Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Modification: Notary Rubric - New criteria for Industry Reputation, "Individual Reputation" #24

Closed
jnthnvctr opened this issue Nov 24, 2020 · 2 comments

Comments

@jnthnvctr
Copy link
Collaborator

jnthnvctr commented Nov 24, 2020

Issue Description

In the current rubric there is no option to provide credit to a notary who is applying as an individual. This unintentionally penalizes prospective notaries who apply as individuals instead of applying as a broader organization.

Impact

Fixing this will mean that qualified individual notaries will not be penalized for not applying as a part of a larger organization.

Proposed Solution(s)


Given that an individual is inherently riskier than an organization - it is proposed we cap this leveling to be in the range of L1-L3. Note this is not mutually exclusive from organizational reputation - and organizations who apply (and specifically the person who files the application) may submit details to be ranked on these criteria.

For this condition, we propose that the L1 criteria for "In-protocol reputation" be met AND the following criteria:

  • L1: Has access to 2+ social media accounts which individually have audiences > 500 where they will post publicly about their status as a notary if approved
  • L2: Has access to 2+ social media accounts which individually have audiences > 1000 where they will post publicly about their status as a notary if approved
  • L3: Has access to 2+ accounts on social media accounts which individually have audiences > 10000 about their status as a notary if approved

The reasoning is that by meeting the L1 definition of "In-protocol reputation" it can be guaranteed there is some minimal alignment with Filecoin as a network. By defining different thresholds of reach there can be some accountability from an individual reputation if a notary is to act maliciously.

Related Issues

Other issues affecting Industry Reputation:
#24 (comment)
#22 (comment)
#18 (comment)

@s0nik42
Copy link

s0nik42 commented Nov 26, 2020

We should agree on key elements to include in the communication, like a link to a page presenting the Notary / Fil+ / etc...

@jnthnvctr
Copy link
Collaborator Author

I agree!

I think the basics that we'd want included:

  1. A statement about being accepted as a Notary (literally just a sentence)
  2. A link to explain what a Notary is / Filecoin Plus
  3. A link to where they will be accepting incoming requests from clients

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants