Issue identified the root causes and effects, but was considered ineffective, hoping for justice.

[wangxx2026]

code-423n4/2024-02-wise-lending-findings#197

I believe this issue has been treated unfairly. The description of the problem was simplified, I admit that. However, we can see that the issue was initially marked as valid and successfully categorized. So I can assume that the issue was understood correctly. The issue points out the root cause and its adverse effects. I kept it brief because I assumed the judge is familiar with the code and I highlighted the points that should be sufficient for the judge to understand without going into excessive detail. If my understanding is incorrect, I will change the way I raise issues in the future. But I find it difficult to accept that this issue has been labeled as "unsatisfactory."

[trust1995]

Hey @wangxx2026

• Please label the issue in a more descriptive way
• When making a case it is customary to include any responses so people can have a balanced view. In this case, the ruling was based on the following Supreme Court verdicts: one two

[wangxx2026]

Hey @trust1995
For one,I think I provided the STEP BY STEP poc and I put a link on the function without referencing the code in. You can see the referenced function, and the affected function in the issue. I think it's useful that the issue was successfully understood and categorized. My intention in doing this was originally to make the reading smoother.

In two, I noticed the "quality score", I don't know what the rules are for this score?
In the issue, you can see @GalloDaSballo's comment "A coded POC would have been better, worth checking". But now it's suddenly changed to "Insufficient quality".