# Problem Statement, Hypotheses, Opportunities

## Problem Statement for the Factland App

# "In a digital landscape overwhelmed with misinformation, there's a significant challenge in effectively labeling and addressing half-truths, biases, and rapidly changing veracities without overwhelming users or compromising platform credibility."

## Hypotheses Derived from the Opportunities

1. A well-developed system could potentially label misinformation at a vast scale without introducing noticeable biases.

2. Collaborative efforts and decentralized research might offer breakthrough strategies to manage the immense volume of misinformation, beyond the capabilities of even large teams.

3. It's possible that a thoughtfully-designed incentive model could motivate user participation without the need for significant external funding, resulting in a self-sustaining economy.

4. Introducing adaptive mechanisms might allow the platform to adjust labeled content in light of emerging contradictory evidence, maintaining the platform's accuracy.

5. By establishing a robust appeals process, it's conceivable that disputes regarding content labeling could be managed more effectively.

6. By leveraging a more "general semantics" we might be able to counteract the human tendency to swiftly believe false information, offering users a more contextual and nuanced understanding.

7. Acknowledging the shifting nature of truth could potentially position the platform as adaptive and responsive, rather than rigid and static.

8. Investigating the multifaceted nature of truth could lead to a platform that respects and navigates between objective consensus-based realities and subjective dissensus-based emergence, enhancing user trust.

9. By prioritizing the fluid nature of truth, we might cultivate a platform that gracefully evolves with new information and perspectives.

10. If we develop a system focused on optimizing for user cognitive load, it's possible that users will engage more deeply, trusting the platform and each other to deliver concise yet credible information.

## Potential Problems Identified with Corresponding Opportunities:

1. The adversarial mechanic in which people stake a claim and argue their viewpoint, if not contested, has no mechanism of resolution.
- **Opportunity:** Consider a mechanism like staking that generates interest, which may incentivize counter-arguments and foster active participation.

2. Lack of incentive or payment for fact-checkers, which makes the fact-checking process unpaid and relies heavily on voluntary contributions.
- **Opportunity:** Look into platforms like Gitcoin, quadratic Lenster, etc., for innovative RPGF fundraising and incentive methods beyond degenerate betting models.

3. The need to prevent malicious actors from posting numerous claims to overwhelm the platform.
- **Opportunity:** Token-based incentives to validate claims, ensuring malicious actors have a barrier to spamming.

4. Challenge in incentivizing fact-checkers to ensure the quality of work.
- **Opportunity:** Conduct user interviews and persona creation to understand the psychology of potential fact-checkers and tailor incentive mechanisms accordingly.

5. Biases that come with specific sources of funding, such as expectations from donors.
- **Opportunity:** Investigate different realms of funding resources, such as direct incentivization, public goods funding, and hybrid models.

6. The exact nature of problems faced by fact-checkers and their responsibilities isn't clearly defined.
- **Opportunity:** The platform's potential transition to a fully decentralized DAO-driven governance model, offering stronger governance incentives.

7. The platform's potential over-reliance on economic incentives, ignoring cultural, social, reputational, and other forms of motivation.
- **Opportunity:** Recognize diverse incentive mechanisms, such as cultural incentives, reputational incentives, and potential equity or ownership in the platform.

8. **Compensation for Jurors**: There's a question of whether to financially compensate jurors for their time and effort.
- **Opportunity**: Users may do the work for reasons other than monetary compensation. Exploring these intrinsic motivations could lead to a more engaged community.

9. **System Autonomy and Resilience**: The desire for an unsupervised system without a central governing body raises concerns about sustainability and resilience.
- **Opportunity**: Drawing inspiration from prediction markets, they see the potential for the platform to self-sustain and defend against malicious actors through an adversarial betting system.

10. **Spam and Malicious Activities**: The open model can attract spam and malicious activities, which could skew the platform's integrity.
- **Opportunity**: The team believes that a strong adversarial system can act as a defense mechanism, attracting counteracting forces to ensure fairness and truth.

11. **Is there a Need for a Jury System?**: The concept of a jury system is contentious. While it's based on the citizens' assembly model, there's skepticism about its necessity, especially in a decentralized community.
- **Opportunity**: These assumptions should be tested. If the jury system proves valid and effective, it could ensure unbiased decisions. Alternatively, exploring a more decentralized governance model, where every user has a say, might better align with the platform's vision.

12. **Understanding the Oracle Mechanic**: The need for an "Oracle" to settle truths could introduce potential biases or centralization.
- **Opportunity**: If designed correctly, this mechanism could ensure transparency and fairness in decision-making. Conduct a comparative analysis of existing web2 and web3 solutions we might leverage.

13. **Tokenomics Design Space**: There's uncertainty around how to best align the economic incentives with the platform's goals and mechanics.
- **Opportunity**: Exploring the delegation process of DAOs could result in a system that aligns stakeholders and ensures platform longevity.

14. **Incomplete Tokenomics White Paper**: There's a draft white paper on tokenomics, but it's not finalized. Some content was merely copy-pasted as a placeholder.
- **Opportunity:** **White Paper Refinement**: Focus on finalizing the tokenomics white paper and ensure all placeholders are replaced with concrete details.

15. How much of the interaction exists on-chain vs. off-chain?
- **Opportunity:** **On-chain Transparency**: There's the potential to tokenize every interaction, providing maximum transparency and immutability, though this needs to be balanced with gas costs.

16. **Unfamiliarity with ICP**: ICP is a seemingly very different community than the Ethereum ecosystem, leading to potential misunderstandings about its capabilities and features.
- **Opportunity:** **Educate the intended user base on ICP**: Organize training or sessions to familiarize the team with ICP and its capabilities.

17. **Custody Concerns**: There's uncertainty about where the tokens are held during the onboarding process, raising questions about token custody.
- **Opportunity:** **Token Custody**: Ensure clear understanding and communication about token custody during the onboarding phase.

18. **Friction in Onboarding**: The user experience during onboarding might be complex, leading to potential drop-offs or misunderstandings.
- **Opportunity:** **Quests for Onboarding**: Introduction of quests that guide users through the flows, potentially using NFT badges as rewards.

19. **Chain Selection**: Different blockchain options have different advantages, but they also come with respective challenges, such as gas prices.
- **Opportunity:** **Exploration of Alternative Chains**: Options like Gnosis Chain and Optimism could be considered due to their low gas prices and public goods alignment.

20. **Chain Agnosticism**: While there's interest in being chain agnostic, the initial focus is on the ICP chain. A decision needs to be made about whether to develop cross-chain functionality or unique builds for other chain communities.
- **Opportunity:** **Chain Bridges**: There are possibilities to bridge between different chains, expanding the reach and interoperability of the platform.

21. **Token Inflation**: There's no clear mechanism in place to counteract token inflation.
- **Opportunity:** **Token Inflation Mechanism**: Design and implement a burn mechanism or other strategy to address potential token inflation.

22. **Unclear Initial User Experience:** When a user first arrives at the site, the context and purpose aren't clear. There is confusion about how to participate and what the site is for.
- **Opportunity:** **Improving Initial UX:** There's an opportunity to guide new users better through calls-to-action, making the purpose of the site more evident and user-friendly.

23. **Fixed Model Approach:** The team had previously decided on a specific model (adversarial juries, juried decision making) without fully exploring alternatives.
- **Opportunity:** **Exploring Alternative Models:** Spending time understanding different models can help in finding a more efficient solution and ensure they are not overly attached to a single approach.

25. **Forkability Concern:** A desire for the product to be extensible and adaptable, so other people can modify and use it as per their requirements.
- **Opportunity:** **Engaging the Community:** By defining core ideologies, there's a chance to create a more cohesive community and offer opportunities for them to ideate and potentially fork the project.

26. **Orientation and Education:** There's a need to refine the language and orientation processes for new users.
- **Opportunity:** **Refinement of Existing Features:** Focusing on orientation, education, FAQ refinement, and exploring alternative models.

27. **Overemphasis on Political Orientation in Personas:** The personas currently overemphasize political beliefs and don't focus enough on the users' approach to the product, their pain points, and their interactions with the platform.
- **Opportunity:** **Revisiting Personas:** By recreating personas with a focus on UX/UI pain points, the team can better understand user needs and improve the product accordingly.

28. **Ideological vs. Mechanical Focus:** The platform is currently seen through an ideological lens, rather than a tool that can be used agnostically.
- **Opportunity:** **Broadening the Platform's Appeal:** By de-emphasizing political aspects, the platform can appeal to a wider audience and be used in a variety of contexts.

29. **Skepticism from traditional journalism about crypto**: Journalists, a potential user group, are wary of the crypto space.
- **Opportunity:** **Targeting web3/crypto communities**: These communities might be more receptive to the app given their interest in the crypto space.

30. **Web3 community's potential lack of patience**: This community might not be willing or able to do the work the app requires.
- **Opportunity:** **Make the app more delightful**: Ensuring that the app is fun, intuitive, and user-friendly could attract more users.

31. **General Adoption via App appeal**: There's a perception that the app isn't inviting, fun, or intuitive, which deters potential users.
- **Opportunity:** **Make the app more delightful**: Ensuring that the app is fun, intuitive, and user-friendly could attract more users.

32. **Lack of clear incentives for users**: The current system doesn't seem to offer a strong payout, be it reputational, beneficial, or financial, for users to get involved.
- **Opportunity:** **Airdrop of tokens**: Promising an airdrop of tokens could be an incentive that draws more people to the platform.

33. **Dependency on the token**: The team is heavily relying on a token to create engagement and trust within the community.
- **Opportunity:** **Launch a token to gain credibility**: Successfully launching a token might help in getting recognition and building trust.

34. There's a possibility of getting bogged down in theory without moving forward with practical action.
- **Opportunity:** Using the platform for deep theoretical discussions, catering to an audience that appreciates it.

---

**Loose Threads & Additional Opportunities:**
- Leveraging token models, such as airdrops, to bootstrap governance and provide community-based incentives.
- The idea of dissolving the corporate entity in favor of community-driven DAO operations, indicating a deep commitment to decentralization.
- **Delegation of Votes**: A proposed system where token holders can delegate their votes to experts in different areas, ensuring more informed decisions.
- **Financialized Token**: There's an idea to have a financialized token that could potentially provide liquidity to holders in the future.
- **ICP's Advantages**: The ICP chain allows more actions on-chain for less cost, and some team members have prior experience with it. This can lead to quicker and cost-effective iterations.
- **UX Improvement on ICP**: ICP allows users to interact without setting up a wallet, streamlining the onboarding process.
- **Vote Delegation UI**: Develop a user-friendly interface for the delegation of votes to ensure users can easily delegate to experts.
- **Review Onboarding UX**: Conduct user testing to identify and reduce points of friction during the onboarding process.
- **Chain Strategy**: Make decisions about the primary chain for the initial phase and the roadmap for exploring chain agnosticism.