UNSW Village Green Oval


8,000 FOAM for a missing phone number, which I understand is not even a must have?! :face_with_raised_eyebrow:


It does seem like a large challenge for just a missing phone number. I would support if the challenge amount was for less, and definitely if the cartographer had already posted a correct duplicate POI that could be kept instead of this one, but they haven’t.


I would support if the challenge amount was for less.

I wouldn’t. It’s a missing phone number.


Strange thing is, I dun see the POI owners speaking up or trying to defend themselves a lot of times …


Actually, the POI has neither a homepage nor a telephone number.
It is a green area used by several sports clubs.
After all, it’s called Green Oval
The given homepage is an encore and belongs to a sports club just like when you add a Wikipedia link.
The sports club is located in a pavilion outside the oval.
To provide a phone number, the POI should be named with the sports club. But its not


This is somehow a Strange Situation.
Challenger was not supporting any phone number challange so far.
Hmm lets see how this ends. Looks like here is something going on.


This isn’t a social club. We should defend good pois and take down bad ones, regardless of whether or not the owner is part of the community.

I do think there are plenty of owners who did proof of use but aren’t otherwise active. If they didn’t sign up for emails they may not even know about the challenge.


I was stuck somewhere between:

  • Supporting the challenge on grounds that we should encourage active users to do work for reward (and saying screw the other guy its his fault for staking over the minimum).
  • Being against the challenge because challenging for such a high stake on a phone number could create a dangerous precedent on the map for challenging over small omissions.

What swings me to actually not supporting the challenge is the fact that the challenger @AAbranches hasn’t already posted a correct duplicate POI with the phone number, so we aren’t even sure if he will repost the POI if the challenge wins. Then, it would be a net loss of information. Not going to take that risk.

This is really why we need the Challenge-Edit functionality that we discussed on the last Community Workshop Call, but it wouldn’t be able to be deployed for awhile.


Nowhere did I say don’t defend if someone isn’t on this forum. But it is frustrating to defend a POI and lose, and then you see that no one else has voted in its defense …


Yes, we need the POI edit functionality. At this stage of development, there is no incentive to put POI’s on the map, and the voting incentive is small relative to the effort, hence the lack of voting participation. To spur the addition of POI’s I suggest that at every voting challnge 10% of the rewards are distributed to all existing POI. And lower the staking amount for a POI to 1 FOAM, similar to a Signal. When people across the crypto space realize they can get rewarded for just putting POI’s on the map and the barriers to entry are low, we will get higher adoption. Locking a large deposition of FOAM on the map at a POI at this stage does not seem to help with wide spread user adoption.

My reason for this challenge is to push this discussion along.


Yes that sounds very good what u say. And i am for everything what makes this project better.
But In fact u challenged a green area for not having an phonenumber.
The phone number belongs to Arc Sports
The poi’s name is green oval and describes just the green are there.
It’s like when I put a poi which is a park. I link to a homepage where the park is described by an travel company… why would we than expect a phone number on this Park which belongs to the travel company??


And in the meantime, the cartographer loses 8000 tokens with 4800 of them ending in your wallet …


This guy has his first day one the map


The cartographer does not have to lose his 8000 tokens. Vote that the POI is valid. I will lose the 8000 tokens that I put in. That is the intent of skin in the game. I have as much to lose as he/she does.

By voting that the POI is valid the community would be saying, they support less information on a POI, which is a perfectly reasonable outcome.


Of course … but his 8000 tokens are now on the line just because you want to prove a point to the FOAM people.


And by the way, if your challenge fails and you lose the 8000 tokens, you would also have failed to prove your point to them …


I don’t follow.

  1. I am one of the FOAM people, action, dialogue and discourse are how we will enhance this protocol. I believe the value that this protocol will gain will only be through active participation. The way the ICO was structured showed that intent.

  2. Voting participation has been dropping to a few willing to vote. We need to find a way to get more people in the community to vote.

  3. When I look at this challenge, which is and should be controversial for all the reasons highlighted on this thread. I see the following 6 votes thus far (7 if you include mine)

These are
0x04fd76c0b6d975a5de158f4edcf88b55ddce4a8c – 47875 tokens voted
POI’s placed - 70, Challenges started - 3, Votes revealed - 90, Map rewards - 4682

0x9a78a4d0723a224d89374fe48c4feb589e67c773 – 92640 tokens voted
POI’s placed - 36, Challenges started - 26, Votes revealed - 115, Map rewards - 6877

0x869daaa8257abbba3471a909cfa9c728be4d82f4 – 365793 tokens voted
POI’s placed - 0, Challenges started - 16, Votes revealed - 47, Map rewards - 77201

0x52eeB6605dD55762056a1F8034D84bDA02eBF037 – 84374 tokens voted
POI’s placed - 12, Challenges started - 3, Votes revealed - 28, Map rewards - 3244

0x81df87a117417b554a2ade4f7a425fcc4b2d919a – 72000 tokens voted
POI’s placed - 17, Challenges started - 8, Votes revealed - 33, Map rewards - 29580

0x0a17A58a0a8072EFe6e84d3a9a3A5F9B621f9C87 – 11111 tokens voted
POI’s placed - 66, Challenges started - 2, Votes revealed - 23, Map rewards - 317

0x0a17A58a0a8072EFe6e84d3a9a3A5F9B621f9C87 – 30000 tokens voted
POI’s placed - 484, Challenges started - 4, Votes revealed - 98, Map rewards - 2508

Each of us should draw our own conclusions from this data set.
The challenge is serving the purpose from my perspective.

Differences of perspective are welcomed, and when there is skin in the game even more so.


By FOAM people, I meant people who are the project owners, people like Ryan. I presume you are not one of them, since you need to resort to this challenge to get their attention.

Voting participation could be down for a number of reasons - voters apathy as you seem to infer, or people might just be unsure of which way to vote. In any case, I don’t think voting participation will break or make FOAM project.


The POI owner dialed it down double quick :joy:


That challenge was a big mysterium