# Vouch and challenge issue
We'll transform this in a forum post later?

## Current options
* Have the vouchee (the one receiving vouch) accept the vouch
* Have a curating period before pending
* Penalize bad vouchers
* Reward responsible vouchers
* Use the crowdfunding option as default and/or Use the UX to foment this option (popups, etc...)

## Associated issues
* Impossibility of the registring person to be contacted
* currently ethmail is not a viable option
* we need to find a way for the person to be reached out, reallistically. Maybe forcing them to have a social media account? Incentivize them to check their inbox, notifications, etc. during the registration?

## 1. Allow users to accept vouch
Theres a HIP on phase 1 [here](https://gov.proofofhumanity.id/t/phase-1-hip-12-let-users-decide-to-accept-vouches-when-your-profile-is-in-vouching-phase/583)

Pros:
* prevents bad PR
* reduce around xx% of challenges that could be prevented if challengees were notified

Cons:
* hard implementation?
* UX is affected negatively for all users
* would still allow vouchers to convince challengees to accept vouches

## 2. Have a curating period
Theres a HIP stub [here](https://gov.proofofhumanity.id/t/phase-1-hip-xx-allow-a-waiting-period-after-vouch-and-before-pending/1203)

During this period it might be important to have the person be fully alert to notifications in their inbox or whatever contact info they could have.
Could the interphase add an e-mail field? People might get scared to publish their personal e-mail.
* **IDEA:** have a reward to people that help during this period (bienchallengear),
* Rewards could be
* stream some of the UBIs of the helped person for a month or something (might be too complex to implement), or
* POAPs,
* could make a person mark systematically all new posts and reap the benefits of the % that were right.
* possible solution, add a cost to this process

### Pros
* people could have a period in which they are not vulnerable to the attack, and they could (or should) use this period to double-triple-quadruple check their submission
* It is specially useful in cases where the person thinks the video and picture uploaded correctly, but the file got truncated for some reason

### Cons
* incentivize people to notify challengees will be necessary, otherwise they will be vouched and challenged anyway

## 3. Penalize bad vouchers
There are mechanisms to detect which profiles have a high vouched/removed
### Pros
* depends on the implementation

### Cons
* hard to implement, might require PoH v2 (citation needed)

## 4. Reward responsible vouchers

### Pros
* it would make it more expensive to perform malicious vouches
* meaning that when a reward is given to good actors, bad actors loose profit, right?
* might not need much development (it's easy to pull a list of users that did not vouch for challenged profiles)
*

### Cons
* would not deter the bad actors, which they would still be acting in the platform.

## 5. Recommend and refactor the crowdfunding option as default

- Rename the crowdfund option to "Safe Fund/Crowdfund" in the UI
- Change the documentation to incentivize users to use this option, and only fund their deposits after they are sure their submission is correct
- Create a group where people can share their profiles **before** they have deposits, so anyone can verify their profiles
- Rename the self-fund option to make it more clear it is the advanced option "I trust my submission follows the rules and I would like to proceed without consulting the community"
Optional
- Create a crowdfunding market like vouch.market, where people can pay to be crowdfunded

### Pros
* No change in the contracts necessary, therefore little to no dev resources are required (only change button names/order)
* Almost immediate implementation
* It provides a window for checking the profiles like option 2, without locking funds unnecessarily
* Savvy users can still use the self-fund option

### Cons
* It makes the experience a bit more clunky, since a user would need to send two transactions

## 6. Eliminate vouchers who vouch an Incorrect Submitted Profile

- The Registered Human who wants to vouch a Profile knows perfectly the conditions that the profile must met because he already pass the same test
- The Registered Human should verificate the profile and human condition before giving his vouch (Responsible Vouch) helping others to pass the test and avoiding challenges.
- Malicious Vouchers or Irresponsible Vouchers will be eliminated from the registry if they vouch an Incorrect Submitted profile
Optional
- Give back 50% of deposit to the submitter of an incorrect profile successfully challenged

### Pros

* Promotes **Responsible Vouch** and eliminates **Malicious Vouchers**
* No need to add new phases in the registration process or Accept Vouch mechanism
* Improves the quality of the registered profiles
* Diminishes the number of Incorrect Submission challenges
Optional step pros
* The submitter of an incorrect profile successfully challenged will keep part of the funds, maintaining motivation to become part of the registry

### Cons

* New version of Proof of Humanity Smart Contract is needed
* A bit more pressure to vouchers

# 7. Have a comment wall on each profile so that people can reach them
Something like the old facebook wall where you could write a comment.
Jean mentioned that a Disqus could be added to the interphase.

### Pros
* Avoids privacy issues
* Easy for the user, which does not have to install or login to anything

### Cons
* Maybe not fast enough
* Disqus is ad-supported
* Might work as a smear campaign platform