The author, who does not agree with the results of the validator check, sends an appeal to the incorrectly checked triple.
Appeal goes to 5 validators
3 validators are randomly selected from the top 100 validators 2 validators are selected from the Golden team
Economics and validation steps:
- Author has “-” 6 points for reject triple;
- Disagreeing author submits an appeal - sends an appeal for re-validation;
3.1 With a negative check, the trio is rejected! the author is removed “-” 6 points
“+” 1 point is transferred to each validator from the top 100, 3 points in total.
“+” 1 point is transferred to the validator from the Golden team, total 2 points
“+” 1 point returned to the treasury Golden
3.2 With a positive check - the triple is accepted!
The author is returned “+” 6 points for the triple “+” 6 points additionally
Points “-” 6 are deducted from all validators that rejected the correct triple (for example, if there are 5 validators: total 30 points - 6 points = 24 points)
“+” 1 point is transferred to each validator from the top 100 (3 validators), 3 points in total. (for example, if there are 5 validators: 24 points - 3 points = 21 points)
“+” 1 point is transferred to the validator from the Golden team (2 validators), total 2 points (for example, if there are 5 validators: 21 points -2 points = 19 points)
“+” 19 points, the rest is returned to the Golden treasury (for example, if there are 5 validators: 19 points will return to the Golden treasury)
3.3. A defense mechanism to exclude Validators’ game elements in case the validating validators collude. If the 3 Validators considering the appeal from the top 100 do not honestly accept or reject the threes submitted for the appeal. But the Golden team has a different opinion than the 3 top 100 validators. Then additional penalty points are deducted from 3 top 100 validators
“-” 6 points, 1 validator top 100
“-” 6 points, 2 validator top 100
“-” 6 poitons, 3 validator top 100
Total
Appellant to the author
returns “+” 6 points per triple “+” 6 points additionally. Points “-” 6 are withheld from all validators who rejected the correct triple
3.1.1. With a negative check (if the game mechanics of valitors were applied during the appeal), the trio was rejected! the author is removed “-” 6 points
“-” 6 points are removed from each validator from the top 100 (3 validators), total 18 points.
“+” 3 points are given to the validator from the Golden team (2 validators), total 6 points
“+” 18 points returned to the Golden treasury, total 24 -6 =18 points ( 6 author points + 18 validator points - 6 points of Golden team validators).
3.1.2. With a positive check (if the game mechanics of valitors were applied during the appeal) - the trio is accepted!
“+” 6 points are returned to the author for the triple “+” 6 points additionally (for example, if there are 5 validators: total 30 points - 6 points = 24 points)
“-” 6 points are removed from each validator from the top 100 (3 validators), total 18 points.
“+” 3 points are given to the validator from the Golden team (2 validators), total 6 points
“+” 36 points returned to Golden treasury (24 points +18 points from appeal validators - 6 points from Golden validators = 36 points)
It is also necessary to freeze points for all Validators for 3 months for the period of appeal of authors who disagree with the accepted triples.
Be sure to indicate the 90-day appeal countdown counter.