WPS Proposal to Build Scalable Dispute Resolution & Arbitration Tech Infrastructure

amy1kenobiamy1kenobi Posts: 4 Brand New

_Note: To view this proposal in Google Doc format (which is far easier to read), click here: _

Sagewise Request for Worker Proposal Funding to Build Decentralized & Scalable Dispute Resolution Infrastructure

Table of Contents
Proposal Summary
Introduction
Proposal
About Sagewise
Sagewise <> EOS Track Record
Sagewise Team
Funding Request

Proposal Summary
EOS needs a scalable, efficient, and transparent dispute resolution and arbitration infrastructure built by a third party (not Block.One). Sagewise is uniquely positioned to architect and develop such infrastructure given its technical expertise in blockchain and smart contracts, real world expertise in law and governance, and demonstrated history of rapidly developing technology for EOS dispute resolution purposes.
Introduction

Shortly after the launch of the EOS MainNet, the wider EOS community--including token holders and block producers--has expressed serious concerns about arbitration on the EOS network.

The launch of the EOS network triggered the filing of a large number of disputes, mostly due to issues regarding unregistered wallets or victims of phishing scams during the registration process. Arbitrators from ECAF recommended that BPs freeze several wallets to prevent the transfer of such stolen tokens, which resulted in some negative reaction from the EOS tokenholder community. This was due, in part, to the lack of transparency in the process, since some wallets were ordered frozen before the reasoning behind the order was disclosed. Still others have had strong reactions towards the centralized features of EOS’s current dispute resolution architecture.
Issues

Among the issues are:

Lack of Community Buy-In: The concept of dispute resolution has not been sufficiently socialized within the community to achieve consensus.
Lack of Architecture: Although some preliminary rules of dispute resolution (RDRs) have been drafted, there is no consensus and very little in the way of technology has been built.
Centralization: The EOS community has expressed concerns about the current system’s highly centralized features.
Lack of Cost-Efficiency and Scalability: As it is architected today, today’s hundreds of cases requiring human arbitration and enforcement by block producers will be thousands or millions of cases tomorrow. The transactional cost is inefficient, as human arbitrators will be deciding on $20 disputes. For block producers and ECAF, this system will be unscalable--ECAF will need to employ hundreds of thousands
Lack of Fairness: The lack of references to precedent in the ECAF system today leads to non-uniform decision making across disputes of the same type. A well-architected dispute resolution system should enable consistent decision-making for disputes of the same type.

Proposal

The EOS Alliance Dispute Resolution and Working Group is working to resolve broader questions regarding dispute resolution and its exact architecture on the EOS network as a whole, especially with regard to the first issue.

Sagewise proposes to assist in fleshing out and building the dispute resolution architecture for the EOS network and, where relevant, building out the infrastructure necessary to bridge such architecture with Sagewise’s dispute resolution solution. To the extent Sagewise builds integration tools to connect its tech with the EOS network, those tools and the EOS version of the Sagewise SDK shall be open-source.

Work done under this proposal shall be done in cooperation and at the direction of stakeholders, including token holders, EOS Alliance DR&A WG, Block.One, block producers, and ECAF.

Why Development Must Take Place by a Third Party

Any judicial or legal system is only as good as the community trust around it. Just as block producers should not build out such infrastructure to prevent its architecture from favoring block producers, Block.one is not in the best position to develop dispute resolution infrastructure because it is a significant stakeholder in the EOS network.

Additionally, build out of dispute resolution architecture requires not just technological expertise, but expertise on dispute resolution and governance. Sagewise’s team of technologists, attorneys, and legaltech and dispute resolution experts uniquely marries both fields.
About Sagewise

Sagewise builds dispute resolution infrastructure for smart contracts. It was co-founded in 2017 by Amy Wan, a lawyer with experience in legaltech, startups, and international policy, and Daniel Rice, a technologist with a development background in C++ and focus on fintech, distributed ledgers, blockchains, and cryptocurrency.

Sagewise’s mission is (1) to enable transactional confidence and certainty in the blockchain ecosystem and (2) to shift the existing geophysical and sovereignty-based legal paradigm into that of an alternative legal system by developing dispute resolution infrastructure that allows for scalable, transparent, fair, and efficient resolution of disputes.

How it works

Sagewise’s dispute resolution architecture reflects a system that is:

More Decentralized: Our architecture reflects the principles that:

  • The parties best positioned to determine the value and sensitivities of any transaction are the parties themselves.
  • Competition, paired with a reputation system, will promote the use of top arbitrators and weed out weak arbitrators.
    Scalable:
    *Users make determinations about their process; Arbitrators resolve disputes and use tools that automate collections and enforcement. Block producers are not saddled with enforcement.
    _Efficient:_
    *Our marketplace approach enables various types of transactions to be resolved on a timeline and with a transactional cost appropriate for each dispute.
    _Fair:_
    *Our digital jurisdiction allows for flexibility and evolution of precedent, while applying decision-making consistently across disputes of the same type.

Sagewise can alter or customize its core product for the EOS network based on the EOS Alliance Dispute Resolution and Arbitration Working Group’s findings and recommendations.

Sagewise <> EOS Track Record

Sagewise has a track record of building dispute resolution tools for EOS arbitration and studying arbitration on the EOS network, including the following:

*July 2018: CEO Amy Wan tapped to chair EOS Alliance Dispute Resolution and Arbitration Working Group to help solve “the arbitration problem.”
*July 18, 2018: Sagewise delivers EOSverify, to help verify frozen accounts--less than two weeks after initially requested by members and affiliates of ECAF. Read more here.
*June 2018: Sagewise releases commentary on EOS arbitration issues.

Sagewise Team

Amy Wan, CEO
Amy Wan is Co-Founder & CEO of Sagewise. Amy has authored various legal publications in capital markets, including the upcoming legal practice guide on ICO securities offerings on Bloomberg Law and chapters of the Lexis-Nexis Practice Advisor on Private Equity. Previously, she was a partner at a law firm and general counsel of a crowdfunding platform. She founded Legal Hackers LA, which programs around the intersection of law and technology; was named one of the ten women to watch in legal technology by the American Bar Association Journal in 2014; was named one of 10 millenials to watch in legaltech by Law.com; was named in the Fastcase 50 Legal Innovation Awards; and was nominated as a Finalist for the Corporate Counsel of the Year Award 2015 by LA Business Journal.
Amy has also worked in international regulatory and trade policy at the U.S. Department of Commerce, and was a Presidential Management Fellow at the U.S. Department of State and U.S. Department of Transportation. She holds an LL.M. in Public International Law from the London School of Economics and Political Science, a JD from the University of Southern California Gould School of Law, and a BA in Biological Sciences from the University of Southern California.

Daniel Rice, CTO

Daniel Rice is a veteran software engineer, leader, speaker, and writer with expertise in blockchain and finance. Daniel’s most recent role was as CTO for Totum Risk which provides portfolio analytics software. Totum was selected for YNext incubator in 2016, which was awarded “top accelerator” honors by Finance Magazine. Daniel has helped launch over 20 products, and as an entrepreneur his personal apps have racked up over 5 million downloads. He has previously consulted on blockchain projects for a blockchain escrow company and blockchain real estate title transfer and records company.

In 2014 Daniel founded Bitcoin Developers Los Angeles to focus on building a developer community around blockchain technology. He has also consulted as CTO for several early blockchain startups and published a whitepaper on managing price volatility of cryptocurrencies.

Daniel is also the founder and organizer of the Orange County CTO Forum. He holds a BS degree in Computer Engineering from Cal Poly, San Luis Obispo.

Dan is the author of the Vzero Whitepaper and has written extensively on Blockchain technology on his blog.

Colin Rule
Colin advises Sagewise on online dispute resolution systems. Colin is Vice President for Online Dispute Resolution at Tyler Technologies. Tyler acquired Modria.com, an ODR provider Colin co-founded, in 2017. From 2003 to 2011 Colin was Director of Online Dispute Resolution for eBay and PayPal, which resolves some 60 million disputes per year—more than the U.S. court system. He has worked in the dispute resolution field for more than 25 years as a mediator, trainer, and consultant. He is currently Co-Chair of the Advisory Board of the National Center for Technology and Dispute Resolution at UMass-Amherst and a Non-Resident Fellow at the Gould Center for Conflict Resolution at Stanford Law School.

Colin co-founded Online Resolution, one of the first online dispute resolution (ODR) providers, in 1999 and served as its CEO (2000) and President. In 2002 Colin co-founded the Online Public Disputes Project (now eDeliberation.com) which applies ODR to multiparty, public disputes. Previously, Colin was General Manager of Mediate.com, the largest online resource for the dispute resolution field. Colin also worked for several years with the National Institute for Dispute Resolution (now ACR) in Washington, D.C. and the Consensus Building Institute in Cambridge, MA.

Colin has presented and trained throughout Europe and North America for organizations including the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service, the Department of State, the International Chamber of Commerce, and the CPR Institute for Dispute Resolution. He has also lectured and taught at UMass-Amherst, Harvard, Yale, Stanford, Pepperdine, Southern Methodist University, and Santa Clara University.

Colin is the author of Online Dispute Resolution for Business, published by Jossey-Bass in September 2002, and The New Handshake: Online Dispute Resolution and the Future of Consumer Protection, published by the ABA in 2017. He has contributed more than 50 articles to prestigious ADR publications such as Consensus, The Fourth R, ACResolution Magazine, and Peace Review. He serves on the boards of the Consensus Building Institute and the PeaceTech Lab at the United States Institute of Peace. He holds a Master’s degree from Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government in conflict resolution and technology, a graduate certificate in dispute resolution from UMass-Boston, a B.A. from Haverford College, and he served as a Peace Corps volunteer in Eritrea from 1995-1997.

Dr. Gillian K. Hadfield

Gillian Hadfield is a leading proponent of the reform and redesign of legal systems for a rapidly changing world facing tremendous challenge from globalization and technology. Her extensive research examines how to make law more accessible, effective, and capable of fulfilling its role in balancing innovation, growth, and fairness. Current challenges being explored include:
· How can we develop regulatory systems to manage innovations like global digital
platforms, self-driving cars, and powerful artificial intelligence systems?
· How can we dismantle the regulatory barriers that make legal help for ordinary people too expensive and inaccessible?
· How can we build better legal platforms for the four billion people in the world currently living without the benefits of stable rule of law?

Hadfield is a member of the World Economic Forum’s Global Future Council on the Future of Technology, Values and Policy and co-curates the Forum’s Transformation Map for Justice and Legal Infrastructure. She was appointed in 2017 to the American Bar Association’s Commission on the Future of Legal Education, serves as Director of the USC Center for Law and Social Science and is a member of the World Justice Project’s Research Consortium. She serves as an advisor to The Hague Institute for the Innovation of Law, LegalZoom, and other legal tech startups.
Hadfield and her work have featured widely in the media and at key events on legal innovation and technology. Cited in the New York Times, The Atlantic and Forbes, Hadfield has also been published by the Washington Post, LA Times, Reuters and CNN. Her book, Rules for a Flat World: Why Humans Invented Law and How to Reinvent It for a Complex Global Economy, was published by Oxford University Press in November 2016.

Born in Canada and a citizen of the US and the UK, Hadfield holds a J.D. from Stanford Law School and Ph.D. in economics from Stanford University. Now based at the University of Southern California, she teaches courses in legal innovation and design, the origins and evolution of the law, and contract law and strategy.

Previously, she served as clerk to Chief Judge Patricia Wald on the U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. Circuit. She has been a visiting professor at Harvard, Chicago, Columbia, Toronto, NYU, and Hastings law schools, a fellow of the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences at Stanford, and a National Fellow at the Hoover Institution. She is also currently teaching Legal Design Lab with Dan Ryan at the University of Southern California.

Proposal Details

Initial 6 months of funding to define scope, architect, and build out EOS network’s dispute resolution and arbitration system according to EOS Alliance Dispute Resolution and Arbitration Working Group’s findings and recommendations. This would not include iteration or maintenance of the system after 6 months--that would need to be a separate future proposal which would depend on the community’s determination of how the system should function.
*Connect EOS network with Sagewise solution. Integration tech and EOS version of Sagewise SDK shall be open-source.
*Modify systems as needed based on user and stakeholder feedback.
*Total funding request for 6 months of initial build out: 275,000 EOS

Comments

  • amy1kenobiamy1kenobi Posts: 4 Brand New

    We were requested to convert to fiat and break out costs. Most up to date revision is in Google doc, but here is the main update:

    Proposal Details

    5 Milestones in 6 months averaging USD $275,000 per milestone. Initial deposit of USD $550,000.

    Milestone 1

    Community iterative feedback intake, weekly iteration on system components and interfaces, start of coding

    Deliverables:
    High Level Architecture Diagrams
    MVP Feature List Defined
    List of open source repositories commenced in association with project including URLs
    Community Engagement Transparency Report (Results of community discussion)
    Weekly blog and video on progress and findings

    Milestone 2

    Dispute Resolution MVP APIs added to EOS SDK
    Community Engagement Transparency Report (Results of community discussion)
    Weekly blog and video on progress and findings

    Milestone 3

    MVP Dispute Handling System
    Community Engagement Transparency Report (Results of community discussion)
    Weekly blog and video on progress and findings

    Milestone 4

    Dispute Vendor Marketplace Client and Back-end Feature Complete
    Tech and Customer Support to Onboard Dispute Resolution Vendors
    Community Engagement Transparency Report (Results of community discussion)
    Weekly blog and video on progress and findings

    Milestone 5

    Dispute Resolution System 1.0 Launches
    Community Engagement Transparency Report (Results of community discussion)
    Weekly blog and video on progress and findings

    Summary

    Initial 6 months of funding to define scope, architect, and build out EOS network’s dispute resolution and arbitration system according to EOS Alliance Dispute Resolution and Arbitration Working Group’s findings and recommendations. This would not include iteration or maintenance of the system after 6 months--that would need to be a separate future proposal which would depend on the community’s determination of how the system should function.
    Modify systems as needed based on user and stakeholder feedback.
    Total funding request for 6 months of initial build out: USD $1,375,000

    Assuming 1 EOS = $5 USD

    -25% (3.75 USD)
    -10% (4.50 USD)
    0%
    +10% (5.25 USD)
    +25% (6.25 USD)
    366,666.67
    305,555.56 EOS
    275,000 EOS
    261,904.76 EOS
    220,000 EOS

  • sukeshtedlasukeshtedla Posts: 3 Brand New

    Can you give more reasoning for your hourly cost estimation of 160usd? The average market stats are way less. And here they are even getting professional training.

Sign In or Register to comment.