[bisq-network/proposals] Properly define trade limits (#264)

[pazza]

Hi as a new user of Bisq I am all for clearly defining trade limits.

So reading from the wiki it says:

> Account limits apply to fiat payment accounts with chargeback risk. The intention is to limit damage a malicious user can do to others while allowing honest users to start trading immediately with no KYC and utmost privacy. Currently, account limits are implemented with two mechanisms: account aging and account signing. These mechanisms only apply to fiat payment accounts—altcoins accounts have full trading capability right away.

The [Payment methods](https://docs.bisq.network/payment-methods) page has some information about account signing but not enough to note here.

@m52go has made a super good video [All About Account Limits on Bisq (Fiat Only) ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TP5Zh6IJPVo) it covers the technical aspects well but does not really answer my question on the reasons for account limits.

I expect account limits have grown with Bisq over time through lots of discussion between contributors but have not been documented in a way that makes it clear and obvious to new users; what are the reasons for account limits?

If anyone has a link about where I can find more information about the reasons for account limits please share a link below.

I think the reasons for account limits could be more clearly defined. Once they are better defined it will be much easier to have a conversation and reach consensus about how they should be set. For new users such as myself it would be nice to know why these were created. Often reasons can be forgotten over time for example in the discussion above about why sellers have limits.

**Current account limit reasoning definition**

- Account limits apply to fiat payment accounts with chargeback risk.
- The intention is to limit damage a malicious user can do to others 
- To allow honest users to start trading immediately with no KYC
- To allow honest users to start trading immediately with utmost privacy.
- Currently, account limits are implemented with two mechanisms: account aging and account signing.
- These mechanisms only apply to fiat payment account
- Altcoins accounts have full trading capability right away.- 

**My questions based on the current account limit reasoning definition**

Should account limits apply only to fiat payment methods with chargeback risk?
Should account limits apply only to fiat payment methods?
Should account limits apply only to altcoin payment methods?
Should account limits apply only to all payment methods?

Is Bisq goal to allow for trading immediately?
Is Bisq goal to allow for trading with no KYC?
Is Bisq goal to allow for trading immediately and with no KYC?
Is trading with no KYC more important than time taken to trade?
Is trading with no KYC important enough to make a user wait; 1 day, 1 week, 1 month etc?

Is Bisq goal is allow honest users to trade?
How does Bisq define an honest user?
Is an honest user defined by their counterparty, the bank, by Bisq? Can one persons honest user be abother persons dishonest user?
Is Bisq goal to not allow honest users to trade?
How does Bisq define a dishonest user?

Is Bisq goal to allow for trading with utmost privacy?
What is utmost privacy?
Who does upmost privacy apply to (counter parties, mediators, contributes, third parties)
Can upmost privacy be different from one user to the next. Is it defined by the individuals or Bisq?

Do altcoins accounts have full trading capability right away, I think the limit is 2 BTC? Why is this?

**My questions based on not fully understanding reasons for Bisq's account limits**

Are account limits used to limit losses to users?
Are account limits used to limit losses to the DAO / Bisq as a project?
Are account limits expected to grow as Bisq grows; in BTC terms / fiat terms, 
Or... are account limits expected to lower if BTC where to increase in price;  
Is there a trade off between account limits and liquidity?
Is there a trade off between account limits and trade volume?
Is there a trade off between account limits and Bisq success?
What impact would increasing account limits have on users, on contributors, on the DAO?
What impact would decreasing account limits have on users, on contributors, on the DAO?
Is there a shared consensus among all stakeholders for the above answers? is one needed?

I also think the reasons for having account aging and account signing could be better defined. 

I get the impression from reading between the lines that the account signing / aging protocols are a cause of friction for users and contributors. More problems, more support issues etc. Maybe this is me getting the wrong end of the stick? 

Apologies for the wall of questions. They are rhetorical in nature, and a way for me to try and be a logical as in documenting my thought process if only to help myself! Please don't feel I want an answer to all.

Main question is the last one:

### Is there a shared consensus among all stakeholders for the above answers? is one needed?

As a user of Bisq I think there I am confident that Bisq can achieve what it desires. But it first has to be clear about what that is :)

-- 
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/264#issuecomment-718304395
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bisq.network/pipermail/bisq-github/attachments/20201028/e08c70a4/attachment.html>