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

Add the losing side appeal duration on the dispute periods timeline #301

Open
jaybuidl opened this issue Sep 9, 2022 · 1 comment
Open
Labels
Good first issue 1️⃣ For new contributors, a good issue to get started.

Comments

@jaybuidl
Copy link
Member

jaybuidl commented Sep 9, 2022

Issue

Some users reported that the UX is confusing for the losing side of a dispute who may want to appeal. The timeline shows the overall appeal duration period, which is most relevant to the winning side, but rather misleading for the losing side.
image

Note

The screen below does show the correct information for both sides, but the point is that the image above remains misleading.
image

Possible solution

The easiest is to add a mention "(for the winning side)" next to Appeal here, and possibly add another label for relevant to the losing side (either by giving the losing side appeal duration, or either by redirecting them to the correct info).

@jaybuidl jaybuidl added the Good first issue 1️⃣ For new contributors, a good issue to get started. label Sep 9, 2022
@jaybuidl jaybuidl changed the title Add the losing side appeal duration on the dispute timeline Add the losing side appeal duration on the dispute periods timeline Sep 9, 2022
@greenlucid
Copy link
Contributor

Where did you take the 1st screenshot? That's https://github.com/kleros/dispute-resolver , not Court, right?

The issue here with this is that the Court is agnostic to how the appeal system of the Arbitrable works. The Arbitrable might allow sniping appeals, or not appeals at all, or use other exotic systems.
In practice, this has never been the case, as all Arbitrables respect the 1/2 appeal period for loser side. So it could be added to the interface

I'd close this as wontfix since solving this is in scope for kleros-v2, and there's no elegant solution to the problem

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Good first issue 1️⃣ For new contributors, a good issue to get started.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants