[bisq-network/proposals] Proposal for new trade protocol without the need for arbitrators (#52)

[Manfred Karrer]

@oscarguindzberg Thanks for your input and a pretty good question!

In earlier versions of the idea we had the requirement that the victim need to deliver some proof to the mediator (we us PageSigner/TLSNotary [1] which gives you a cryptographic proof if a bank transfer happened or not). But with the timelocked payout we don't need that anymore as there is no way the user can gain from a scam.

The case that both users request would only make sense if they have a real dispute and could not resolve it. I would suggest that they need to consult a mediator first who can request proofs from both sides for their statement in a similar fashion as it is done now in arbitration cases: First try PageSigner, if that is not available/possible make screensharing and ID verification (I know that causes a lot of criticism, but in reality it was used 1 or 2 times) and if even that does not lead to a clear result make a payout according to what the arbitrator sees the most fair outcome or do not make any payout at all. So we coould use a mediator for that role and his suggestion will be taken as base for the decision of the stakeholders.
 
There is also a fee in BSQ to be paid for making a request. If the request gets declined that fee is still lost, so that helps as well to keep out scammers as they risk money to lose.

Another idea we had earlier was to use BSQ bonding. Scammers do not want to invest and risk money (thats probably why we have nearly no scammers as with the security deposit in a Bisq trade they need to invest/risk something). So if we require a long term BSQ bond from anyone who wants to get reimbursed we keep most scammers out. But that requirement became also obsolete with the new model with the timelocked payout. But maybe we could still use it for such edge cases that the stakeholders require something extra to filter out the scammers. E.g. if both request they have to put up a BSQ bond which is locked up for a long time to provide some sort of "reputation".

Just some ideas, nothing perfect, maybe something better can be found. But I think/hope such cases will be super rare as they are now.

[1] https://tlsnotary.org/pagesigner.html

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/bisq-network/proposals/issues/52#issuecomment-433107357
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bisq.network/pipermail/bisq-github/attachments/20181025/5afd9544/attachment.html>