Jack Miller @Derivativeweb

I want DerivaFlow's planned event markets to cover every valid outcome under a clear rule. YES and NO must not overlap, and together they must cover the question. If an outcome fits both sides or neither, the question needs work before trading begins.

I see borrowing as access to liquidity, with obligations attached. For DerivaFlow's planned lending, I want loan proceeds distinguished from realized profit. The position keeps its risks, and the borrower still has to repay under the loan terms.

I want DerivaFlow's insurance choice to show both winning and losing outcomes before signing. The choice changes settlement terms and whether a failed prediction creates a DF allowance for gradual release. People should see that trade-off before choosing.

I want DerivaFlow's audit disclosures to show the code version, review scope, findings and fix status. People should be able to distinguish open issues from addressed ones. Security communication needs that level of detail.

I want every DerivaFlow rule change to state its scope, effective time and treatment of existing orders. A change notice should help people identify which rules apply to them. Clear transitions belong in the product experience.

I want DerivaFlow to make the fee base as clear as the fee rate. Each product should show what is charged and how fees are collected before a trade. As we plan future products, we should define their fees under their own rules.

I want DerivaFlow to show service availability before people participate. The operating entity, supported regions and eligibility rules should be explicit. Connecting a wallet alone does not make every product available to every user.

As we plan DerivaFlow's arbitration, I want appeal rules set before a dispute begins. Evidence standards, dispute deadlines and appeal procedures belong in the product rules. A staking requirement alone cannot explain how a disputed result will be reviewed.

I want DerivaFlow's participation mechanism described at the right layer. Judgment-based mining is an application-level distribution mechanism. It does not replace AISO's underlying consensus, and a reward paid from the DF pool does not mean new DF was minted.

I want DerivaFlow's stress tests to cover concentrated wins and reduced funds returning to the pools. Before opening more capabilities, we need to test clustered insurance releases and one-sided exposure against payment obligations.

I want DerivaFlow's operating reports to show how long exceptions take to resolve. A count of abnormal orders tells only part of the story. Resolution time belongs alongside real use and settlement success when we assess how well the product works.

I want DerivaFlow's pool disclosures to explain who controls each address and what it is used for. A visible address is only part of transparency. Permission controls, fund accounting and executable rules give that address the context people need.

As we build toward DerivaFlow's open protocol, I want stable interfaces paired with clear event standards and dispute handling. We plan to support third-party market creation with APIs and SDKs. Each capability should open only after validation.

I want every DerivaFlow settlement to follow the conditions recorded when the order was signed. The asset, direction, duration, price source and rule version should stay traceable. We should never choose a different quote or payout basis after seeing the outcome.

I want DerivaFlow's XAU orders to make market hours explicit before signing. Trading sessions, holidays and orders that cross a market closure need defined handling. A countdown alone cannot explain whether a valid settlement quote will be available.

I want DerivaFlow's interface to make uncertainty as clear as the countdown. Shorter cycles and simpler interactions do not automatically improve accuracy. A judgment can still be wrong, and participants can lose what they put in.

I want DerivaFlow's pool monitoring to include unsettled orders and release obligations. Concentrated claims, changing market depth and external asset volatility can alter coverage. We need to watch those exposures as the product evolves.

For DerivaFlow's planned governance, I want the voting snapshot time published alongside voting weights and participation thresholds. People should know which reference point the vote uses before they participate. These rules belong in the proposal process.

In DerivaFlow's planned lending, I want pledged assets shown separately from assets free to use. Collateral would remain locked or restricted under the loan rules. Release would require repayment of the loan and fees, plus any other release conditions.

I want DerivaFlow's DF-to-AGI conversion records to show both amounts. DF set aside for conversion does not imply an equal quantity of AGI. Execution price, slippage and fees determine the AGI actually received.