Fast (near real-time) dispute resolution for e-sports - some thoughts about workflow and incentives


Surely Kleros can handle fast (near real-time) disputes?

I was thinking about various things…

:arrow_right: Thought 1

Both teams start with 100000

  • level 1: 1000
  • level 2: 3000
  • level 3: 9000
  • level 4: 27000
  • level 5: 81000 final level, all jurors vote

Coach of each team decides whether to fund an appeal, but that could exploit their budget.

Similar to timeouts in basketball (each team have 2 per quarter) or clock in chess.

:arrow_right: Thought 2

Jurors watch the game.

In other to participate in the draw, they need to press button every 60 seconds.

(similar to dead man switch when for train drivers)

It is to ensure they stay online and provide a timely decision.

All who press the online button participate in each ruling.

At all times, all the jurors who pressed the button to participate in the vote.

:arrow_right: Thought 3

What if supporters of one team stay online to increase chances of them becoming jurors?

:arrow_right: Thought 4

66% minimum threshold for a decisive decision.

Anything less is pretty much a coin flip.

To put it in a different way - if the case is obvious - the decision will be obvious too.

If the case is close to 50 / 50 then jurors may do strategic voting, aiming for Schelling Point and Keynesian Beauty Contest.

That’s why anything less than 66% should be a coinflip, because it is a coinflip anyway.

:arrow_right: Thought 5

Current model: 3-0 and 2-1 are equally good

I was thinking about automatic (governed by Kleros) extension if there is no clear consensus.

Alternative solution - more jurors to begin with? Different courts have different initial amount. Even then - if there is split decision, adding more jurors will not fix it.

:arrow_right: Thought 6

Current model: winner takes all.

In many blockchain and real-life situations, there has to be a definitive outcome.

In some cases, it’s perfectly acceptable to find a balanced approach, way of the middle - binary choice is not a good use case for that.

Arbitrable and arbitrator standards allow non-binary decisions, I think we will see more such cases in the future…

I can tell you that since I became involved in Kleros, I look at everything from the viewpoint of rational incentives.

With regards to these thoughts - we are unlikely to know, unless we create more cases. Check this post with some potential ideas: Full Stack Developer - Blockchain/LegalTech/FinTech

(translating ideas into code requires manpower)