In the beginning, there were four species, and the Yokais hatched first…

The reason why the four capsuleverse species (Humans, Demihumans, Posthumans and Yokais) were initially instated into this world, through capsules, is still a mystery.

So many questions remain unanswered, who brought them here? For what purpose? Which world did they originate from?

The most powerful and insightful specie, the Yokais, were the first to emerge from their deep sleep state inside the capsules.

Those supernatural and spiritual beings slowly gained consciousness one by one, discovering their extraordinary abilities and, particularly, the psychic ones.

Initially, their telepathic skills enabled them to gain self-awareness and awareness of each other. Soon, Yokais could assess their own number, 1300 beings. They would later turn out to be the rarest race of this world.

As they quickly identified themselves as being part of the same specie, they formed a collective intelligence that would reveal itself a key element for their liberation.

During the discovery phase, Yokais noticed that capsules were also holding variable ratios of different items including living companions in some cases, all directly linked to the Yokais’ abilities and life characteristics.

Slowly but steadily, Yokais analysed their primary and colorful environment, inside the capsules, and unraveled several variations of their own species: Spirits, ghosts, monsters, animals, demons or transformed humans. Whatever their shape and form, all were gifted with a body, be it physical or ethereal, and a different set of skills. Later, they would learn about the importance of the various chroma that were theirs.

In time, the Yokais who had the capacity to have out-of-body experiences would explore the surroundings and collect essential elements of the closeby environment:

There were thousands of capsules, in addition to theirs and populated with other species, dispatched in a large futuristic compound.

No living being other than those in the capsules were detected by Yokais. The air was only filled with the lone buzz emitted by the functioning machines.

This was an essential step to comprehend the whole situation and enabled the collective mind to strategize and come up with a master plan towards freedom, through the activation of the capsules to induce hatching.

Breaking through the capsules’ complex arcane was no easy task and demanded full use of the collective intelligence for several years.

Despite all the obstacles, the powerful minds of the Yokais were eventually successful at decrypting all the mechanisms involved: the capsules’ mysterious process and language were finally entirely assimilated by the specie.

Through this, the Yokais gifted with the capacity of acting on inanimate objects, took a crucial part in the freedom process.

They were able to input the appropriate symbols’ sequences patiently into every Yokai capsule dashboard, some being Zodiac signs written in a very ancient runic writing, to activate a new phase.

The hatching started.

But this was only the beginning.

A whole universe, the Capsuleverse, remained to be explored with unforeseen dangers and unknown encounters paving the road of the Yokais’ adventure…

The Background

So, on Friday 12th June 2020, the Kleros Team released its new Decentralized application (Dapp): Curate (aka the GTCR — Generalized Token Curated Registry).

With this application, one can create a community curated list of virtually anything in a decentralized way.

You can read the release presentation here.

A glimpse of Curate dynamics

Basically, in order to start a new list you just need to let the neat user interface guide you through 2 main stages: Creating a list and Submitting the list.

Prerequisite: you need a funded Eth wallet (Metamask, Trust wallet, Fortmatic or WalletConnect) and to connect it to the Dapp..

First stage, click the “Create a List” button to initiate a list in 4 easy steps.

1. Give the essential details of your list:

Title, description, logo, listing rules, Eth deposit amount mandatory for a submission and initial number of jurors (for the first round of a challenged submission).

2. Describe the required parameters for the list items:

These are the elements that any submitter will have to provide regarding an item (for example: a name, a picture, a link etc…).

3. Badges list:

Here you can provide criteria defining interesting badges for your list items (basically, other lists of the Dapp where the items could also be meaningfully listed). If you’re not yet familiar with badges, simply skip this step, this is something that can be dealt with later.

4. Deploy!

Note that you will have to sign 2 transactions for this step to be completed. This step will also give you your list address.

Second stage, now that your list is generated you need to submit it.

This is the step where you submit your freshly created list to the Dapp.

Indeed, for a list to be registered on Curate, it has to comply with the global listing criteria.

So, click the “Submit List” button and enter your list address (this submission requires a 0.42 Eth deposit that will be reimbursed once the list is registered).

Et voilà!

Following this final step, you are done, your list appears on Curate browser page and anyone can use it to submit items (even if it is not registered yet).

The renewed bounty

Along with this release, the team reactivated the Storytelling Bounty Program but, this time, by integrating it directly within the fresh Curate application.

In short, participants submit their own production to a list, while respecting associated criteria, for the story to be ultimately accepted and in turn being eligible for a PNK reward.

If you read my contribution for the previous Storytelling bounty, Journey of a fresh Kleros Token Curated Registry bounty hunter, the dynamic is the same as the TCR’s one.

The story: the Nefarious Crime

So, following this major Dapp release, I checked rapidly the two storytelling lists involved.

I was pleased to discover that there was already a few submissions.

Great, I thought! It has already begun!

Hold on a minute, what’s that…

I was compelled by an already challenged item named Journey of a fresh Kleros Token Curated Registry bounty hunter.

Yes, you got it, someone dared submit my very own production!

Fortunately, as I said, it was already being challenged for the submission date (the submission’s date, seriously??). Even though the challenge’s motive looks valid, it is, of course, missing the real deal:

The ongoing thievery! The despicable scam!

That’s my story you evil submitter named 0xa1552A4ba8655065fa9F0697653d4AFc7F2359Fc.

May the truth be revealed

I could not let this horrendous felony go unpunished: I had to submit a new evidence, unveiling the real author of the story (me!), and leading eventually to the submission’s refusal.

At this point, you may have guessed that this Kleros Curate Mini-Story is the very proof that the submitter’s claim is wrong in several ways and that the Kleros Justice Hammer has to show its mighty power!

Update on the nefarious submission: decentralized justice prevailed and it has been rejected.

Conclusion

Beyond this little story, this Dapp release provides a solid use case for the Kleros ecosystem allowing for endless useful curated lists.

The efficiency of such decentralized community verified lists has, in my opinion, already been proven through the T2CR Dapp.

So, get your lists ready and submit!

Credits to Noëlle for improving and correcting my writings here.

A bit of context

So, what is the Kleros TCR (Token Curated Registry) about? It is a community verified list of tokens complying with a set of listing criteria. Anyone can propose a token to the list, you just need to stake some Ethereum to do so (you get it back if no one challenges your submission or if you win the challenges).

Submission is subject to a 5-day probationary period during which it can be challenged by anyone who feels it doesn’t match the listing criteria. Provided it clears, the token is then registered. You can get full detailed explanation on how the Kleros TCR works here.

That said, the Kleros team initiated a new bounty program worth 1 Million PNK to boost submission incentive for a 3 months’ period. (check the bounty details here). Similar to a reward system, the more tokens one gets registered, the more PNK one receives. I decided to take part in that hunt.

At this point, I must add that, although I have been a juror since the very beginning of Kleros (the Doge trial), I never submitted any token (nor Doge picture) until this bounty.

Summary figures

I submitted 88 tokens during these three months, 87 of which have made their way to the registered status (out of a total of 135 which have been approuved for the bounty).

I was challenged 5 times, on submissions n°19, 22, 23, 34 & 48.

I was rewarded with approximately 645,000 PNK (around $4,500 at the time of writing).

Beginning the hunt

At first, I was not aiming at submitting more than a dozen tokens and i just wanted to focus on some of the blockchain projects I was following: fair enough, one could say!

From the beginning, I was being very cautious about sticking to the required criteria for the token inputs — Asset name, Ethereum contract address, asset ticker name and compliant png logo picture — as I was well aware the community has a high exigency level for the TCR and is eager to have a polished tokens list (and to grab some incentives by challenging too, obviously).

Quite rapidly (maybe 8 tokens submissions later), I noticed that the TCR twitter bot used to notify submissions wasn’t working properly, missing a lot of token announcements. This bot is a key feature for the community to be aware of submissions and, if it fails, submissions may rather easily fly under the community radar.

I decided to wave the team about the issue while pursuing my hunt (foolish me! Handing to the crowd the Justice Hammer to get me challenged!).

However, I achieved my first goal (remember, a dozen token submissions) in a pretty effortless way, without being challenged, and I found myself very enthusiastic about taking the bounty experience to another level:

Hitting maximum tokens submissions

My strategy for risk management for this was to allocate a maximum of 4 Eth to the task (allowing for potential challenges). Thus, I was in position to keep a cruising speed of one token submission by day.

To keep track of all my submissions (including their status), I was also maintaining a manual handwritten record (why would I do that at a digital era ?? Search me!).

At this point, I accumulated a lot of confidence in submitting tokens. I remained very vigilant about being in line with the listing criteria, but I did not really have any kind of rigorous verifying protocol and figured this should not be too difficult to achieve. Until…

Submission 19 got challenged, “OVCode”, the lowercase issue

First challenge out of nineteen submissions, so I was not too disappointed even though the challenge was about deciding which was the most used asset name regarding 3 lowercase “ode” letters:

OVCode or OVCODE ?

I defended my case and the jurors’ decision ended in a DRAWN (So-so! a drawn implies submission being rejected). Anyway, my semi-satisfaction did not last very long as the challenger appealed rapidly (damnit!). All my task-allocated Eth being busy into other submissions, I was unable to fund myself and the token was eventually rejected.

The OVCODE challenge did not prevent me from going on with submissions meanwhile, but soon…

Submission 22 got challenged, “BlockMason Credit Protocol”, the uppercase issue

Somewhat annoying as it was very close to the previous challenge and was again on the basis of the most used asset name for a petty uppercase “M” letter (come on, cut me some slack about those names!).

BlockMason Credit protocol or Blockmason Credit protocol ?

I defended my case and the jurors decision ended in my favor with a “YES, ADD IT” (yeah!). But again, short lasting joy, case was appealed, my bounty allocated Eth were busy, could not fund myself* and token was eventually rejected (damnit!).

*In case of an appeal, it is an automatic case fail for the unfunded side whatever was jurors previous decision.

Did this second challenge stop or even slow me down? No. Commitment at work here!

But, still, I was a bit bothered, wanting to rush into next submissions and to put this challenge behind me. Quite the big mistake, leading me to omit the basic duplicate control, which consists in checking to ensure the token you’re about to submit isn’t already listed, and…

Submission 23 got challenged, “XYO Network”, the duplicate token issue

This challenge on XYO Network occurred quite swiftly and, of course, irritated me regarding my own negligence. This case is covered straightforwardly as it was obviously undefendable and resulted in the token being rejected.

It is now time for a quick sumup with some figures

One month into the bounty at this point, and I submitted 23 tokens so far while being challenged 3 times in a short time frame.

I lost my Eth stakes on those three cases, which was not far from a 1.5 Eth loss, thus reducing a lot my submission cruising speed (remember, only 4 Eth allocated to the task). Down to 2.5 Eth still available for submissions since the challenge on my 23rd submission.

But I kept going forward anyway with a special focus on the asset name to avoid, at most, potential uncertainty that would lead to new challenges (remember, the Kleros community is closely watching your submissions, at least when the twitter bot is fully functional).

Resolution taken: I will not get caught again on asset names!

Indeed…

Submission 34 got challenged, “Morpheus.Network”, the logo issue

I hesitated a little before validating the transaction of this submission, a small voice telling me to think twice about potential attack angles on the image: i swept those doubts aside and eventually clicked the metamask button.

I really should have listened to that tiny voice because the challenge on the Morpheus.Network token submission happened: the argument was about the logo that would not be compliant to the listing criteria due to 2 slim grey lines at the bottom of the symbol. Those lines were representing the 2 letters’ shadows.

This time, the case generated a lot more interest from the community, community which was divided on whether there was an issue or not with that image regarding listing policies. A lot of discussions went on on the telegram channel dedicated to jurors and, more generally, talking about cases: https://t.me/klerosjuror

2 community groups naturally emerged:

One considering submission was outrageously violating the rules and lead by community member Mars Roberson (@marsxr on telegram).

The other one defending that the logo was clearly respecting the criteria and lead by Kleros team developer Ferit (@ftunc on telegram).

Evidence were presented by both sides (you can check this on the TCR token details here). Battle raged during 3 rounds with 2 appealed sessions:

Round 1 — 3 jurors involved, verdict “DRAWN” (So, meaning a token rejection, damnit!).

Round 2 — 7 jurors involved, verdict “YES, ADD IT” (So, favoring me, yeah!).

Round 3 — 15 jurors involved, verdict “YES, ADD IT” (So, in my favour again, yeah!).

You can check those rounds on the blockchain of course and with the case explorer facility “Kleroscan” developed by community member Marc Zeller (please, someone help me convince him to give it a sexier look!).

So this time the submission went through the challenge and was approved.

Moreover, as I was able to contribute a little in the second appeal funding, i won some Eth back, restoring some submission cruise speed.

End of the hunting journey

From this last challenge, I decided to implement a stricter set of rules to select the tokens to submit with the goal of limiting challenge opportunities to a minimum.

These rules are quite simple but following them helped me to get 87 tokens registered in the end. Keep in mind that these rules apply in a context where you want to submit as many token as possible without being challenged too much. If you want to submit a particular token, you can take more time to do it safely.

So, here we go, grab a list of ERC20 tokens and:

1- Check for duplicates on the TCR (Yeah, do not miss that point).

2- Check the smartcontract on Etherscan.

3- Look for any token migrations or token swaps, passed or running: even though token swaps are not clearly forbidden within the listing criteria, it can be a weakness and induce a challenge, so drop the token if it is the case.

4- Check the asset name and see if there is any doubt on it: drop the token if there is no clear consensus over their website, media channels and exchange listings, avoid any token with a name including “token” or “coin”.

5- Check the logo, you need a clear consensus on its global use: drop the token if different logos are used even involving tiny differences such as colors.

6- Find good quality logos strictly respecting listing criteria especially the transparent background and the size: ask the project team, look for projects media kits, logo from websites, track them on google image, convert svg to png, crop if necessary to be sure logo takes the most part of the image, zoom to detect pixelated parts.

To conclude the trip, I had an ultimate challenge on my way to the end of the bounty period concerning the “LocalCoinSwap” token submission (n°48), but it was most likely a listing rules misunderstanding from the challenger and the case was easily won on my side.

Final words

I found bounty very enticing and challenging, and somewhat fell in a submission race.

Was it easy money ? Not at all!

It took me dedication and a lot of work to ensure solid submissions. Sometimes, I was able to find a fitting token in 10 minutes whereas it could take me several hours reviewing tokens for nothing.

Kleros wise, the decentralized dispute resolution protocol provided by the project and relying on game theory, Shelling point and incentives is amazing and, as far as I am concerned, has proven its efficiency with use cases like the Token Curated Registry (I have now been experiencing both juror and submitter sides on this matter).

The Kleros Team 2020 roadmap is promising and one should check it carefully here.

To conclude, there is a little PNK bounty hidden somewhere in the story: be the first to PM me the correct answer through telegram (@Presence_Numerique) and get the reward (one guess by person).

PNK Bounty Update: We already have a winner, community member Koki (@kokialgo) found the 4 tokens and won the 5000 PNK, congratulations! Check the transaction on the blockchain.

Credits to Noëlle for improving and correcting my writings here.

Honeypot! Disruptive technology! People will rightfully claim. Yes, but there is a huge downside lying under the last word: the lack of privacy. An aspect undeniably needed for everyday use and global adoption from both every individual and industries.

And there comes the Enigma project which propose to solve this peculiar, yet unavoidable and critical, point. How, will you probably ask me? Through secret contracts, a second layer that allows smart contracts input data to be hidden while performing computation on the blockchain.

And that’s it! Here land the applications medley that seemed unreachable before because they needed that level of privacy: auctions, voting systems, personal data automatic computing (for medical, insurance or banks use for example) and so on. The potential sounds limitless and this is the motivating promise lying under the Enigma project.

To conclude, i bet you are now able to see why the name “Enigma” was chosen for this project. Nevertheless, did the team think about the famous cryptographic device, used during WWII, or, in a simplier way, the word itself (implying mystery)? It is up to you to discover, this point remains Enigma-tic for me yet.