Reading the chain
one moment
Asking the contract
Asking the contract
Our checkout returns raw gateway codes to customers, and support handles the fallout. We want every customer-facing error in the payments API rewritten in plain language that says what went wrong and what to do next, with the internal code preserved in the response for our own logs. Scope is the checkout path only, not refunds or disputes.
Weights are the buyer’s and are published with the criteria. They never enter the prompt: the network scores each criterion on its own, and the priorities are applied in code afterwards. There is no method in the contract that edits either after publication.
criteria digest b188e9f6a8b93fcb0636664dcd28c629a46d99afe68806d884617880381d113f
2 sealed commitments so far. Nothing about them is readable, by anyone, including the buyer - the contract holds a sha256 digest per bid and no text at all.
Scorecards appear after the reveal window, which opens in 18h 38m.
Questions and answers are public and permanent, and they close with the commit window - an answer arriving after commitments were sealed would be information only the bidders who waited could act on. An answer explains what a criterion means; it does not change what is scored. The network is given the frozen criteria and nothing else.
Anyone may ask, whether or not they have sealed a bid - the answer is public either way, and needing to pay a deposit to find out what a criterion means would defeat the point.
A bidder whose score on a specific criterion looks wrong against their own proposal text can contest it. Both are public after the reveal, so the claim is checkable by anyone.
The appeal is re-scored against the same proposal. The argument is treated as a claim about text that was hash-committed before anyone saw a score - if it points at wording that is genuinely there, that wording is taken into account; if it asserts anything the proposal does not say, it is ignored. An appeal cannot become a second, unsealed bid.
The award is held while an appeal is open. A tender that paid out during a live scoring appeal would make the appeal meaningless. If the total moves, the appeal is upheld and the bond comes back; if it does not, the bond pays for the re-scoring. Resolving is permissionless, so nobody needs the appellant’s cooperation to unblock the round.
An appeal can be opened at any time while this round is still open. It is bounded by settlement rather than by the decision window, because scoring has no deadline and a bid scored late would otherwise get no window at all.