[bisq-network/proposals] Increase security deposits to avoid future trades and mediation. (#155)

[Steve Jain]

I've been loosely advocating for this change in other communication channels so I'm glad to see this proposal.

> The entire amount of the trade is the security deposit for the SELLER.

This becomes moot once the buyer sends payment to the seller. What's the sellers incentive to remain responsive after he's received payment, if he doesn't have a meaningful deposit to lose?

Deposit amount can also be an important measure for preventing [this attack vector](https://bisq.community/t/new-trading-protocol/8575/6).

> A motivation to keep buyers deposit low was to not increase too much the problem that you need BTC to buy BTC.

I don't think increasing the security deposit would have an effect on this issue. It seems the friction is with needing to acquire BTC to begin _at all_, not having to acquire _a particular quantity_ of BTC to begin.

As for amounts, I would prefer to see percentages be as alike as possible (i.e., 15% across the board instead of 10% fiat buyer variable, 15% altcoin buyer variable, 15% altcoin seller fixed, etc). But this is more for ease of understanding and communication than for tactical reasons.

-- 
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/155#issuecomment-566724997
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bisq.network/pipermail/bisq-github/attachments/20191217/05bc1f2b/attachment-0001.html>