Contest Proposal: Free TON Reputation System

Short description:

To design the best possible approach and mechanics for an reputation system for Free TON participants.



Contest entry period:

September 20, 12.00 P.M UTC - October 10, 24.00 P.M UTC.


When interacting with an unknown Free TON member, it is important to be sure of his good faith. The reputation system is designed to solve this problem.

General requirements:

  • Must be fair, just, transparent, and creative.
  • All best practices mechanics are allowed, including the use of Telegram bots, gamification, your own applications, or whatever you feel is the best way to create an airdrop that will attract new members.

Evaluation criteria and winning conditions:

  • Most effective idea.
  • Free TON related


  • Each of the initial Free TON jurors can vote on your submission. Jurors whose team(s) intend to participate in this contest by providing submissions lose their right to vote in this contest.
  • Each juror will vote by rating each submission on a scale of 0 to 10 or can choose to reject it if it does not meet requirements, or they can choose to abstain from voting if they feel unqualified to judge.
  • Jurors will provide feedback on your submissions.


1st prize…………………………15,000 Tons

2nd prize……………………….10,000 Tons

3rd prize………………………. 5,000 Tons

Next 5 runners up……………. 1,000 Tons each

Jury rewards:

An amount equal to 5% of the sum total of all total tokens actually awarded will be distributed equally between all jurors who vote and provide feedback. Both voting and feedback are mandatory in order to collect the reward.

Procedural remarks:

  • Participants must upload their work correctly so it can be viewed and accessible in the formats described. If work is inaccessible or does not fit the criteria described, the submission may be void by jurors.
  • Participants must submit their work before the closing of the filing of applications. If not submitted on time, the submission will not count.
  • If the number of participants is less than the amount of prizes available, the excess prize awards are void.

Note: If the number of participants per sub competition is less than the amount of prizes available, the excess prize awards are void.


Anyone can participate, but Free TON cannot distribute Tons to US citizens or US entities.


The forum already has such functionality. In chats it will be interesting to implement.

1 Like

this is not a forum or chat rating, this is a global Free TON rating stored in the blockchain

Cool idea! But there is a nuance. Real life example: I am a frequent visitor of forums and often there are times when people with a good reputation do bad things. Or there are times when two people do not fully understand each other and one thinks that they were treated in bad faith. In such cases, arbitration is needed - that is, for an independent member of the community to consider the case. In a huge community, this is impossible (imagine thousands of controversial applications, but there are generally crazy cases). Therefore, the idea is cool, but from the point of view of efficiency it is not very effective. Therefore, even working with a person with a good reputation, there is no 100% guarantee. And there will be thousands of controversial cases - which could take decades to resolve. I hope you get my point.

1 Like

“There is no 100% guarantee” but its better than nothing.
It is always important to have an idea of ​​the reputation. Most of the well-known marketplaces operate on the basis of the seller’s reputation. On the basis of reputation, loans are issued in the bank. Why not store information about a person’s reputation in the Free TON blockchain? Yes, there are difficult moments in implementation, but the contest is designed to solve them.

Better than nothing - in a perfect world. Where there is only black and white.
And again, you gave the example of centralized governance systems where there is a regulator that can handle a dispute.
But a smart contract (if it is not a smart contract with artificial intelligence and trained to consider disputes (and evidence of the parties) and able to process hundreds of applications per second) will not be able to determine who is right and who is to blame in a given situation.
And having a reputation will lead some people into the delusion that one can trust this or that person. But if the presence of reputation does not give a 100% guarantee - then why is it necessary.
In addition, a black market may emerge, where people with reputations will sell their accounts for crimes to dishonest players.
And again, I will say that I am sitting on one very visited forum. We had a system of reputation - yes, people stick to it. But there are many cases where people with a reputation are acting in bad faith. Others built up a reputation on purpose so that later they would act in bad faith. As a result, the reputation was turned off. And again, the forum is a centralized system where disputes are considered by the responsible persons. Who will be able to resolve disputes among thousands and millions of blockchain users?
I’m not a hater, I just try to look at it objectively

1 Like

As i know something similar is planning to be in Governance 2.0 or latests versions.

1 Like