Live Demo: Juror Experience

This page walks through a real dispute resolved on Slice, using the mobile app and real wallets. The goal is simple: show how dispute resolution works in practice, from a juror’s point of view.

This is a real dispute resolved on Slice, step by step, from a juror’s perspective

The demo was recorded on mainnet. To keep it safe and accessible, the amounts used are small, but the mechanics are exactly the same as in real-world disputes.

The dispute

The dispute shown in the video is Dispute #9, titled:

“Freelance Work Not Paid”

Two parties are involved:

• Julio Banegas (claimant), who states that freelance work was completed but not paid.

• Micaela Descotte (defendant), who disputes the claim.

Both sides submitted evidence directly through Slice. As a juror, you see the same information any independent reviewer would see: descriptions, attachments, and context.

---

Jurors joining the dispute

In this demo, the same person participates as a juror using three different wallets, each one connected through a separate MetaMask account.

This is done only for demonstration purposes, to clearly show how majority and minority outcomes work.

For each wallet:

1. The juror opts in to the dispute.

2. A small amount of USDC is staked to participate.

3. The dispute appears in the juror’s current portfolio, indicating active participation.

At this stage, the juror has skin in the game.

---

Voting phase

Each wallet votes independently, based only on the evidence presented.

• Wallet #1 votes in favor of Julio Banegas

• Wallet #2 votes in favor of Micaela Descotte

• Wallet #3 also votes in favor of Micaela Descotte

There is no coordination between wallets. Each vote is a standalone decision.

After voting, the dispute moves to the juror’s Inbox, labeled “Reveal now”, indicating that the commit phase has ended and the votes can be revealed.

---

Reveal and outcome

Once all votes are revealed:

• The system determines the majority decision.

• Jurors who voted with the majority are marked as winning jurors.

• Jurors who voted against the majority are marked as losing jurors.

In this case:

• The two wallets that voted for Micaela Descotte are in the majority.

• The wallet that voted for Julio Banegas is in the minority.

---

Rewards and penalties

After the dispute is resolved:

• Winning jurors receive a “Rewards pending” notification.

• They can claim their rewards directly from the app.

• The juror in the minority does not receive a reward.

This mechanism is intentional.

Slice does not reward being loud or early — it rewards being right, relative to the collective judgment.

---

Why this matters

This demo highlights the core principles behind Slice:

• Jurors are real participants, not automated rules.

• Decisions are driven by evidence, not authority.

• Economic incentives align behavior without requiring trust.

• Outcomes are enforced automatically.

For platforms, this means disputes can be resolved without internal arbitration. For users, it means fairness is not just promised — it is enforced by design.