Free TON is known for its Soft Majority Voting (SMV) system with more decentralised jury members. But now everyone see that Wiki Subgovernance adopts a new rule to dismiss decentralised voting and Jury Members Feedback.
Game and Rule
Already Ended Contest with decentralized voting and jury members feedback.
Voting Result:
Accepted : 12
Rejected : 05 Feedbacks from Jury Members are also in favour of contribution and its value for the community
I’m surprised that there are owners of subgovernance in public network and they want to change Jury Team votes and feedback and so the result of SMV.
Conclusion :
Only 5-6 initial members are enough to change any result or decentralised voting feedback. So there is a need to remove SMV and make Free TON as a centralised project by demotivating community at all.
Submissions were submitted before the team report moderation, so there may be difference between both but actual team report is under jury control for consideration.
Jury team always distribute rewards as according to the team report moderated by wiki administratives. Then there shouldn’t be any mean to the screenshot and all members team public report is enough to calculate rewards.
There is a rules for getting the reward, that everyone should follow and everyone actually follows and you followed it in previous contests in Wiki so you must know it.
Editor had filled the reward amount not me but at the time of editors filling I had been submitted the submissions.
But this fault can be eliminated by mutual communication but rejecting submission isn’t a fair option.
Submission should be added to contest ONLY after editor’s review of your team report. That is why you make a screenshot of it.
This fault can be eliminated by resubmission, you didn’t do it this WRC (although you answered to me in topic…) but you didn’t do it. So you can do it the next WRC.
In the #WRC23 I had been posted for jury suggestions for submission. Jury doesn’t make any suggestion before the deadline so it’s not only my fault but also a fault of jury team. Jury team updated my report with rewards then I had avoided resubmission for same work.
India is a con artist. Don’t let him fool you guys. This is not the first time he’s faked “work” to try and con the community into giving him tokens. Show him the door and send him packing.
You gave a general answer with an irrelevant example, not the case-specific one.
I will answer myself, though.
If one dives into details he will find out that one part of the jury members voted in your favour having no information on a fraud attempt from you. As the other part rejected your submission when they got info on the fraud attempt. As simple as that.
The Wiki Jury members do not reject any work based on nothing, just for fun.
When I realised the Wiki jury members were mislead that dumbest way I was totally frustrated.
Even if one has no strong moral principles, this behaviour and attitude is beyond logic and reason.
Having said that, however, as repeatedly stated here you still can get what you deserve in the next WRC if you resubmit in a proper way under the Wiki rules.
