DISP WORLD Platform
Republic of Uzbekistan, Tashkent
7 August 2026
These Rules for Judges (the “Rules”) constitute an integral part of the User Agreement of the DISP WORLD platform, available on the Internet at: https://dispworld.com/ (the “Platform”), and apply to all Users who have obtained or are applying to obtain the role of Judge. These Rules establish the procedure for obtaining and using the role of Judge, the rights and obligations of the Judge, the requirements of impartiality and good faith, the procedure for working with the Judging Protocol, the terms of interaction with the Organizer and Event participants, the remuneration procedure, and the Judge’s liability for violation of these Rules. Acceptance of the User Agreement also constitutes acceptance of these Rules where the User obtains or intends to obtain the role of Judge. In the event of a conflict between these Rules and the User Agreement in relation to the Judge’s activities, these Rules shall apply as the special document; in all other respects, the User Agreement shall apply.
1. TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
1.1. For the purposes of these Rules, in addition to the terms defined in the User Agreement, the following terms and definitions shall apply:
“Judge” means a Platform User who has completed identity verification (KYC), obtained the role of Judge on the Platform, and has been admitted by the Organizer to participate in a specific Event as a person authorized to assess the course of the Event, make decisions, and record the official result using the Platform’s tools.
“Judging Protocol” means the set of scores, decisions, metadata and other information entered by the Judge into the Platform system through a dedicated interface during or following an Event. The Judging Protocol is the official document of the Event within the Platform; its cryptographic hash is recorded in the DISP-2 blockchain registry where the Organizer has the relevant Tariff Plan.
“Judge’s Decision” means a score rendered by the Judge, determination of the winner, award of points, or any other action recorded in the Judging Protocol.
“Impartiality” means the principal professional requirement applicable to the Judge, under which Decisions must be made solely on the basis of the Event Rules and objective indicators of the participants’ performance, without regard to personal likes or dislikes, commercial interests, arrangements with participants, or any other external factors not provided for by the Event Rules.
“Conflict of Interest” means a situation in which the Judge has personal, financial or other interests in relation to one or more Event participants that may influence, or create a risk of influencing, the Judge’s Decisions.
“Judge Rating” means the Judge’s aggregate score generated according to the Platform’s mathematical model on the basis of ratings assigned by Organizers and Event participants after completion of Events in which the Judge participated. The Judge Rating is displayed publicly and affects the Judge’s priority in searches conducted by Organizers.
“Judge Remuneration” means monetary or other remuneration agreed and paid directly by the Organizer to the Judge outside the Platform in accordance with arrangements reached directly between them.
“Disqualification” means a measure applied to a Judge following review of complaints or identified violations and consisting of deprivation of the right to participate in Platform Events for a specified period or indefinitely.
1.2. Other terms and definitions shall have the meanings established in the User Agreement and other Platform documents.
2. CONDITIONS FOR OBTAINING THE ROLE OF JUDGE
2.1. The role of Judge is available to Platform Users subject to simultaneous compliance with the following conditions:
2.1.1. Attainment of 18 years of age. The role of Judge involves making decisions that affect the official result of an Event and accepting responsibility for their objectivity and justification. Users under the age of 18 are not eligible for the role of Judge. The Administration may at any time request proof of age and suspend or terminate the role of Judge where non-compliance with the age criterion is identified.
2.1.2. Completion of identity verification (KYC) through an external verification provider in accordance with the Platform’s Identity and Business Verification Rules (KYC/KYB). Verification is deemed successfully completed when the Administration receives the status “identity verified” from the provider. Access to the Judge functionality is blocked until that status is received. If the status “verification rejected” is received, the User may contact support to determine the reasons and, where grounds exist, complete verification again.
2.1.3. Review of these Rules and acceptance of all their terms by ticking the relevant checkbox when applying for the role of Judge. By accepting these Rules, the User confirms that they understand the requirements of impartiality, the principles governing the Judging Protocol, and the rules of the rating system.
2.2. Obtaining the role of Judge does not require payment for a separate Tariff Plan. The Judge registers on the Platform as a Registered User, completes identity verification, and obtains access to the Judge functionality. The role of Judge may be combined with other roles on the Platform provided that such combination does not create a Conflict of Interest in relation to a specific Event.
2.3. The Administration may refuse to assign the role of Judge or revoke it at any time where grounds provided for by these Rules, the User Agreement or applicable law exist, including where inaccurate information is identified during verification; where the requirement of impartiality is systematically breached; where substantiated complaints concerning the Judge’s actions are received; or where a Conflict of Interest is intentionally concealed.
3. RIGHTS OF THE JUDGE
3.1. The Judge may, at their discretion, accept or reject proposals from Organizers to participate in Events as a Judge. Before deciding whether to accept, the Judge may request from the Organizer information about the Event, its Rules, format and conditions of participation.
3.2. The Judge is entitled to receive from the Organizer all information necessary to perform judging functions, including the Event Rules, scoring system, rules of procedure of the Judging Panel (where there are several Judges), and the procedure for resolving disputed situations during the Event.
3.3. The Judge is entitled to remuneration for participation in an Event in the amount and according to the procedure agreed directly with the Organizer. The Administration is not a party to remuneration arrangements and does not pay such remuneration.
3.4. The Judge may withdraw from participation in a specific Event where a Conflict of Interest or other circumstances preventing objective performance of judging functions exist, provided that the Organizer is notified immediately.
3.5. The Judge has the right to protect their business reputation by challenging unfounded ratings and complaints submitted against them in accordance with the Platform’s Moderation and Complaints Rules.
3.6. The Judge may appeal decisions of the Administration relating to the Judge’s activities on the Platform in accordance with the User Agreement and the Moderation and Complaints Rules.
4. OBLIGATIONS OF THE JUDGE
4.1. The Judge shall perform judging functions in good faith, objectively and impartially, guided solely by the Rules of the specific Event established by the Organizer and by objective indicators of the participants’ performance. The Judge’s personal preferences, relationships with Event participants, commercial interests, or any other factors not provided for by the Event Rules may not serve as grounds for Decisions.
4.2. Before the start of an Event to which the Judge has been appointed, the Judge shall disclose to the Organizer any circumstances that may create or do create a Conflict of Interest. Such circumstances include, without limitation, personal or family relationships with Event participants; financial relationships with Event participants; past or present disputes or conflicts with any participant; and any other circumstances that may objectively call the Judge’s impartiality into question. Where a Conflict of Interest exists, the Judge shall immediately notify the Organizer and, if the Organizer finds no grounds for the Judge’s continued participation, decline to perform judging functions in that Event.
4.3. The Judge shall enter all Decisions and scores exclusively through the dedicated Judging Protocol interface of the Platform within the time limits set by the Organizer. Decisions entered outside the Platform interface are not officially recognized and are not recorded in the blockchain registry.
4.4. The Judge shall ensure the completeness and accuracy of the Judging Protocol. After the Judging Protocol is signed (confirmed) through the Platform interface, its cryptographic hash is sent for recording in the DISP-2 blockchain registry. Amendments to a confirmed Judging Protocol may be made only through a formal request to the Administration where justified grounds exist (technical error, deception, force majeure circumstances) and only before the hash is recorded in the blockchain.
4.5. The Judge shall maintain the confidentiality of official information learned in the course of performing judging functions, including information concerning participants’ strategies, internal communications between participants, and other information whose disclosure may cause harm to participants or the Platform.
4.6. A Judge who identifies Prohibited Content during or in connection with an Event (violations of the User Agreement, unlawful acts of participants, or content from prohibited categories) shall immediately report it to the Administration through the Platform’s complaint mechanism. Intentional concealment of Prohibited Content by the Judge constitutes a material breach of these Rules and grounds for Disqualification. The rating and Event access system takes this requirement into account: a Judge who systematically fails to report identified violations is subject to Disqualification regardless of other performance indicators.
4.7. The Judge shall participate in full in the Event to which they have been appointed and for which they have given consent. Withdrawal from an Event that has already started without valid reasons constitutes a violation of these Rules and entails a reduction of the Judge Rating. Valid reasons include illness or other force majeure circumstances, a confirmed Conflict of Interest identified during the Event, and other circumstances recognized as valid by the Administration following review of the relevant submission.
5. WORKING WITH THE JUDGING PROTOCOL
5.1. The Judging Protocol is prepared by the Judge through the Platform’s dedicated interface during or following the Event. The content and structure of the Judging Protocol are determined by the type and format of the Event established by the Organizer when creating it.
5.2. Depending on the type of Event, the Judging Protocol includes the following elements: scores for participants’ performances according to established criteria; the final Event result (winner, prize places, distribution of points); technical Event metadata (Event identifier, timestamps of key moments, Event status); notes and explanations of the Judge (where necessary); and, where applicable, records of violations of the Event Rules by participants.
5.3. The Judge enters data in the Judging Protocol in real time or following the Event, depending on the Event format and the Organizer’s instructions. Where there are several Judges, each Judge enters data independently in their part of the Protocol; the final result is generated from all parts in accordance with the Event Rules.
5.4. After entering all data, the Judge confirms (signs) the Judging Protocol through the Platform interface. Confirmation of the Protocol means that the Judge certifies the accuracy and completeness of the data entered. From the moment of confirmation, the Protocol acquires the status of the official Event document on the Platform.
5.5. The cryptographic hash of the confirmed Judging Protocol is sent for recording in the DISP-2 blockchain registry where the Organizer has the Pro or Caesar Tariff Plan. Only the following data are recorded in the blockchain: the Event identifier, final result, cryptographic hash of the Protocol, timestamp, and confirmation status. Participants’ Personal Data, details of scores and other extended Protocol data are not transmitted to the blockchain and are stored exclusively in the Platform’s internal system.
5.6. The full text of the Judging Protocol, including score details and notes entered by the Judge, is stored in the Platform’s internal system and is accessible to the Event Organizer, Event participants (insofar as their results are concerned), and the Administration. Public access to the full text of the Protocol is determined by the Event settings established by the Organizer.
5.7. If a technical error is identified in the Judging Protocol before confirmation, the Judge shall independently correct it through the Platform interface. After confirmation of the Protocol, amendments may be made only through a formal request from the Judge or the Organizer to the Administration on the following grounds: a documented technical system error; intentional deception of the Judge by participants; or other justified circumstances recognized by the Administration as sufficient after review of the request. After the Protocol hash has been recorded in the blockchain, the blockchain entry itself cannot technically be changed; in that case, the Administration may create a corrected version of the Protocol with a separate blockchain entry and appropriate annotations.
6. IMPARTIALITY REQUIREMENTS
6.1. Impartiality is a fundamental requirement for the role of Judge on the Platform. A Judge who systematically breaches this requirement or is confirmed to have made a biased Decision under the influence of external factors is subject to Disqualification.
6.2. The following actions by the Judge constitute material breaches of the impartiality requirement and entail immediate Disqualification without prior warning: accepting remuneration from Event participants or their affiliates in addition to remuneration agreed with the Organizer; intentionally making a knowingly unlawful Decision in favor of a particular participant; participating in an Event while having a Conflict of Interest intentionally concealed from the Organizer; or colluding in advance with Event participants regarding a predetermined result.
6.3. A suspected breach of the impartiality requirement may serve as grounds for a complaint by the Organizer, Event participants or the Administration. The complaint is reviewed in accordance with the Moderation and Complaints Rules. Pending completion of the review, the Judge’s participation in new Events may be suspended.
6.4. For the purpose of objectively verifying compliance with the impartiality requirement, the Platform keeps a log of all Judge actions in the Judging Protocol interface, including the time each score was entered, the sequence of actions, and the time the Protocol was confirmed. This log is stored in the Platform’s internal system and may be used when reviewing complaints and resolving disputed situations.
7. RATING SYSTEM AND ACCESS TO EVENTS
7.1. The Judge Rating on the Platform is generated on the basis of the following parameters: ratings assigned by Organizers after each Event; ratings assigned by Event participants; the history of complaints concerning the Judge’s actions and the results of their review; completeness and timeliness of Judging Protocols; and compliance with the requirement to report identified violations. The mathematical rating model is based on principles similar to rating systems used by professional assessment services, taking into account the specific nature of judging activities.
7.2. The Judge Rating is displayed publicly on the Judge’s profile and is one of the key factors affecting the likelihood of appointment by Organizers to new Events. Organizers may use the Judge Rating when deciding whether to appoint the Judge.
7.3. Where the Judge Rating is consistently low, below the threshold established by the Administration and displayed in the Platform’s rating system rules, the Judge may be restricted from participating in certain categories of Events or placed on waiting status until the Rating improves. The Administration shall notify the Judge in advance when the Rating reaches the threshold value.
7.4. The Judge Rating is an element of the Platform’s quality control system for judging activities and does not guarantee that a particular Judge will receive appointments from Organizers. The decision to appoint a Judge is made exclusively by the Organizer of the relevant Event.
8. JUDGE REMUNERATION
8.1. Judge Remuneration is determined by arrangements entered into directly between the Organizer and the Judge outside the Platform. The Platform is not a party to such arrangements, does not determine the amount of remuneration, does not pay it, and is not liable for the Organizer’s performance of remuneration payment obligations.
8.2. Under the conditions of the Platform’s first release, Judge Remuneration is determined as an agreed percentage of the Organizer’s advertising revenue from the specific Event. The method of calculating and paying remuneration is agreed directly between the Organizer and the Judge before the Event begins.
8.3. When a remuneration arrangement is recorded through the Platform interface (to the extent of recording the status of the arrangement), the following notice is displayed: “Judge Remuneration is agreed and paid directly by the Organizer. The Platform does not pay Judge Remuneration.” The Judge confirms that they have read this notice by ticking the relevant checkbox.
8.4. The existence or absence of a remuneration arrangement does not affect the Judge’s obligation to perform judging functions in good faith and impartially in an Event in which the Judge has agreed to participate.
8.5. The Judge is solely responsible for payment of all taxes and mandatory charges arising from remuneration received from Organizers in accordance with the laws of the Judge’s country of residence. The Administration is not the Judge’s tax agent and is not liable for the Judge’s performance of tax obligations.
9. LIABILITY OF THE JUDGE
9.1. The Judge is responsible for the objectivity and accuracy of Decisions made and data entered in the Judging Protocol. Knowingly unfounded or biased Decisions constitute grounds for Disqualification and may result in claims against the Judge by affected Event participants.
9.2. The Judge is responsible for timely disclosure of a Conflict of Interest. Intentional concealment of a Conflict of Interest constitutes a material breach of these Rules and entails immediate Disqualification.
9.3. The Judge is responsible for timely reporting of identified violations of the User Agreement and Prohibited Content. Intentional concealment of Prohibited Content identified by the Judge during or in connection with an Event constitutes a material breach of these Rules and entails Disqualification.
9.4. If the Judge violates these Rules, the Administration may apply the following measures:
9.4.1. Warning, for an initial minor violation that has not caused material consequences for the Event or its participants.
9.4.2. Temporary suspension from participation in Events, for the period of review of a complaint or in the event of systematic procedural violations (failure to meet data entry deadlines or incomplete Reports).
9.4.3. Administrative reduction of the Rating, following review of substantiated complaints confirmed during the proceedings.
9.4.4. Temporary Disqualification, for violations of medium severity, including systematic failure to report violations, repeated unjustified refusal to participate in Events without valid reasons, or repeated breaches of impartiality requirements in the absence of evidence of intent.
9.4.5. Permanent Disqualification (indefinite blocking of the role of Judge), for material violations, including intentional bias, concealment of a Conflict of Interest, receipt of remuneration from Event participants outside the arrangement with the Organizer, or prior collusion concerning the result. Permanent Disqualification is applied without prior warning.
9.5. The Judge shall indemnify the Administration for all losses, fines and expenses arising from the Judge’s violation of these Rules, the User Agreement or applicable law, including in connection with claims by Event participants or competent authorities resulting from the Judge’s actions.
10. PROCEDURE FOR REVIEWING COMPLAINTS CONCERNING THE JUDGE’S ACTIONS
10.1. A complaint concerning the Judge’s actions within a specific Event may be submitted by the Event Organizer, an Event participant, or the Administration. The complaint shall be submitted through the Platform’s complaint mechanism or to the email address specified in the Administration Details section of these Rules, Gr22Attract@gmail.com, together with reasons and available evidence (screenshots of the Platform interface, recordings of streams where available, and other materials).
10.2. The complaint is reviewed by the Administration within the time limits established by the Moderation and Complaints Rules. During review, the Administration may request additional information from the Judge, the Organizer and Event participants, and may examine the Judge’s action log in the Judging Protocol interface.
10.3. Following review of the complaint, the Administration shall adopt one of the following decisions: find the complaint unfounded and leave the Judge Rating and status unchanged; find the complaint partially substantiated and apply the relevant measure under Section 9 of these Rules; or find the complaint substantiated and apply measures up to and including Disqualification, depending on the nature of the violation. All parties involved in the review are notified of the decision.
10.4. The Judge may appeal the Administration’s decision on the complaint within 10 (ten) business days after receipt in accordance with the User Agreement. The Appeal is reviewed in accordance with the Moderation and Complaints Rules. Filing an Appeal does not suspend application of the measures imposed by the challenged decision.
11. COMBINATION OF ROLES AND CONFLICT OF INTEREST
11.1. The role of Judge may be combined with the roles of Registered User and Organizer provided that, in relation to a specific Event, such combination does not create a Conflict of Interest. A User combining the roles of Judge and Organizer may not perform judging functions in an Event that the User organizes.
11.2. A Judge who is simultaneously an Event participant (for example, in another discipline or a parallel Event) may not perform judging functions in the Event in which the Judge participates or in which persons with whom the Judge has a Conflict of Interest participate.
11.3. The Judge shall independently monitor circumstances that may create a Conflict of Interest and disclose them to the Organizer and the Administration in a timely manner. The Administration is not liable for Conflicts of Interest not disclosed by the Judge.
12. AMENDMENT AND TERMINATION OF THESE RULES
12.1. The Administration may unilaterally amend these Rules by notifying Judges in accordance with Section 17 of the User Agreement. Amendments enter into force within the time limits specified in the notice. Continued use of the role of Judge after the amendments enter into force constitutes acceptance of the amended terms.
12.2. These Rules cease to apply to a particular User when that User’s role of Judge is terminated, whether by the User’s own decision, by decision of the Administration (including as a result of Disqualification), or in other cases provided for by the User Agreement. Termination of the Rules does not release the Judge from liability for violations committed while the role was active.
12.3. Upon voluntary termination of the role of Judge, the User shall complete participation in all Events in which the User has already been appointed as a Judge and has agreed to participate. Early withdrawal without valid reasons from Events that have already started constitutes a violation of these Rules.
12.4. All matters not governed by these Rules are governed by the User Agreement and other applicable Platform documents and, where those are insufficient, by the laws of the Republic of Uzbekistan.
ADMINISTRATION DETAILS
Limited Liability Company “GR ATTRACTOR”
254, 1st Passage, Usta Shirin Street, Miskin CSG, Almazar District, Tashkent, Republic of Uzbekistan
Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN): 313127023
Email for submissions: Gr22Attract@gmail.com
Email for legal inquiries: Gr22Attract@gmail.com
Platform website: https://dispworld.com/