• silverpill@mitra.social
    7·
    6 months ago

    @nihilist @monero Consider the following situations:

    - Bob and Arbitrator are colluding against Alice
    - Bob and Arbitrator are the same person

    I think this system needs a higher authority to function properly. And there’s a simple non-technical solution to this problem. If you don’t agree with Arbitrator’s ruling, you make the case public and provide proofs. As a result, Arbitrator’s reputation is destroyed.

    Someone can even create a rating service similar to @kycnotme that will list arbitrators with good reputation

    • delirious_owl
      6·
      6 months ago

      I think every arbitrator is just going to get 1 good and 1 bad review from every dispute, then.

      But, in reality, people who are happy don’t leave reviews. So, likely, all arbitrators are going to have a negative rating.

    • iiGxC@slrpnk.net
      4·
      6 months ago

      Could also have a system where multiple arbritrators separately decide on a case, say 3 arbitrators per dispute by default, and if there’s a disagreement, more arbitrators decide until above x% of them agree on the resolution

      • nihilist@monero.townOP
        3·
        6 months ago

        yea but if all the arbitrators are corrupt on the network side, no matter how many you put on the arbitration the outcome wouldnt really change right ?

        • iiGxC@slrpnk.net
          2·
          6 months ago

          True, and any rewards to the arbitrators would be less and less if they get divided equally

        • delirious_owl
          1·
          6 months ago

          Works for Tor. Its nearly impossible to get all 3 if the network is large enough.

    • nihilist@monero.townOP
      21·
      6 months ago

      to that i would reply, that the arbitrators better be honest and behave correctly because the reputation of their network (ex:reto) is at stake, and yea definitely could be a good idea to have an external rating service, so that over time the scammy haveno networks are called out, and people avoid them

      • itsmect@monero.town
        3·
        6 months ago

        exactly. haveno can be a cash cow for the arbitrators if they keep it running. The more they scam, especially on high value disputes, the higher the chance traders will just create their own network, killing the cow in the process.

  • libertodd@monero.townEnglish
    3·
    6 months ago

    Awesome, appreciate these in-depth walkthroughs! Excited to see the functionality that Haveno brings to the community, and much needed now with the exit of localmonero.

    • shortwavesurfer@monero.townEnglish
      6·
      6 months ago

      We hit 30 offers in the offer book this morning, and over 100 Monero being offered in total. And that’s the first time we hit those marks. And the number of listings grew 36% in 24 hours.

  • delirious_owl
    1·
    6 months ago

    So what happens if Alice is the scammer and redeemed the code but then told the arbitrator that it was invalid? Is there any protection for Bob here?

    • nihilist@monero.townOP
      2·
      6 months ago

      yea as mentionned, there are a ton of difficult possible arbitration scenarios, i think there is a clear need to :

      1. list the payment options (like bisq did on this page here https://bisq.wiki/Payment_methods)
      2. detail each payment option with the correct trade protocol (which includes the precautions to PROVE that you conducted the trade correctly for the arbitrators (see localmonero’s tips on cash by mail for example https://localmonero.co/cash-by-mail-tips )), the risks of the trade going wrong, and what to do in each case.

      I opened up https://github.com/haveno-dex/haveno/issues/944 just now for the same

      • delirious_owl
        2·
        6 months ago

        Thanks. Having all possible cases fully documented so I know all the risks and, their likelihood, and any possible or impossible mitigations is a strong prerequisite to me using it.