[bisq-network/bisq-website] Add blog post for cycle 7 results (#293)

Devin Bileck notifications at github.com
Mon Nov 25 08:10:59 UTC 2019


devinbileck requested changes on this pull request.

Aside from a few corrections, looks good.

> @@ -0,0 +1,60 @@
+---
+layout: post
+title: "Bisq DAO Cycle 7: Results"
+author: Steve Jain
+excerpt: "Cycle 7 of the Bisq DAO ended at block 604 506 on November 18 2019. This post covers its results. <br><br>"
+en-only: true
+---
+
+This post summarizes the results of Cycle 7 of the Bisq DAO.
+
+### Summary
+
+* Cycle took place between blocks 604 507 and 609 186

Cycle 7 was blocks 599 827 to 604 506

> @@ -0,0 +1,60 @@
+---
+layout: post
+title: "Bisq DAO Cycle 7: Results"
+author: Steve Jain
+excerpt: "Cycle 7 of the Bisq DAO ended at block 604 506 on November 18 2019. This post covers its results. <br><br>"

It ended on November 19

> +**Re-route disputed deposit funds to burner address instead of donation address**
+
+_Generic proposal ([link](https://github.com/bisq-network/proposals/issues/135){:target="_blank"})_
+
+_Rejected_
+
+As discussed [here](https://bisq.network/blog/bisq-v1-2-released/){:target="_blank"}, the new trade protocol introduced in v1.2 significantly changes dispute resolution. In case a dispute cannot be settled by mediation, funds in 2-of-2 multisignature escrows are sent to a "donation" address. This donation address is owned by an anonymous Bisq contributor who has [locked a 50 000 BSQ bond](https://explorer.bisq.network/tx.html?tx=45859e0fc3c75db969fb33e85dfd5b35c62743ba8649186ca02703d90579ac3a){:target="_blank"}, and they're required to use the bitcoin accumulated there to [buy and burn BSQ every 4 weeks](https://github.com/bisq-network/proposals/issues/116){:target="_blank"} (or sooner, if the balance exceeds 50% of the bond amount).
+
+This DAO proposal suggested to instead send deposit funds to a burner address (i.e., one not controlled by any Bisq contributor) to avoid the possibility of the donation address holder colluding with a trader to send all funds to them (i.e., entering trades and forcing them to arbitration, which would send all deposit funds to the address they control).
+
+Ultimately, the risk was acknowledged but not considered an urgent issue.
+
+1. Although the donation address holder is outwardly anonymous, the person who holds the role was voted into it by sufficient BSQ weight, indicating core contributors are confident this person is trustworthy.
+2. BTC and BSQ transactions are public, so in the event there are issues, the person would be outed quickly, lose their bond, and probably become an outcast.
+
+While this not what people wanted to hear, it's possible expectations for the new trade protocol were set too high. The new trade protocol does not promise _trustless_ trading and dispute resolution—such a thing may not even be possible. It does, however, _reduce_ trust in some places (no anonymous figure with third key) and _decentralize_ trust in others (responsibility to make traders whole is now spread across the counterparty, mediator, arbitrator, and the Bisq DAO).

```suggestion
While this is not what people wanted to hear, it's possible expectations for the new trade protocol were set too high. The new trade protocol does not promise _trustless_ trading and dispute resolution—such a thing may not even be possible. It does, however, _reduce_ trust in some places (no anonymous figure with third key) and _decentralize_ trust in others (responsibility to make traders whole is now spread across the counterparty, mediator, arbitrator, and the Bisq DAO).
```

> +_Generic proposal ([link](https://github.com/bisq-network/proposals/issues/135){:target="_blank"})_
+
+_Rejected_
+
+As discussed [here](https://bisq.network/blog/bisq-v1-2-released/){:target="_blank"}, the new trade protocol introduced in v1.2 significantly changes dispute resolution. In case a dispute cannot be settled by mediation, funds in 2-of-2 multisignature escrows are sent to a "donation" address. This donation address is owned by an anonymous Bisq contributor who has [locked a 50 000 BSQ bond](https://explorer.bisq.network/tx.html?tx=45859e0fc3c75db969fb33e85dfd5b35c62743ba8649186ca02703d90579ac3a){:target="_blank"}, and they're required to use the bitcoin accumulated there to [buy and burn BSQ every 4 weeks](https://github.com/bisq-network/proposals/issues/116){:target="_blank"} (or sooner, if the balance exceeds 50% of the bond amount).
+
+This DAO proposal suggested to instead send deposit funds to a burner address (i.e., one not controlled by any Bisq contributor) to avoid the possibility of the donation address holder colluding with a trader to send all funds to them (i.e., entering trades and forcing them to arbitration, which would send all deposit funds to the address they control).
+
+Ultimately, the risk was acknowledged but not considered an urgent issue.
+
+1. Although the donation address holder is outwardly anonymous, the person who holds the role was voted into it by sufficient BSQ weight, indicating core contributors are confident this person is trustworthy.
+2. BTC and BSQ transactions are public, so in the event there are issues, the person would be outed quickly, lose their bond, and probably become an outcast.
+
+While this not what people wanted to hear, it's possible expectations for the new trade protocol were set too high. The new trade protocol does not promise _trustless_ trading and dispute resolution—such a thing may not even be possible. It does, however, _reduce_ trust in some places (no anonymous figure with third key) and _decentralize_ trust in others (responsibility to make traders whole is now spread across the counterparty, mediator, arbitrator, and the Bisq DAO).
+
+And of course, liability on the network itself is reduced signficantly without the third key.

```suggestion
And of course, liability on the network itself is reduced significantly without the third key.
```

-- 
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/bisq-website/pull/293#pullrequestreview-322090777
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bisq.network/pipermail/bisq-github/attachments/20191125/1a9ea20c/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the bisq-github mailing list