[bisq-network/proposals] Develop a network of Bisq merchants by adding conditional orders (#123)

MwithM notifications at github.com
Fri Sep 20 11:22:57 UTC 2019


I'm somehow still surprised how underused is F2F in Bisq, so seeing a proposal to encourage people to use this payment method is very good news.

The main concern I have is that stores will be sooner or later required by local agencies to ask for KYC/AML. Keeping the offers in a private way is better vs a business level, specially considering the privacy level you can achieve with this payment method.
In the case of tikebit and bitnovo, you can buy a paper in a store without identification. But when you try to exchange this paper for bitcoins, you have to go to a plattform (bit2me, bitnovo) where [limits and corresponding KYC is applied](https://bit2me.com/preguntas-frecuentes).

My preffered protocol is the first one, although maybe is because I don't understand completely the other 2 new.
Now we can just use a % from bitcoinaverage price and remove or not display the offer if the price is too low. Creating a sell order order that would automatically become unavailable if the price goes below certain level makes sense and that would be a great option for all traders.
In the third option as I understand it, I see like there's too many parts in action where ideally there should be only two: the buyer and the seller, instead of the store, the buyer and the seller, and then also Bisq. To me, a store that wants to sell or buy bitcoins need to have those bitcoins or fiat, otherwise it gets too complex. Some inconveniences will appear, creating difficulty for mediation and also delays to the process.
An offer saying "Joe's Bar tue-sun 10:00 23:00h" allows you to accept the offer and go there the same day, and that's an advantage. Waiting another trade to be completed before the buyer gets the bitcoins doesn't make much sense to me. If buyer doesn't show up at the store, does the store have any right to return the btc to seller? I know bonds would make this situation improbable, but I want to make the point that a contract between two parts and a mediator is easier to manage than a contract between three parts and a mediator.

The Opendime option looks great, if 2of2 multisig option becomes available. Bisq can't know if the Opendime was exchanged for cash or not. Arbitrarion looks impossible, so Mutual Assured Destruction protocol is the best for these kind of trades.

-- 
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/123#issuecomment-533514255
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bisq.network/pipermail/bisq-github/attachments/20190920/39698248/attachment.html>


More information about the bisq-github mailing list