Discussion on the prolongation of the Groth16 zkSNARK Proof Verification Use Cases contest, the results of the Anonymous Token Design contest, and the ZKP voting contest.
Prolongation of Groth16 zkSNARK Proof Verification Use Cases
One of the teams could not apply a submission on time due to a technical error.
Is it possible for a team to apply retroactively?
Pavel Prigolovko offers two options:
- allow the team to apply on general terms;
- allow participation in the contest, but the team can only count on 5th place and below.
Boris suggested an additional contest on the terms of this contest, reducing the awards and specifying that those teams that participated in the first contest cannot apply for the second one. The approximate duration of the contest is 2 weeks.
Anonymous Token Design Contest results
Pavel believes that the rejection of the participant’s application by the jury members was groundless. Pavel points out that the smart contract contest states that submissions are only considered rejected if they receive 50% or more rejections. In his opinion, the benchmark should be the scores of the jurors who voted in this contest.
One of the two applications failed to pass the score threshold. Pavel proposes to cancel the threshold and include the application in the contest.
Mikhail relates such scores to the unreasonably high expectations of the jurors. He reminds us that the main goal of the contest is to create a specification good enough for a product launch, nothing more. It was decided to put this issue to an on-chain vote.
ZKP Voting contest
Alex Novikov proposes to expand the number of prizes up to 5-7 and slightly increase the reward for the teams to motivate them more.
Pavel asks Alex to present the award proposal in the group for further discussion of this issue.