Title: Dispute
Delegate Name: cp0x
Reason for dispute:
I believe my contribution this month has been seriously underestimated. Let me explain in detail:
- Out of 44 comments I made this month, you considered only one — and gave it the lowest scores I’ve ever seen:
Wind Down the MSS + Transfer Payment Responsibilities to the Arbitrum Foundation - #22 by cp0x
Objectively, this is a solid and thoughtful comment:
- Relevance (3/10) — Clearly, the comment is on-topic. It highlights potential negative outcomes that voters should be aware of. A score of 3 implies it’s a poor comment. If that were the case, why was it even taken into consideration?
- Depth of Analysis (2/10) — This rating suggests that my analysis was extremely weak. But all I did was point out problematic elements of the proposal in a structured and reasoned way. Are you saying that identifying potential flaws is not valuable?
- Timing (2/10) — This is especially confusing. For context, I posted my comment before @JoJo , who received a 5 for timing. According to Karma’s own criteria, timing is based on when the comment is made, not its relevance or depth — those are covered by other metrics. This score seems either deliberately reduced or simply careless.
At the same time, I believe JoJo’s comment is also valuable — he presents the perspective from within the system, while I provide an external view. Together, we complement each other and contribute to a more well-rounded discussion - Clarity & Communication (3/10) — Again, a surprisingly low score. My comment clearly outlines the issues in a numbered, color-coded format, making it easy to follow and understand. If this isn’t considered clear communication, what is?
- Impact (1/10) — This one is the most puzzling. How is impact measured? If we consider influence over voting:
I voted against with a VP of 95.2k. The total “against” votes amounted to 5.2 million. Paulo, who voted before me, also voted against. Even if we assume our votes had similar influence, my participation likely helped sway a significant number of votes. A basic estimate would show I influenced ~2.5 million votes. That’s certainly not an “impact” score of 1 — and arguably more than 10.
For another comparison — Camelot received higher scores for Impact and Depth of Analysis, even though their comment simply expressed support and repeated the rationale already provided by Entropy in the motivation section. In other words, it didn’t add any new insights or original points to the discussion
Now let’s look at the second part of this evaluation
You chose to assess my comment that was posted after the vote had started. However, four days earlier, I posted another comment that was no less valuable — yet it was completely overlooked. You may have missed it, so I’m sharing it here again:
This comment received several likes, indicating that it was recognized by other delegates (even if not by you), and it was also referenced in a separate comment by another delegate. In other words, its impact may have been even greater than the one you initially evaluated.
Therefore, this earlier comment should also be taken into account — particularly for its impact and timing.
I will break my comment into several parts to make it easier to read.
The second part will focus on the missing evaluations for my comments on other proposals
