[bisq-network/proposals] Proposal to increase trade deposit to 30% (#233)

[wiz]

Well of course having a TTP / CPOF for Arbitration goes against the spirit of Bisq, nobody is going to disagree with this statement, and I agree it’s an obvious security hole. But this proposal doesn’t acknowledge or address the real issue.

The elephant in the room that nobody wants to talk about, is that when the Bisq v1.2 trade protocol update removed the 2 of 3 multisig Arbitration system to eliminate the TTP, it neglected to provide a replacement Arbitration system, despite the need for Arbitration remaining present in the trade protocol.

So now Bisq is in the awkward situation where Bisq traders still need an Arbitration system and due to the lack of one they are not happy. This is very obvious in hindsight and I deal with it every day as a Mediator. I understand that our Growth team has hard data showing the XMR trading volume declined sharply immediately after the v1.2 update.

This proposal to raise the security deposits only serves to lockup more trading capital, introducing more friction and makes users less happy, driving them away further. It didn’t work last time and it won’t work this time. We will only lose more and more users and trading volume.

Instead of another band-aid, can we please address the real issue here and discuss how to best implement a properly decentralized and secure Arbitration system to give the users what they really want? Until the need for Arbitration is completely removed, which seems nearly impossible to do, Bisq still needs an Arbitration system. If you raise security deposits higher and higher you are only removing the need for Arbitration because no users will be trading on Bisq anymore.

In the past I have proposed implementing a new Arbitration system by utilizing multiple different pre-signed timelocked payout transactions that are encrypted to mediators or arbitrators, so they can decrypt and publish the one they feel is best. While my idea is still raw and needs additional discussion to resolve the remaining issues, I feel it has merit and would address the core issue Bisq is now facing.

So with all due respect I feel I need to NACK this proposal and I again ask the dev team to try harder to address the core issue here - please come up with a proposal for the new decentralized Arbitration system that was painfully missing from the v1.2 update last year.

-- 
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/233#issuecomment-650033990
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bisq.network/pipermail/bisq-github/attachments/20200626/75bca7a2/attachment.html>