My Proposed Solution

To address disputes without closing the Oracle to the community, Polymarket could adopt a model that balances targeted restrictions with greater accessibility. This chapter presents my proposed solution.

Remove the Propose Resolution Button

The easiest way to immediately reduce proposal disputes is to remove the Propose Resolution button from the Polymarket interface. Most new proposers encounter the Oracle through this button without understanding the process. Removing it would significantly reduce first-time proposals while still allowing informed participants to propose directly to the Oracle.

Restrict Frequently Disputed Markets

Markets with high dispute rates, such as sports scores, weather data, and crypto prices, could be limited to whitelisted proposers. These are usually straightforward, score-based markets often dominated by bots. Limiting them would address the majority of P4 (Too Early) disputes.

Keep Contentious Markets Open

Markets involving ambiguous or interpretive criteria should remain open to all proposers. These are the cases where community discussion and multiple perspectives matter most. Restricting them would risk losing valuable input.

Whitelist the Second Proposal Only

Currently, markets can have two active proposals to allow reproposal if something changes after the first proposal. This ensures the market can resolve even if the first proposal is incorrect and the resolution criteria have been satisfied. Otherwise, a bad actor could keep a market stuck in dispute. For example, if someone proposes one second too early for the Bitcoin price on August 8, another proposer could still submit on time.

To address this, if an open market's first proposal is disputed, the second proposal could be restricted to whitelisted proposers. This would prevent markets from being locked up by two disputed proposals while still allowing the first proposal to be made by anyone.

Expand the Whitelist with Trusted Figures, Not Just Bots

The whitelist should not be dominated by automated accounts. It should include visible, trusted community members who can be held accountable and who actively participate in discussions.

Why This Is Not Enough

Even with these measures, the Oracle will not become healthier without improving accessibility and understanding. Restriction alone narrows participation; it does not prepare new contributors to participate successfully.

Polymarket and UMA should actively promote Oracle resources, such as PolymarketGuide and similar materials, across multiple platforms. Educational content should be easy to find, frequently shared, and detailed enough to explain not only the rules but also key precedents. Users should feel empowered to participate in the Oracle, contribute to market resolutions, and uphold its long-term credibility.

By combining targeted restrictions with active outreach, the Oracle can reduce disputes while remaining open and participatory.

Summary

This proposal combines targeted restrictions with better accessibility to reduce disputes without closing the Oracle. Measures include removing the Propose Resolution button, limiting high-dispute markets to whitelisted proposers, keeping contentious markets open, and expanding the whitelist to trusted figures. Yet restrictions alone are insufficient, and Polymarket and UMA must promote educational resources and key precedents to keep the Oracle efficient and participatory.

Coming Up

In the final chapter, we examine what MOOV2 means for the future of the Oracle and how we, as a community, can shape its growth while preserving decentralization.