Meritum is a verification layer that helps communities evaluate submissions against explicit standards — transparently, repeatably, and without relying on blind trust.
Every evaluation references a public standard — no hidden criteria or reputation-only decisions.
Validators review without coordination first, then outcomes surface agreement and disagreement.
Results show the reasoning behind decisions. Disagreement is informative, not failure.
A simple flow: submissions are evaluated against standards by independent validators, producing transparent outcomes.
Work or claims are submitted for evaluation. Submissions become immutable for the review window.
Each submission is evaluated against an explicit standard — clear criteria that can be applied repeatedly.
Validators review independently and provide structured reasoning against each criterion.
Outcomes show whether standards were met, where reviewers agree, and where ambiguity remains.
Meritum prioritizes legitimacy over plutocracy. Voting is designed to resist both whales and sybil attacks.
Voting power is capped at one vote per eligible wallet, regardless of token balance.
Eligibility can require a minimum balance and a holding period (e.g., held ≥ N tokens for ≥ T days).
Standards governance is separated from operational decisions. Outcomes remain validator-driven.
Meritum’s goal is to build durable standards—where participation requires commitment, not wealth.
A public surface for verifiable work. Submissions are evaluated against explicit standards and published with outcomes.
Each submission has a stable ID, an immutable review window, and linked evaluations.
Outcomes reference the standard used so judgments are legible and comparable over time.
Evaluations are published after closure to preserve independence and reduce bias.
Requested work with verification built in. Rewards are released only when the submission meets the bounty criteria.
Communities post a bounty with explicit criteria and a defined review window.
Contributors submit work against the bounty criteria. No guessing what “good” means.
Validators evaluate. If the standard is met, rewards are released; otherwise feedback is recorded.
Foundational docs designed to be calm, clear, and versioned. No promises. No hype.
Read the full thesis, system model, validator accountability design, governance approach, and roadmap phases.
Meritum begins with careful pilots. Start small, publish outcomes, refine standards.
Create a standard, accept 5–10 submissions, recruit 3–5 validators, publish outcomes. Learn fast.
Validators are accountable through visibility and exclusion first, then economic bonding in later phases.
Help refine standards, propose pilot domains, and improve the clarity of outcomes and reporting.
