[bisq-network/proposals] Replace burningman and refund agent by market place based solutions (#259)

[MwithM]

@flix1 I would not call your proposal MAD, if seller can get it's trade funds back. Mutual Assured Destruction needs that both participants see the deposit an traded funds to be destroyed (or sent somewhere they can't reach) if one of the parts is not happy with how the trade developed. Your idea could be applied only for online, not reliable payment methods but not for face to face etc.

@chimp1984 Bisq is the first positioned platform to develop MAD protocols, and the one which needs it the most to keep its goal. Other platforms rely on reputation so they don't even think of it, but that makes them more centralized, trust dependant and less private.
I know there's not much demand right now for it, and that MAD is double-sided: it protects traders on the long term only if they're willing to take the risk on short and mid term.
So yes, maybe it's more an experiment than a need, but I think it's worth trying, and since 2of2 multisig there's no much more to add to start trading with this protocol.

-- 
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/259#issuecomment-726981041
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bisq.network/pipermail/bisq-github/attachments/20201113/dd87ce55/attachment.html>