There are advantages of having a process in place in case ourFundamental Report Workflow fails. Which is the case if a report gets approved that has fatal mistakes or complete inaccurate ratings. In such a case, we want to give the affected protocols the opportunity to step in and raise a dispute. With this decentralized framework, protocols and users have the possibility to report an official dispute for an already published fundamental report. This process is permissionless and can be started by anyone.
What is a RDR?
The Report Dispute Resolution (RDR) is a proposal that should only be used in extreme cases of inaccurate data in already submitted reports.
This process would need to be started in a timely manner after we publish/approve a report (for example within 10 days after report approval). The RDR process should not be used by protocols to claim a better score but rather provide a formal process to fix errors, in case crucial points are missing. It also gives protocols a shared responsibility to verify their score.
The RDR Lifecycle
The following steps are required to initiate and effectively queuing a RDR for vote:
Please inform the author of the affected report, the reviewer and the governors about the forum submission (via tagging in Discord or forum)
After the proposal was published, the dispute discussion will be open for one week, with a possible extension to two weeks if necessary
Tag a Prime governor to request an RDR number and call for a Snapshot vote on a specific date
RDR is queued on Snapshot and runs for 72 hours once it is live
Once the vote has passed, the challenged report gets updated/removed by the Prime governors, stewards or rater.
Token used to vote: RXP (Rating Experience Points)
Eligible to vote: Minimum of 100 RXP required to participate in vote
Quorum: At least one Governor accepting the dispute (i.e. 200 RXP)
Pass: 50.1% of participating votes need to vote FOR, for a proposal to pass
Voting: Can happen all year round
The following guidelines define the clear situation(s), where a dispute request is allowed. A protocol or user can file a dispute, if a combination of false content and high impact is given.
An existing report can be challenged if one or more of the following points apply:
The report contains false claims
The report misses highly important information (i.e. information of high significance absolutely necessary to accurately answer the question and, if missing, would lead to a distorted representation of the protocol’s situation and thus scores)
Report data is utterly outdated (12+ months)
In addition, the impact of the above must be significant, so that:
The score is off by >=8% (impact of +/- 20 points out of 250 points for full FA report)
The content is damaging the image of the protocol (e.g. report declares the protocol as a scam when it’s not true)
When these scenarios apply, an RDR process can be initiated in the Governance forum.