Post-Judging QA

[PaperParachute]

1. Please post feedback about specific findings on the relevant issue in this repo.
2. More general feedback for the judge can be shared here.

The judge for this contest is @0xA5DF

Reminders

• Please keep your comments as fact-based as possible.
• C4 judges have final authority in determining validity and severity.
• You are welcome to start new discussions here!
• Please link to specific issues wherever relevant.

Thank you!

[0xA5DF]

Hey wardens

Here is the scoring sheet for QA, Gas, and Analysis reports.
Points to keep in mind:

Gas

I judged based on the estimation of the total gas saved.
Deployment gas is a one-time saving and therefore I considered it to be worth 1/100 of normal gas savings.

QA

I sorted the valid findings into 3 categories:

• Low - worth 5 points
• Refactoring (has some impact on the code, but not as a low severity issue) - worth 2 points
• Non Critical (informational) - 1 point

Analysis

Here I had in mind the recent SC verdict on the topic, esp. the following line: “Merely repeating the code functionality in pseudo-documentation is not considered valuable information”
In my judging I put an emphasis on 2 points:

• Providing valuable insight about the code (esp. around security, but also anything that can be valuable to the sponsor)
• Low noise to signal ratio

Thresholds for A grades are 80% of best, and for B 60%

[c3phas]

Hi @0xA5DF ,nice work. Regarding #220 and #224 shouldn't they be graded A given the significance of the first finding for both reports. Seems like a classic case of quantity vs quality

[0xA5DF]

See my comment above regarding the standards for rank A and B (none of the reports passed 80% of the winning report), I don't see a reason why make an exception in this case

[c3phas]

Thanks, I've left some comments on #274 with additional invalid issues on that report. The report has so many issues that are OOS

[0xA5DF]

Thanks, replied

[hungdoo]

Hi @0xA5DF , thanks for the work.

I left a comment at #247

[0xA5DF]

Replied

[niser93]

Hi @0xA5DF, thank you.
I left a comment at #156

[niser93]

Thanks! I've replied!

[niser93]

I've also left a comment on #158. Thank you!

[0xA5DF]

I've replied to that as well

[niser93]

I replied on #158. Thank you!

[0xA5DF]

Replied

[Shubh0412]

Hello @0xA5DF
Thank you for the hard work & appreciate swift judging.
Please find time to check the comments left at #234 & #309

[0xA5DF]

Replied

[Shubh0412]

Thank you for replying @0xA5DF
I have replied to both the issue once again.
Please do have a look.

[0xA5DF]

Thanks, replied

[Shubh0412]

@0xA5DF
I have replied to the query regarding issue #234
Do find time to have a look.

[0xA5DF]

Replied

[udsene]

Hi @0xA5DF,

Thank you for quick judging of this contest.
I left a comment at #271

Thank You

[0xA5DF]

Replied

[udsene]

Thanks for the reply @0xA5DF
I have replied on the issue #271 again.
Please do have a look

[0xA5DF]

Replied

[jingyi2811]

Hi @0xA5DF,

I left a comment at #169

Thank You

[0xA5DF]

Replied

[Nabeel-javaid]

[0xA5DF]

I took a look, I don't see a reason why to change the grades. Please also take a look at my comment above and the notes in the judging sheet.

[adeolu98]

Hi @0xA5DF thanks for judging, i put a comment here #60. please check.

[0xA5DF]

Replied

[flowercrimson]

Hey @0xA5DF , thanks for your time. I left comments in #161 , #73 and #59

[0xA5DF]

Replied

[flowercrimson]

Hey@0xA5DF , I replied again in #59

[0xNentoR]

Hey @0xA5DF, thanks for judging this, I've left comments in #256 and #258, thanks in advance!

[0xA5DF]

Replied

[0xNentoR]

@0xA5DF I've replied again as well

[0xA5DF]

Replied

[0xNentoR]

I don't see a new reply

[0xA5DF]

I replied now

[udsene]

Hi @0xA5DF,

I left a comment on #142

Thank You

[0xA5DF]

Thanks, I've replied