Motivation Inspiration Rationale
- Longevity.
- Prosperity.
- “If you are not paying for the product, you are the product.”
1. Kleros Cooperative Coommunity Fund (KCCF) DAO to receive 10% arbitration fees.
2. This fund to be used for funding the appeals (appeal unsurance)
Background
https://kleros.slack.com/archives/C5WM5BZTJ/p1556027742027000
Have you ever thought of 10% of ruling fees going to Kleros cooperative community fund?
Ensuring long term prosperity of the project.
Currently it feels like work is sponsored by original ICO (ETH) and PNK…
I think it’s OK to recycle 10% of the fees back to Kleros.
https://kleros.slack.com/archives/C5WM5BZTJ/p1556037258028100
For now, there is still a significant part of PNK which are reserved for future funding. But in a more distant future this could be an option (among others).
I am a participant in an experiment: https://tokens.kleros.io Invested some ETH and wasn’t careful enough. It was a worthy investment as it enabled me to discover what is it like to be part of the appeal and experience the process.
Problems
1.
Even though you paid the deposit, even though jurors voted in your favour, you’ll still have to fund 0.91 ETH appeal and you will always lose to someone who has way more ETH as they are able to outspend you anyway in the next next next next round of appeal.
2.
Currently there is not enough traffic on the website, not enough adoption, not enough education and understanding about game-theory incentives
3.
It is unlikely to expect strangers on the internet to throw ETH into experimental pilot and become a party n the middle of a heated internet debate.
(some users on Telegram disputed the 3. statement as they funded the appeals of complete strangers)
Initial discussion
http://t.me/kleros/54467 - “I think it’s just a UI, funding appeals of winning parties is quite lucrative.” - How lucrative is quite lucrative?
https://t.me/kleros/54422 - “Of course game theory is extremely useful to understand and predict how rational agents should behave.” - Do you remember Gnosis ICO?
Real-life analogy
Access to justice is a basic principle of the rule of law.
Access to justice cannot be prevented by not having enough ETH to fund the appeal in the crowdfunding process.
There could be any number of reasons
- 50 / 50 cases where there are no clear game-theory monetary incentives
- PNK whale with fat fingers
- Someone AFK (away from keyboard)
- Listing in some sub-sub-sub-court and no enough traffic on the website
- MetaMask having outage (see here)
- CryptoKitties paralyzing Ethereum network
- Fighting against a whale who will outspend you anyway (attrition warfare)
- Xmas break
- Chineese New Year
- Some really annoying neo-nazi former lawyer making really good arguments
- …
- anything and everything, there could be any number of issues…
- …jurors in the previous round were wrong being the most obvious one
Cost-benefit analysis, risk-reward ratio
It could happen that initial juror ruling was wrong and the appeal will win, KCCF DAO will lose the appeal funding fee, especially in the light that original litigant and community did not fund the appeal.
It’s the price worth paying anyway.
As a participant in the Kleros community, I want voluntarily pay 10% to the fund to ensure that frivolous litigants will always face the justice - it is in the best interest of the system, Kleros, justice.
It’s de facto an insurance policy.
Time notice
72 hours or more
The respondent in the appeal process can fund the appeal fees themselves.
In that way, they will be eligible for all the payouts.
72 hours or more
Community crowdfunding
Those personally involved can use real life (social media) ways to gather ETH crowdfunders
The KCCF DAO should kick in only after these two periods have elapsed.
(potential) attack vector
User Will on Slack replied:
Isn’t there a room for attack? Let’s say a bad actor tries to slip in a trojan submission and he uses another address to challenge himself
If the submission successfully passed, he can appeal it and now finally reveal the trojan, leading to the rejection off the submission and thus getting free money from the DAO
Funding
- Initial ETH deposit from the crowdsale
- Ongoing 10% fee of the arbitration
- Some of the appeals will be won, some of the appeals will be lost.
- If the fund goes below 10 ETH - topup. If the fund goes above 100 ETH - redistribute.
TODO: analyze what is the ratio in the current cases. Potentially it will be a number between 25% and 75%. If too little or too many appeals are won it means that something else is wrong.
3rd party service? (advanced)
It is possible that based on this post, a game-rational 3rd party will create an insurance service. The cost of arbitration is 20% higher, but in case of any appeal, the service handles it all the way without your involvement.
Closing remarks
10% fee can be discussed separately, it can be a separate proposal.
I believe that 10% fee and funding appeals are conveniently bound together, creating beneficial game-theory incentives for the ODR (online dispute resolution) system as the whole:
- More trust in the system
- More resilience
- Preventing bullies
- More than just theoretical game theory
(admin): 
