HIP 60: New deploy of the UBI DAO Governor

santisiri · September 1, 2022, 3:17pm

HIP: 60
title: New deploy of the UBI DAO Governor
authors: santi.eth
status: Phase 1
created: 2022-09-01
conflicts with: None
languages: EN

Simple Summary

Due to recent issues that have emerged with the existing UBI DAO Governor we recommend deploying a new version of it with the same equivalent settings that are present currenty on the PoH DAO Governor in order to advance with the mandate of HIP 22 to split UBI DAO from PoH DAO.

This vote has been put to a vote on the PoH DAO because it requires that PoH pays for the deployment costs of the new contract.

Abstract

The UBI DAO Governor has effectively reduced its submissionBaseDeposit according to the UIP-3 phase 3 vote but in the user interface we have detected that the governor itself is pointing towards an non-existent Kleros Court and requires 64 jurors to be drawn in order to make a decision in case of a dispute.

This has lead to a deposit cost in order to use the UBI DAO Governor that is 27% higher than the deposit cost of required on the Proof of Humanity and the Kleros Governor contracts.

We will deploy a new version of the UBI DAO Governor contract matching the same configuration settings from the Proof of Humanity Governor contract. The Proof of Humanity DAO will cover the cost of deploying the new contract.

Motivation

After the execution of UIP 3 on the existing UBI DAO Governor to lower submissionBaseDeposit to the voted value of 4.1 ETH, we have detected that unlike the Proof of Humanity Governor or the Kleros DAO Governor which both require a final deposit of 4.46 ETH (submissionBaseDeposit + stake for jurors), the UBI DAO Governor has a requirement of 5.7 ETH as it can be seen on the following image:

The reason for this difference in deposit cost after further inspection by @forgeron.eth is that on the arbitratorExtraData of the UBI DAO Governor contract there are 2 incorrect things:

The number of jurors was setup to 64, leading to a higher price.
It points to an inexistent subcourt.

The inexistent subcourt is set to General Court by the arbitrator so it’s fine for now, but if Kleros ever creates a dozen more subcourts in the future, the UBI governor will request an unrelated subcourt.

Implementation

Deploy a new UBI DAO Governor contract that follows the same exact settings currently available on the PoH Governor by copy pasting required configuration. This can be done easily using Remix or any standard Ethereum development tool.
Replace the on the Kleros Governor User Interface the UBI DAO Governor address for the one corresponding to the new Governor deployed on step 1.
Pay back from the Proof of Humanity treasury the 0.43 ETH required to cover the costs of contract deployment. The number used as a reference comes from the cost of deploying the original contract.

Andrei · September 1, 2022, 4:38pm

Why not simply change the arbitratorExtraData to the right value?

github.com

kleros/kleros/blob/master/contracts/kleros/KlerosGovernor.sol#L204-L211


/** @dev Changes the arbitrator of the contract.
 *  @param _arbitrator The new trusted arbitrator.
 *  @param _arbitratorExtraData The extra data used by the new arbitrator.
 */
function changeArbitrator(Arbitrator _arbitrator, bytes _arbitratorExtraData) public onlyByGovernor duringSubmissionPeriod {
    arbitrator = _arbitrator;
    arbitratorExtraData = _arbitratorExtraData;
}

santisiri · September 1, 2022, 4:41pm

Aight, I wasn’t aware that we had a changeArbitrator function in there that would modify the governor internally… that’s all that would be required to setup the proper juror count and subcourt? Let me compose a ticket and I’ll get back to you.

Would a UIP be required still? What’s the legal precedent and the risks of this?

Andrei · September 1, 2022, 4:48pm

You can put the arbitratorExtraData the other governors use as parameter.

As I understand the governor works (suboptimally since it points to the general court for now), so changing the arbitrator parameters should be similar to the process done when changing the submissionBaseDeposit

santisiri · September 1, 2022, 4:57pm

So, based on the settings I found on the PoH Governor, we should implement the following ticket:

Title: HIP 22: Fix arbitratorExtraData to match the same configuration of the PoH Governor according to the approved clarification on https://bit.ly/3cHbpEj
Contract Address: 0x7510c77163683448b8Dc8fe9e019d9482Be1ed2b
Value: 0
Contract Input: changeArbitrator
- _arbitrator: = 0x988b3A538b618C7A603e1c11Ab82Cd16dbE28069
- _arbitratorExtraData: 0x0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000020000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000004000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000040000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000005

Can @herniadlf, @fnanni, @forgeron.eth, @Andrei, @0xjean.eth please provide feedback if that ticket is okay?

I mention HIP 22 on the title because that’s the one that mentions:

A Kleros Governor shall be setup to enforce on-chain the off-chain votes expressed on the UBI DAO.

And it had a clarification vote held back in the day that says:

The HIP clarifies that the UBI DAO will follow the rules of the POH DAO at the time of the proposal unless stated otherwise.

If I can get confirmation from (ideally all or most of) you that the ticket is okay, then I’d be happy to advance this on behalf of the UBI DAO.

forgeron.eth · September 1, 2022, 5:06pm

_arbitratorExtraData should be

0x00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000040000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000005

subcourt = 4
minJurors = 5

santisiri · September 1, 2022, 5:16pm

Why do I see:

0x0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000020000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000004000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000040000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000005

On the PoH governor: https://etherscan.io/address/0x327a29fcE0a6490E4236240Be176dAA282EcCfdF#readContract

then?

Andrei · September 1, 2022, 5:17pm

Seconding @forgeron.eth
I also get the values @santisiri gets when returning values through etherscan, but that’s a etherscan bug when returning bytes. Using remix I get the right value for arbitratorExtraData:

arbitrator
0x988b3A538b618C7A603e1c11Ab82Cd16dbE28069

arbitratorExtraData
0x00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000040000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000005

santisiri · September 1, 2022, 5:19pm

Jesus christ and lord this whole thing is going to give me a heart attack one day.

After talking with @0xjean.eth on telegram he has suggested to do a UIP for this for the sake of having a good precedent for this action. I agree.

santisiri · September 1, 2022, 5:41pm

I will close this HIP then in favor of UIP 6.

Please comment and provide feedback over there.

Mike · August 14, 2023, 2:09pm

how will this affect lp on uniswap. people have liquidity there that cant not be accessed. will this fix this?
Unfortunately I can’t see my liquidity there either.
Here are all the details of the hash transactions and the addresses we own. If you can’t assist maybe you can point me to a dev who can. Possibly a dev has removed my liquidity some how?

0x146491AD7373015E8963C069c90835dd839De7E5

0xff1b01d125f7d02877d6e8ec7e43087724599c42826ef163b4404491ff08777d

0x761612962642C533913df4241C92bf632a3Ac4C0

0xfc930d578dba76e872f93b84e58b6192ba07a75c523d7a0c163f3028c2d2e953