<p>Hi <a class="user-mention" data-hovercard-type="user" data-hovercard-url="/hovercards?user_id=50771801" data-octo-click="hovercard-link-click" data-octo-dimensions="link_type:self" href="https://github.com/reipichu">@reipichu</a>, I think that most of us in the community think that BSQ bonding will be the best solution.   The problem is that if requiring to own some BTC in order to onboard Bisq is a barrier of entry, requiring BSQ would raise the barrier of entry even more.</p>
<p>Furthermore, BSQ token still needs to mature, and we need a solution in the meantime.</p>
<p>Proposal <a class="issue-link js-issue-link" data-error-text="Failed to load issue title" data-id="446714052" data-permission-text="Issue title is private" data-url="https://github.com/bisq-network/proposals/issues/93" data-hovercard-type="issue" data-hovercard-url="/bisq-network/proposals/issues/93/hovercard" href="https://github.com/bisq-network/proposals/issues/93">#93</a> is a more concrete approach to strengthen account age as a trust parameter.  In that proposal it wouldn't be that easy  for a scammer to fake a fiat payment.   The real root of trust in this proposal and also in <a class="issue-link js-issue-link" data-error-text="Failed to load issue title" data-id="446714052" data-permission-text="Issue title is private" data-url="https://github.com/bisq-network/proposals/issues/93" data-hovercard-type="issue" data-hovercard-url="/bisq-network/proposals/issues/93/hovercard" href="https://github.com/bisq-network/proposals/issues/93">#93</a> is not really arbitrators but old users.</p>
<p>In <a class="issue-link js-issue-link" data-error-text="Failed to load issue title" data-id="446714052" data-permission-text="Issue title is private" data-url="https://github.com/bisq-network/proposals/issues/93" data-hovercard-type="issue" data-hovercard-url="/bisq-network/proposals/issues/93/hovercard" href="https://github.com/bisq-network/proposals/issues/93">#93</a> it is also suggested to put the first stones to pave the way for an arbitration-less protocol by enabling direct communication between users.    And once arbitrators are gone,  a decentralized blacklisting system can be implemented (we already have a rather solid conceptual design), which will be needed anyway regardless of the protocol (BSQ bonding included).</p>
<p>I think we should focus on the priorities set at <a class="issue-link js-issue-link" data-error-text="Failed to load issue title" data-id="444500792" data-permission-text="Issue title is private" data-url="https://github.com/bisq-network/proposals/issues/91" data-hovercard-type="issue" data-hovercard-url="/bisq-network/proposals/issues/91/hovercard" href="https://github.com/bisq-network/proposals/issues/91">#91</a>.  What you propose is indeed excellent input for priority number 3, but we all need to make a decision first about priorities 1 and 2.</p>

<p style="font-size:small;-webkit-text-size-adjust:none;color:#666;">—<br />You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.<br />Reply to this email directly, <a href="https://github.com/bisq-network/proposals/issues/78?email_source=notifications&email_token=AJFFTNQ5EXNDYCAKE4K2AWTPXWQFTA5CNFSM4HHTGH42YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGODWNQFPY#issuecomment-496698047">view it on GitHub</a>, or <a href="https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AJFFTNXWQVKPXTPOSR5OOJ3PXWQFTANCNFSM4HHTGH4Q">mute the thread</a>.<img src="https://github.com/notifications/beacon/AJFFTNU3LYDGHX4IQRV2X63PXWQFTA5CNFSM4HHTGH42YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGODWNQFPY.gif" height="1" width="1" alt="" /></p>
<script type="application/ld+json">[
{
"@context": "http://schema.org",
"@type": "EmailMessage",
"potentialAction": {
"@type": "ViewAction",
"target": "https://github.com/bisq-network/proposals/issues/78?email_source=notifications\u0026email_token=AJFFTNQ5EXNDYCAKE4K2AWTPXWQFTA5CNFSM4HHTGH42YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGODWNQFPY#issuecomment-496698047",
"url": "https://github.com/bisq-network/proposals/issues/78?email_source=notifications\u0026email_token=AJFFTNQ5EXNDYCAKE4K2AWTPXWQFTA5CNFSM4HHTGH42YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGODWNQFPY#issuecomment-496698047",
"name": "View Issue"
},
"description": "View this Issue on GitHub",
"publisher": {
"@type": "Organization",
"name": "GitHub",
"url": "https://github.com"
}
}
]</script>