[bisq-network/proposals] Use Keybase to increase accessibility to Bisq for new traders with no funds for security deposit, trading and mining fees (#283)

[pazza]

> * Does anyone has experience of similar OTC trade platforms on Telegram, Whatsapp,... Which kind of security do they provide. I guess its bases on reputation only...

I have no experience other than completing 2 trades already using Keybase. One for a small amount of BTC a trader needed to make a trade, the other for someone that wanted to buy the min amount of BSQ and did not have a security deposit. In both cases the buyers sent me the funds first prior to me releasing the BTC and BSQ.

I have seen people sell on Reddit and BitcoinTalk and they use a reputation system. The Keybase channel moderator would be free to remove any users they see fit.

> * In case of a confiscation request for the DAO we could just leave the 2 parties present their evidence, that is more work for the DAO but it should be exceptional anyway (and if it happens it might be the end of that experiment anyway). So maybe its better to keep mediators completely out of the concept. I am not sure if one can deliver a (cryptographic) proof of the keybase chat messages, if so it would be easier, otherwise anyone could make up a screenshot...Mediators would have same dilemma... PagerSigner proof of fiat payment could be provided to some "trusted" community members as well if available...

I do not think the DAO needs to be involved, no mediators, no arbitration. It is a P2P transaction not going through Bisq no trade fees are involved. Traders are not paying for Bisq services. They are simply gaining the required security deposit / miner and trade fees to trade on Bisq. 

If trade goes wrong. Either user is free to share concerns on Keybase channel.
 
> * One barrier might be that a new user does not know really about the DAO and BSQ bonds. So they might be worried about the security as they have to pay first. Some easy to understand explaination will be required.

I do not think new users would need BSQ bonds. Only sellers of BTC would need them, if this was deemed appropriate.

The risk is mainly shouldered by the Buyer as they will be sending the funds first. The Seller's are not really shouldering any risk other than to their reputation. They only send the BTC once they have been paid.

> * There should be clear limits of number of trades and total amounts per buyer. If that is violated by the seller it is a clear reason for confiscating the bond. In case it becomes polular users might prefer it over Bisq as it has no trade fee and less miner fee, BUT the security might be misleading and is weak. Buyers might not understand that sufficiently and long-cons (BSQ bond will not cover all if lots of trades are going on) would be a logical result long term it it becomes bigger.

I agree transaction limit should be 0.007, just enough to start trading on Bisq. Ideally buyers will only use the service once. Get their no KYC BTC and then start accumulating / trading on Bisq. 

If it became popular the DAO could charge the Seller's an annual fee to be a member of the Keybase channel designated for this. 

Buyers should be aware that they risk losing their funds if trading this way. They are relying on the reputation of the seller.

> * The project should be clearly "branded" as NOT-Bisq but a private initiative of community members using BSQ bonds for security. BSQ bonds could be used anyway for anything what Bisq is not aware of. In fact there are several bonded reputation bonds set up where nobody knows for what they have been used for. The DAO voters also have no obligation to vote on confiscation requests.

Agreed. 
 
> Somehow its partially a low tech version of the off chain trade protocol idea ;-).

I think the simpler it is kept the better.

-- 
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/283#issuecomment-753421252
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bisq.network/pipermail/bisq-github/attachments/20210101/7bcefeb5/attachment.htm>