What is the mechanism for assessing the quality of information provided on the Mosaic platform? Who and how does it make its ratings relevant to reviews and conclusions? How many such experts? Is there a possibility of corruption when evaluating content?
The quality of information is assessed by Mosaic's users.
Users can rate research, upvote or downvote etc.
They ultimately decide what content is deemed as good and what content is deemed as bad.
Mosaic Network is decentralized, there is no “admin”, and since there is no admin, in an immutable, decentralized blockchain-based system
like Mosaic, an individual cannot delete or censor particular transactions on the network.
When it comes to evaluating content Mosaic system is designed to take care of
misinformation and spam automatically through mandatory staking contracts.
The underlying mechanics are simple: every time a user posts content on Mosaic or
rates the content of others, they place a slashable stake in MZX into escrow
through a smart contract, with size of the stake dependent on the type of
interaction as well as the accuracy and popularity of past posts. The Mosaic smart
contract holds these tokens in reserve for a given amount of time. At the end of
this period, if a post is heavily downvoted, the staking mechanism automatically
flags that post and removes it from users’ feeds, with the stake sent to a pool
reserved for future contributor rewards. MZX stakes attached to unflagged content
are automatically returned to their original owner and those posts remain
unchanged on the feeds.
We expect this staking mechanism, in conjunction with the requirement for users
to submit their real identities when joining the network, to promote content
excellence while simultaneously penalizing spam, misinformation, or low-quality
comments.
