[bisq-network/proposals] Trading protocol change: release of funds in 2of2 multisig to be signed by seller in first place. (#224)

[chimp1984]

> the objective to prevent seller from performing future trades

Future trades are usually executed by the buyer as he can decide to not send the fiat/altcoin payment. The seller is locking up initially his funds so he cannot "cancel" the trade by not pressing the "received" button, but only risks to lose his deposit if doing so. The buy on the other hand can opt out of the trade by not sending the fiat/altcoin if volatility is higher than his security deposit and therefore it is economically rational to do that. 

I think the security deposit for the buyer should be higher than for the seller (as it was in the past). For seller the 15% is probably already pretty high. For buyer I would suggest to increase to 30% if no other solution is found soon. Once Refund agent revokes the current situation becomes a big problem if not solved in time.



-- 
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/224#issuecomment-643890971
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bisq.network/pipermail/bisq-github/attachments/20200614/d061fde3/attachment.html>