[bisq-network/proposals] Applying arbitration fee (#335)

[refund-agent2]

You are correct, arbitration should never be worse than mediation for the part who did the right, unless mediator did a mistake.
What I have been already doing in this cases is just giving the winner the amount decided by the mediator and leave the rest for the DAO. Buyer would be refunded 0.00181 BTC and the 0.0005 BTC that should be awarded to seller if accepted mediation is now kept for the DAO. It's not buyer's fault that the other part is not responding, but neither is Bisq's.

> I think the costs of arbitration should be covered by the trade fees. No trader ever really knows when you might need it.

Traders who need arbitration don't pay the arbitration fee, which is paid by those who aren't using it by not responding. More than 80% of arbitration cases at last cycle were caused by unresponsive traders. That has a remarkable cost for Bisq and increases the risk that Burningman role supposes for the DAO.

>I like the idea of DAO insurance for when things go wrong, but in reality the BTC being burned is not differentiated in anyway.

It would still be better than fixing mistakes just by printing more BSQ when DAO's budget has a shortfall. A not detailed  insurance budget is better than no budget at all, although this budget could be estimated from my reports if necessary.

>With regards the fees suggested as a percentage of security deposit I think a standard percentage of security deposit should be used.

I don't think mediators use this method to calculate their payouts. I have to manually calculate this payouts, so I have chosen an easy way.
The percentages used in the table are the max amounts and the main goal of arbitration is still to reimburse and compensate affected traders. I will surely reduce the arbitration fee if a trader used a 50% security deposit.

-- 
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/335#issuecomment-840390175
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bisq.network/pipermail/bisq-github/attachments/20210513/0194b7cb/attachment-0001.htm>