Whitelist Address Standards
If Polymarket moves forward with the proposer whitelist, the next step is to define clear standards for whitelisted addresses. This chapter will explore what those standards could be.
Labeling Whitelisted Addresses
Whitelisted proposers should be clearly labeled and linked to a public or pseudonymous figure. This helps ease concerns about insider cabal allegations and ensures accountability, as community members have a reasonable expectation they are active on Discord. When Polymarket and UMA community members relinquish proposal rights, they have every right to know who submitted a proposal to hold them accountable for bad faith or malicious submissions.
Markets With Whitelist
Given that over 80% of disputes resolve to P4 (Too Early), if there is a whitelist, it should only apply to frequently disputed markets. Most P4 proposals occur in topics like sports, weather, and crypto prices, so limiting these markets to experienced proposers would address most disputes without restricting Oracle access.
Many of these markets are score-based or binary, such as temperature readings or final game scores, and are often proposed automatically by bots. When a first-time proposer tries to beat a bot, they often submit too early and lose their bond. This also happens when new proposers mistakenly think unsubmitted proposals are "free money," only to be disputed and lose the bond.
If these frequently disputed markets were restricted only to whitelisted proposers, most of whom are bots, the requirements for entering the whitelist would need to change. Otherwise, manual proposers would find it virtually impossible to be whitelisted, as bots can easily submit hundreds of straightforward proposals in a single day.
Markets Without Whitelist
Some markets may benefit from not having a whitelist, especially those with ambiguity or room for interpretation, such as war-related events or real-world situations. In these cases, discussion can meaningfully influence the resolution. Restricting proposals would limit valuable perspectives and weaken the Oracle's ability to reach well-considered outcomes.
Because contentious markets differ from low-ambiguity types like sports scores or temperature readings, whitelist restrictions should be reserved for high-dispute, low-ambiguity markets, while leaving contentious markets open to all proposers.
Proposer Etiquette
Under the whitelist system, the proposal process is:
A user identifies a Polymarket market that is ready to be proposed.
The user tags a whitelisted proposer.
A whitelisted proposer submits the proposal.
Some issues with this approach include:
No dedicated discussion time before a proposal is submitted.
Hard to judge if the market is contentious, especially if proposed immediately after being tagged.
Fewer people reviewing the proposal, which reduces community oversight.
A possible solution is to require a short discussion period before proposing, triggered when a user tags a whitelisted proposer. This would still be shorter than the two-to-four day dispute window and would mirror how the Oracle currently handles ambiguous proposals through initial discussion before submission.
Discussion Etiquette
Whitelisted proposers should not be allowed to participate in resolution discussions. Their role should be limited to submitting proposals, not advocating for a particular outcome. They may ask questions to clarify the events at hand, but should not suggest how the market should resolve. This preserves community autonomy, avoids undue influence, and prevents proposers from being seen as deciding outcomes unilaterally.
Risk Labs and Polymarket team members, in particular, should refrain from both proposing and participating in discussions for contentious markets. These positions hold significant influence, and proposing inherently signals that they believe the resolution criteria have been met. In practice, this could discourage disputes or sway voters, effectively allowing the teams to decide on behalf of the decentralized Oracle. The same standard should apply to other whitelisted proposers to prevent them from justifying their own proposals in ways that rally support and force a vote in their favor.
Current Risk Labs and Polymarket Behavior
As of August 2025, both Risk Labs and Polymarket engage in dispute discussions.
Risk Labs
Risk Labs team members occasionally participate in dispute discussions. This can create an unfair dynamic, as statements from the Oracle's CEO often carry significant weight and may discourage or undermine those who disagree from presenting their claims. Voters may also feel inclined to side with the CEO's position rather than that of another community member.
For example, in July 2025, several users criticized Hart, the CEO of UMA, for commenting on the contentious Will Zelenskyy wear a suit before July? market.
Polymarket
Polymarket team members, while not openly debating disputes, frequently issue clarifications that almost always determine voting outcomes. Because proposing inherently signals that the proposer believes the resolution criteria have been met, allowing these influential insiders to propose effectively lets them decide on behalf of the decentralized Oracle.
If a Polymarket team member proposed a market, it would be functionally the same as issuing a clarification asserting that the resolution criteria have been satisfied. This leaves little room for discussion, and they would be unlikely to clarify against their own proposal if disputed. As a result, all resolution power would rest with them, and disputers might feel disadvantaged by having to argue against the team's position rather than on the merits of the case.
Summary
If Polymarket adopts a proposer whitelist, it should apply only to frequently disputed, noncontentious markets, while leaving contentious markets open. Whitelisted proposers should be labeled, held to clear standards, and be barred from resolution discussions to preserve community autonomy. This is especially important when Risk Labs or Polymarket team members are involved. When they take part in the resolution process, it can decide outcomes, discourage disputes, and weaken the Oracle's permissionless nature.
Coming Up
Having discussed several ways a whitelist could be implemented, we now evaluate a potential compromise that could satisfy both Polymarket and its community.
Last updated