[bisq-network/proposals] Add negative score for protocol violations (#260)

[chimp1984]

> However to add an additional punishment of a negative trade score seems a little like a double punishment that would risk disheartening new users from continuing to use Bisq.

Yes, that was not intended. Only for behaviour which can be interpreeted as bad intentions or not responding. Honest mistakes should not be punished. We rather should work to improve UX to avoid those mistakes.

> Accounts that become restricted

Same here. I would even not take away security deposit for bank problems.

> option trades:

We have a tool in place to detect that. Mediators get the info if the trade might be an option trade (e.g. calculate if canceling trade is profitable, if so its suspect to be an option trade). I think that probem has been decreased over the past months also because sec. deposit gets estimated based on past volatility.

> not responding trader

I think that is really a main problem still. Might be a UX problem in some cases, that new users dont understand that they have to be online but that is one of the bigger issues and I would suggest that justifies a negative score. Such a score is not binary anyway, so one issue will not have that much weight, we could fade it out even over time.

Probably its better atm to invest our efforts in improving the UX to reduce the cases. And if we see there are some problem cases which do not go away we can think into that tool/idea again.

-- 
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/260#issuecomment-757073354
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bisq.network/pipermail/bisq-github/attachments/20210108/b29f3089/attachment.htm>