[Phase-3][Binding] HIP 79 - Ridiculous anti lawfare ratification of HIPs passed in Phase 3

HIP: 79
title: Ridiculous anti lawfare ratification of HIPs passed in Phase 3
author: Ludoviko
status: Phase-2
created: 2023-01-27
requires : HIPs 78 and 58
ammends: HIP 45, HIP 5

Versión en castellano más abajo

Simple Summary

This HIP will counter the attempts to block two Binding Proposals to reach the governor safely.


HIPs 78 and 58 are being blocked to be sent to the Governor on a set of bad-faith and beaurocratic noise that hinders democratic processes. This HIP will ammend and ratify the will of these two HIPs to continue its due process to become registration Policy.


To end the lawfare attempt to block this HIPs to pass.



Two commits will be submitted as a new pull request to the original policy (https://github.com/greenlucid/poh-policy/pull/1). These are created to ammend and ratify the HIPs already voted and approved. Both modifications are to be sent to the Governor with the same method specified in each of the HIPs, in such a way that both modifications are fit and properly done to be sent to the Governor.

Anti-lawfare clause

The DAO will also manifest its will that these HIPs are to be merged with the policy and any attempts to challenge the submission to the Kleros Governor are to be treated as lawfare attempts. Kleros jurors (in the case of a challenge) are required by the force of this HIP to refuse to arbitrate in case of such a challenge appears.

If any minor typos or errors prevent the execution of this or future HIPs after its approval on Phase 3, the ammendments to these blocked HIPs are to be fast-tracked and bypass HIP-5 requirements, only requiring a new 24h Snapshot poll with the [Ammendment] tag and options “Ammend the HIP” or “Revert to Phase 3”, along with the suggested modifications.

Ammend to debureaucratize HIP-45

Implementation of HIP-45 is to be modified as to simplify the policy changes. All that is required to make an ammendment valid is to specify which characters are being modified from the original policy markdown file. Methods to do this include but are not limited to the use of version control tools like GitHub, as long as there is evidence that the tool itself has a reputation of trustworthiness.


Previous attempts to implement the HIPs for policy change have met beaurocratic resistance, more specially so the ones that attempt to make the registry process less prone to innocent mistakes and whatever policy reduces the amount of disputes rised at Kleros Humanity Court. Kleros own governance process lacks all of these overkill mechanisms for their governance, so it does not make much sense to continue with such complicated policy change process.


Implementation already described above.

Traducción al castellano

Resumen simple

Este HIP contrarrestará los intentos de bloquear dos Propuestas Vinculantes para llegar al gobernador de forma segura.


Las HIPs 78 y 58 están siendo bloqueadas para ser enviadas al Gobernador por un conjunto de ruidos de mala fe y burocráticos que entorpecen los procesos democráticos. Este HIP enmendará y ratificará la voluntad de estos dos HIPs para continuar su debido proceso para convertirse en Política de registro.


Acabar con el intento de lawfare de bloquear la aprobación de este HIP.



Se enviarán dos commits como un nuevo pull request a la política original (https://github.com/greenlucid/poh-policy/pull/1). Se crean para enmendar y ratificar los HIPs ya votados y aprobados. Ambas modificaciones se enviarán al Gobernador con el mismo método especificado en cada uno de los HIPs, de tal forma que ambas modificaciones estén en forma y correctamente hechas para ser enviadas al Gobernador.

Cláusula contra la ilegalidad

El DAO también manifestará su voluntad de que estos HIPs se fusionen con la política y que cualquier intento de impugnar el envío al Gobernador Kleros sea tratado como intento de lawfare. Los jurados de Kleros (en caso de recusación) están obligados por la fuerza de este HIP a negarse a arbitrar en caso de que aparezca tal recusación.

Si alguna errata o error menor impide la ejecución de este o futuros HIPs tras su aprobación en la Fase 3, las enmiendas a estos HIPs bloqueados se realizarán por la vía rápida y eludirán los requisitos del HIP-5, requiriendo únicamente un nuevo sondeo de Instantánea de 24h con la etiqueta [Enmienda] y las opciones “Enmendar el HIP” o “Volver a la Fase 3”, junto con las modificaciones sugeridas.

Enmienda para desburocratizar el HIP-45

La aplicación del HIP-45 debe modificarse para simplificar los cambios políticos. Todo lo que se necesita para que una enmienda sea válida es especificar qué caracteres se modifican del archivo original de la política. Los métodos para hacerlo incluyen, entre otros, el uso de herramientas de control de versiones como GitHub, siempre que haya pruebas de que la herramienta en sí tiene una reputación de fiabilidad.


Los intentos previos de implementar los HIPs para el cambio de políticas han encontrado resistencia burocrática, más especialmente los que intentan hacer el proceso de registro menos propenso a errores inocentes y cualquier política que reduzca la cantidad de disputas surgidas en el Tribunal de Humanidad de Kleros. El propio proceso de gobernanza de Kleros carece de todos estos mecanismos exagerados para su gobernanza, por lo que no tiene mucho sentido continuar con un proceso de cambio de política tan complicado.


La implementación ya se ha descrito anteriormente.

1 Like

Link to Snapshot poll Snapshot

1 Like

Proposal passed and its binding effects are immediate. Thanks to the Human Voters.


So basically this locks up the governance execution due to the “refuse to arbitrate” clause which means that people submitting TX risk losing part of their deposits.

didnt get an answer, censoring it will not make it dissappear


You were notified to edit your out-of-line response to make it more relevant to the topic you started. Reposting and inciting hate speech doesn’t make the comment nor the discussion any better.

This forum is for civilized public discourse, not for publicizing personal attacks.

Remember to criticize ideas, not people. And respect moderators’ authority.

It was not hate speech, it was evidence-based facts involving concentration of courts and evidence based DAO voting maneuvers.


So I repeat again. What is the actual reason for the alleged risk of deposit loss?

And how is the concentrated staking in technical court doing?


Luis, you are the one that wrote the HIP and promoted it. You are the one that should know what happens if the rules you established are followed, nobody is required to give you any additional explanations. The jurors are expected to refuse to arbitrate if there’s a challenge according to what you’ve written.

Clemént’s voting justification on Phase 2, that you dismissed/ignored.

It’s impossible to collaborate with someone not willing to listen, that treats every recommendation as a threat. Even your original motivation for this HIP comes from that, Green advises you on how to fix your HIP immediately when he found out it did not follow the specification, you just had to follow it and repost. It feels that this is done in bad faith to create more drama.


Ammendment for this hip is open for voting at




Ammendment for this hip is open for voting at Snapshot