[bisq-network/support] Reimbursement request for trade LMKSE38C (#501)

[Bisq-knight]

This trade followed the same pattern as [MZEFILM](https://github.com/bisq-network/support/issues/500#). The mediation suggestion was submitted AFTER the delayed payout tx was published and confirmed.

Here's the timeline (it resembles a lot the other one)
- 25th of Aug - trade started
- 31st of Aug - Mediation started - I contacted both asking for their explanations
- 30th of Aug (I think timestamps are messed probably due to settings of each trader) - Buyer contacted saying that he didn't pay because Seller hasn't answered in 5 days. I told him to hold on the payment until the other trader replies (as it is not uncommon for Monero traders to lock themselves out of bisq due to over-optimized opsec)
- Sep 1st - Buyer said he'd wait.
- Sep 4th - Seller shows up and says "his coins were sent, the trade is missing and he didn't get his coins"
- Sept 5th - Delayed Payout tx is published 
- Sep 7th - Seller contacts me with: "?"
- Sep 8th - I issue the mediation suggestion for the sake of closing the case, which has no effect since the trade already went to arbitration

In light of this trade and the other trade we have that the locktime was too short for both traders to discuss and agree on a payout. In that sense I would suggest that the Buyer (@invertedbobb ) does get compensated for it with the Seller's deposits. @invertedbobb kept his part of the trade protocol in being responsive, he didn't in not making the payment, but that is a consequence of the Seller not keeping his end of the trade protocol.

I would vouch for @invertedbobb getting the amount we're discussing on the other issue ([initial suggestion by @chimp1984](https://github.com/bisq-network/support/issues/502#issuecomment-696376150)) in the other issue and the remainder is a big question mark:
* Does the DAO get to keep it and use it to pay it's dues(i.e. the April victims)? since there is no claim (at least up until what we know today, I would suggest that)
* Does the DAO keep it for a period of time for the other trader to show up and claim his share of the trade? - this would open a very weird precedent and a whole series of potential problems (i.e. if he shows up, what's the BSQ rate that he deserves?)

I tend to think of the first option being interesting for the DAO, but that creates a malicious incentive and precedence for mediators and refund agents in the future to deliberately mismanage cases in detriment of traders and in benefit of the DAO.

To me it sounds like the second option of what to do with the remainder is the right thing to do as long as we agree on a few parameters.

But let's discuss, we need to settle these two decisions:
1. How much should @invertedbobb get out of the total - given the overview
2. what to do with with remainder

-- 
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/support/issues/501#issuecomment-698497126
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bisq.network/pipermail/bisq-github/attachments/20200924/9b6fb233/attachment.html>