[bisq-network/proposals] Add delayed refund transactions (#303)

[chimp1984]

@MwithM 
> could make mediators once again be seen as money transmitters. 
I doubt that this can be interpreted as money transmitter as they have no controlling power. If so they each miner is mt for all mempool txs as well.

> They would be holding a signed transaction to send locked BTC. It's still not a private key, but they would have a way to benefit one of the traders (or Bisq, if you only enable them to use the delayed payout number 1).
Hmm... I still doubt that would trigger liabilities but to avoid those grey area we could broadcast the tx to the whole network as well. Privacy is not changed much by that as a Bisq trade tx on the blockchain can be identified by its structure anyway relatively easy.

@jmacxx 
Yes for fiat thats the spec. For altcoins its 10 -> 15 -> 20. We have more cases where the seller is not responding.

I think it will require a good description in the popup text when arbitration can be opened. There are clear benefits for users so I think if we comminicate that well they should benefit from that feature. Also mediator need to help to make it clear to traders that next step is not to open arbitration in case the peer is not responding but to wait 5 days longer and get refunded without further hassle. Also we could add in mediation a flag so that this option will only be offered in those cases where one trader is not responding at all.

Proposal for text:
"Your trading peer has not responded at all in mediation and has not accepted the suggested payout from the mediator.
You can either open an arbitration case now and publish the delayed payout transaction to the burning man and if your case gets support from the arbitrator you get refunded by the arbitrator [if amount > 0.5 BTC -> refunded by the DAO].
To avoid that extra delays and complications you can also wait 5 days longer and if the peer has not opened arbitration in the meantime you can publish another delayed payout transaction where you are the receiver of all the funds of the deposit transaction."
Steve can make that for sure much more readable but I think it makes clear that its only a benefit to the trader and has no risk involved.

But I agree it adds complexity and thats not great. But what are other solutions to reduce those cases of not responding traders? It is 17 out of 42 cases last month. We increased already security deposit but it seeems it dit no had effect on that.
 




-- 
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/303#issuecomment-771905406
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bisq.network/pipermail/bisq-github/attachments/20210202/e2e31bac/attachment.htm>