The Discussion Phase

Discussion Thread

After a market is disputed, a discussion thread will be created in the UMA Discord (#vote-contributions). These threads allow the community to share arguments about how the market should resolve, and anyone can participate.

To inform voters, all key points should be shared before the Commit Phase ends, since votes can't be changed afterward.

These discussions often reflect community consensus and help UMA stakers decide how to vote. Because stakers are penalized for voting against the final outcome, it's important to share clear, well-reasoned arguments on time.

An example of a discussion thread. Discussion threads range in the number of comments.

Discussion threads can also be found on vote.uma.xyz

Discussion Structure

A discussion thread usually begins with the context of the market and whether the proposed outcome is correct. It then covers why the proposer submitted that outcome, why the market was disputed, and what resolutions are possible.

During these discussions, several key elements often form the basis of arguments.

Discussion Element	Definition
Resolution Criteria	The scope of the resolution criteria and whether it was met.
Evidence	Objective events and facts from all sides, and whether they satisfy the resolution criteria.
Source Credibility	Evaluation of whether presented sources are reputable, independent, and appropriate for the market context.
Logic	Supporting arguments that explain why the market should resolve in a certain way.
Opposing Viewpoints	Consideration of counterarguments and their validity.
Precedents	Similar resolved or concurrent markets used to justify or guide a proposed resolution.
Market Intention	The intended purpose and interpretation of the market by its creators.
Market Consensus	How different sources understood and interpreted the market.
Order Book Sentiment	How market prices and order book activity reflect expectations around resolution.
Effect on Future Proposals	Potential impact of this decision on future market resolutions.

Discussion Guidelines

When participating in a discussion, keep these general guidelines in mind:

Discussion Conduct: Be respectful and focus on ideas, not personal attacks. Keep the conversation centered on the written resolution criteria, and try to avoid personal interpretations or assumptions. Evidence that doesn't satisfy the market's resolution criteria shouldn't be introduced, since it doesn't directly help resolve the market.

Timing of Evidence: Only evidence available at the time the proposal is made should be considered in resolution discussions.

Applying Criteria: If the resolution criteria are unclear, use good judgment based on the underlying market rules. Sometimes the intent or logic behind a proposal can be helpful, even if it doesn't strictly meet the criteria.

Precedents & Argument Quality: Avoid setting precedents that could influence future resolutions. Strong arguments usually include things like opposing viewpoints, precedents, and market consensus. Try to focus on adding new points or perspectives that haven't already been raised, rather than repeating existing arguments.

Use of AI in Arguments: Some users reference AI tools (such as ChatGPT or Grok) to interpret evidence, analyze videos, or critique market resolution proposals. These tools are occasionally cited as external validators of a particular argument or outcome. However, AI is not a substitute for human reasoning and does not carry special weight in resolution decisions. UMA favors clear, sourced, human-written arguments when evaluating whether resolution criteria have been met.

What's Next

Now that you've learned about the discussion phase, let's take a look at a discussion argument.