Public Forum to Wallet Link Verification

DAO Programs & Initiatives
1

Public Forum to Wallet Link Verification

This thread provides an open verification tool for linking your forum account to your wallet address. It serves as a public utility for integrating on-chain governance with forum activity and is available for anyone to use or adopt this on their own platform.

Instructions:

  1. Connect your wallet to your delegate wallet on arbitrum.curiahub.xyz.
  2. Link your forum account by entering your forum name.
  3. Sign a verification message to confirm your identity with your forum handle.
  4. Post the generated signature text:
    • Copy the message.
    • Go to the forum and post the generated signature text under this thread.
    • Verify

Everyone is welcome to use this thread for their forum-to-wallet verification needs.

1 Like
2

Hey @Curia this is really needed but… do we think it’s a good idea to have yet another source of truth for the connection between discourse usernames and wallets?

Right now, Karma is doing that with the same mechanism you are using, in the forum thread you linked above. And now you are also doing it.

What happens if the same delegate links the same discourse account to one wallet on Karma and to another wallet on Curia? Which one is right? The latest one?

How do we expect other apps and downstream consumers to use this information in a composable way and discern which discourse username is linked to which wallet?

There are also more robust technical solutions to achieve this right now, for example, I believe this can be done using zkTLS proofs, the way Questbook does using reclaimprotocol.com tech. For example, right now, if you go to questbook.xyz and create an account, you can connect your Arbitrum Forum Discourse username to that Questbook Wallet, and there is a verifiable proof that the owner of that wallet actually controls the linked Discourse account.

In the meantime, delegates could also do something simpler, which is to add a record to their ENS names, specifying their Arbitrum Forum username, like I did on my paulofonseca.eth ENS name.

CleanShot 2025-02-26 at 16.13.57@2x
CleanShot 2025-02-26 at 16.13.57@2x1556×382 31.7 KB

I believe that this type of delegate information (Name, Profile Picture, Forum account, Delegate Statement, etc), should be as open and composable as possible, which means that it should be onchain. Not behind some API from some service provider. And the easiest way of putting it onchain right now, would be to use ENS records on the delegate wallet. Most ENS records are not verifiable (some already can have proofs like x.com account, github account, etc), but it would be better for delegates to update that info once, in one place, and then all of the apps and downstream consumers would use that onchain source of truth, then forcing delegate to update their name, profile picture, delegate statement, forum username, on Snapshot, Tally, Karma, Curia, and so on…

So, in summary, I think we should try to avoid getting into this kind of situation…

1 Like
3

Hey @paulofonseca, thanks for your insight! Here’s our perspective:

Composability: Our Public Forum to Wallet Link Verification tool is designed as an additional utility—not a replacement for existing mechanisms like the Karma thread that many delegates already use. Our goal is to be fully composable by leveraging existing infrastructure while adding another data point that connects forum engagement with on-chain activity. This approach also avoids redundancy by ensuring that delegates don’t have to verify or sign on every new platform.

Handling Duplicate or Conflicting Links: Our tool records the link provided by the delegate along with the post timestamp. In cases where the same forum account is connected to different wallets, we use the most recent delegate post time as the authoritative record.

Exploring Robust On-Chain Solutions: Your suggestions—such as leveraging zkTLS proofs or integrating with ENS records—are compelling. We share the vision of making delegate information open, verifiable, and composable. While our current approach serves as a practical starting point, we’re actively exploring more robust on-chain solutions to eventually provide a unified source of truth. In fact, we’ve just booked a call with the Reclaim Protocol team to explore this option further.

Ultimately, our goal is to expand the toolkit for governance analytics by enhancing transparency and integrating community feedback into the evolution of these systems. Thanks again for your thoughtful insights—they’re essential as we continue to refine our approach.

1 Like
4

Verifying my forum identity for arbitrum governance addr: 0x17296956b4E07Ff8931E4ff4eA06709FaB70b879 sig: 0x4d43b16b1423e5328284e0462867269b4150cd576475977e61ec11621c6745dd18c658baf738b14a4737d7330c1b18def8583556090fe06099d266e2799ddf041b #arbitrumgovernance

1 Like