[bisq-network/proposals] Cap max reimbursement from peers resucrity deposit (#292)

[pazza]

@MwithM 

> Computer stolen or break can be recovered with the seed. That happens from time to time. Death and sickness related losses can happen using BTC. That's part of the risk people is taking when using BTC and not having an inheritance plan. Bisq being so similar to BTC can't help much to solve this.

It helps in the fact that you do not lose all your funds.

Consider the following you are doing a trade for 2 BTC... Your computer breaks (or you get a cornuted wallet), you need to get it fixed but have a flight to catch. You are unavailable for 10 days.

When you return you have lost 0.3 BTC (15% security deposit). I think this is high. I think limiting it to 7.5% (50% of min security deposit) would be more reasonable. 

Bisq can limit loses to traders that become unresponsive, whilst a the same time protecting the interests of their counterparties. 
 
> Mediation should not offer the same deal as arbitration. That could make all trades go to arbitration. What do you suggest we do with the 50% extra amount? Send it back to the unresponsive party?

Yes. Like in the above circumstance. It would limit traders losers and their counterparty would still be up 7.5% on the trade.

> I also think Bisq should take some profit from arbitration, but not this way. Something like an arbitration fee of 3% of trading and security deposits amount if refund agent is the one who reimburses and a 5% DAO fee if the DAO does it would be the way to go. 

3% / 5% of security deposits amount seems reasonable to me. 

-- 
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/292#issuecomment-753527175
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bisq.network/pipermail/bisq-github/attachments/20210102/29fed03b/attachment.htm>