@David_Dyor
Thank you for your positive support towards the proposal.
@JTraversa
Really appreciate your feedback here. You touch on a really important point: the bug that is the core cause leading to this error for many users. I think finding a permanent solution to prevent an error like this from happening in the future would be the optimal last stage step towards putting this issue to bed. However, we are currently facing a few obstacles preventing us:
- The current team tackling this proposal is very limited in size.
- The team already spent extensive time and effort trying to identify the bug without clear-cut success.
- The team does not contain any Gitcoin core members / individuals who were part of the group that wrote the original code.
- Those members are already jammed up with work and have other things on their plates right now.
Since it is possible to prove failure to claim without identification of the bug, we can, and I personally believe we should take the necessary steps to remedy the situation, hence the proposal. That being said, I think your suggestion of creating a public resource sharing all the ground weβve covered so far with regards to identifying the bug is a smart supplementary idea. We will put that together if this proposal passes. Hopefully, with the help of more people within the community we can identify this bug once and for all.
I also agree that a proposal like this will set a precedent, but I do not think that it will be a bad one. I think having the community, without any monetary incentive to do so, come together and show support to retroactively help those who were unfortunate victims of an error in the system will demonstrate strength in integrity.
Although there might be other parties with similar problems, I think creating an all-encompassing proposal for everyone is the ideal scenario. However, I also think that getting a proposal like that to pass, given the team size we have right now and how much money we would need from the treasury, will not be feasible and probably wonβt pass right out the bat. That is why I still think that starting small by passing this proposal first, and then gaging its response might be the safer and wiser approach to structure a future all-encompassing proposal with more hands on deck.