# kaal:claim:3125822-046

**Claim.** The proposed fix is to value tokens by how the post was received and cited: tokens minted at a node with a large branch of positive references are worth more, while tokens from a post whose betting pool was close to 50-50 are worth less in future salaries than tokens from a post with uniform agreement.

**Type.** design  **Support.** argued

**Holds when.**

- requires the forum to be treated as a weighted citation graph

**Source quote.**

> For instance if there is a large branch of positive references based at a node, the tokens minted at that node should be worth more. If the post was contentious, and its betting pool was close to 50-50, the tokens will be worth less in future salaries than uniform agreement.

**From.** Craig Calcaterra, Wulf A. Kaal, Vlad Andrei, *Blockchain Infrastructure for Measuring Domain Specific Reputation in Autonomous Decentralized and A* (2018), 9.2 The forum as a weighted DAG, page 40

**Cite as.** Craig Calcaterra, Wulf A. Kaal, Vlad Andrei, Blockchain Infrastructure for Measuring Domain Specific Reputation in Autonomous Decentralized and A (2018). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3125822

**Verify.** sha256 of source PDF `d4d0bbaa3260968226186131d60e6d64a53e904d94e4295c61fd17042f1191ef` at https://raw.githubusercontent.com/wulfkaal/Academic-Papers/main/papers/pdf/Calcaterra%20et%20al.%20-%202018%20-%20Blockchain%20Infrastructure%20for%20Measuring%20Domain%20Specific%20Reputation%20in%20Autonomous%20Decentralized%20and%20A.pdf

**Topics.** citation-and-knowledge, tokenomics, economics, law-and-legal-systems

**Keywords.** weighted-dag, citation-graph, token-valuation, precedent

**Canonical form.** This markdown file is the canonical hashed representation of the claim. Its sha256 is the content hash used for attestation.