Arbitrator (formerly known as Refund Agent) #93
Comments
|
This is certainly a very important role for BISQ and one that requires both skilled work, and a large degree of trust. Thanks for your efforts thus far! I haven't seen any reports from your refund activity and the last known info. was given by @burningman2. Could you please update publicly the current state of your refund activities?
If this summary was accurate, how much of the 4.511 BTC surplus do you have left from this month's refunds? Another question regarding this role specifically, will it have an associated bond? Thanks for your time. For those that might be looking through thread #80, here is the relevant suggestion:
|
|
There's no reason for this role. The donation address owner, @burningman2, should have this function. |
|
@huey735 No, those are 2 different roles. |
|
Report March 1 2020: Paid out 11.4729727 BTC in 45 transactions until Feb 29 [1]. From the 144701 BSQ which I received by refunding 11.5 BTC (0.03 BTC is difference to what I already refunded) I got 73901 BSQ already reimbursed, so it is missing 70800 BSQ. @cbeams, @m52go Do you think that is acceptable with our current issuance limits? Please note that this is not a compensation but a reimbursement of the BTC the burningman has converted already back to BSQ by burning them. It should have been requested in the past cycles already but I did not had time to get to that final report to have a correct overview. Summary: [1] List of transactions of payouts: Date/Time,Details,Address,Transaction ID,Amount in BTC,Confirmations [2] The disputes, including pending disputes, are as follows: Dispute nr. 1 Dispute nr. 2 Dispute nr. 3 Dispute nr. 4 Dispute nr. 5 Dispute nr. 6 Dispute nr. 7 Dispute nr. 8 Dispute nr. 9 Dispute nr. 10 Dispute nr. 11 Dispute nr. 12 Dispute nr. 13 Dispute nr. 14 Dispute nr. 15 Dispute nr. 16 Dispute nr. 17 Dispute nr. 18 Dispute nr. 19 Dispute nr. 20 Dispute nr. 21 Dispute nr. 22 Dispute nr. 23 Dispute nr. 24 Dispute nr. 25 Dispute nr. 26 Dispute nr. 27 Dispute nr. 28 Dispute nr. 29 Dispute nr. 30 Dispute nr. 31 Dispute nr. 32 Dispute nr. 33 Dispute nr. 34 Dispute nr. 35 Dispute nr. 36 Dispute nr. 37 Dispute nr. 38 Dispute nr. 39 Dispute nr. 40 Dispute nr. 41 Dispute nr. 42 Dispute nr. 43 Dispute nr. 44 Dispute nr. 45 Dispute nr. 46 Dispute nr. 47 Dispute nr. 48 Dispute nr. 49 Summary of reasons for disputes: |
|
Per bisq-network/admin#69, I've just updated the description of this issue to link to the new https://bisq.wiki/Refund_Agent article and @bisq-network/refund-agents team. The wiki article is just a stub for now. I've asked @RefundAgent to flesh it out, detailing the duties and rights of this role, etc. |
This sounds reasonable, though we may want to break it up over a couple cycles so as not to create a huge spike all at once. Before we do this for Cycle 11 (or possibly break it up over Cycle 11 and Cycle 12), I have the following request: There is a lot of confusion about this role, and the closely-related role played by @burningman2. To my knowledge, the relationship and workflow between these roles has never been properly documented anywhere. I would like to see this clearly written down somewhere on the wiki, probably at https://bisq.wiki/Refunds (which would be a member of the
I will create an issue regarding this documentation immediately after submitting this comment, and I ask that @RefundAgent and/or @burningman2 raise their hands to own that issue. I suggest make the writing and review of that document a condition for complete reimbursement in Cycle 11/12. The purpose of doing so is to make sure that all interested parties, especially stakeholders who see these large reimbursements spiking issuance beyond planned budget levels have a resource they can refer to in order to understand why things work this way and how it all makes sense. |
Done, see bisq-network/admin#70. @RefundAgent, @burningman2, please indicate who among you will own this and I'll assign you accordingly. Thanks. |
@burningman2 those are two functions that don't need to be separated into two roles. |
|
@huey735 Seperation of concerns makes sense for several reasons. Security, censorhsip resistence and to not mix different requirements (burningman does not need to scale with 100000 of users, refund agent must as well with language extensions). Both have very different risk profiles which makes it easy to scale up the refund agent (he is taking the risk). |
|
Fixed, thanks. See bisq-network/admin#70. |
|
Ok, I can take that: bisq-network/admin#70 (comment) |
|
Payout for dispute: Traded with burningman: Remaining BTC not covered yet (try to cover it at next trade event): BSQ for reimbursement: |
|
Payout for dispute:
Amount: 0.0196676 BTC
Traded with burningman: 1.126 BTC for 13566.27 BSQ at price 0.00083 BSQ/BTC on 15 March. BSQ for reimbursement: 13566.27 BSQ |
IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT@RefundAgent will cease to own this role starting with the beginning of Cycle 13 (the next cycle at the time of this writing). This means we are looking for a replacement to take over this role as soon as possible. If you are interested, please speak up! Note that basic documentation for this role is available at https://bisq.wiki/Refund_Agent and @m52go is working on putting together more comprehensive documentation of the processes involved between the refund agent and the donation address holder (@burningman2). Suitable candidates for this role will need to have a considerable amount of bitcoin on hand to perform payouts to traders. That bitcoin will be paid back through trades with the donation address holder. The Refund Agent may request compensation for the time and effort expended in handling cases and for the time value of the bitcoin used in these payouts prior to being paid back. |
|
Note that I have just announced this in the bisq.support Keybase subteam as well. I'll announce it more broadly if I don't hear any interest within the next few days. |
|
What will happen to trade funds in the interim? I know all funds get donated to some stranger in the 2 of 2 system. I assume traders will have to go directly to the DAO to get compensated in BSQ then trade for BTC if indeed there is any liquidity for that? |
|
Report April 3, 2020. This covers the payouts after March 15 which was reported above. I now give the collateral tx so the readers can check that the funds were sent to the donation address. The cases where I paid out to the buyer and seller addresses are caused by bugs such that the dispute was never sent to the Refund Agent but had to be settled on Keybase. I have given the nyms of the support agents that were involved, in case it was not only me.: -------------------------------------------------------------------------- At this stage I am even and got compensated by the DAO 19 March ID payout tx af384ec62086bce704fc7ccdea41900b90b76eb08ff4564074de7dade105743c -0.072947 19 March ID payout tx ee73c63e23083b388d230c5e949c25f43b68dd0c58b5f02f7bc4f734bea4085d -0.0174716 19 March ID payout tx 713b97bf2fc82dcf68e48e2c64017d6fa74e8bb2916b013cc158946b58ef491d -0.050182 20 March ID payout tx 0486bfc5504417d032e736adaff8fa9bd4b2958179e71eb92ca985c3775be0fc -2.60028026 wiz 21 March ID 25 March ID payout tx 56ed5871a162cabd13a7991d6cb267921cfd42cdaf939e5d9693a8461f2d8351 -0.0220404 25 March ID payout tx 98a5212723ffc0ff913a7fe1ce8197468deb24bcd9a29a46268a5010a6057a9d -0.0338244 29 March ID payout tx ab452f470cf53f1a160c5bd365e94a831d7de662600cd09cd58fa00f2d2e678a -0.057526 29 March ID payout tx db678f3901f97af49b802fb2112ff9e65fdae7b52156ca0c04315f2305e4e450 -0.037026 31 March ID payout tx 9db4246df730710111a1000c5bde40c9fceb06773c1d428bb26e36830574ef58 -0.0220676 31 March ID payout tx 1 April ID payout tx 3dd3bcab478e729ff97cb4f9f44d23628bca733277ef062d9a357b003217a4f2 -0.0144364 1 April ID 2 April ID payout tx e6ec888a95d1d698a57e3cfa2b44102db8b61fb608d949a19c2ec1afcdf2a205 -0.048526 2 April ID payout tx 47e4d17ac0f4cba74b3de5ebde3b2beaa4b1b76f3183376085d76e7000c9e473 -0.016026 The sum of the BTC is 3.64436 for the refunds from 19 March to 2 April |
|
Report 11 April: 4 April ID 1.38 BTC was bought in tx 94fac2f181902ddcd6892fc0767faae8a65adaf751952f8e153b63dc27327f4b for 13986.01 BSQ bsq-tx b1b55e385ffab1254db2a2be904de292084030e8a96fcd28ba315cb74a69abaf 4 April ID payout tx f182dd4ad734a86725e82aec33e36845ed47ea27beef1a98c8ed635af8c2655e -0.060026 6 April ID payout tx c9813a4579dac5baadeadbb50247f3a75d7cc56eebe674fbf57c37a48df1f8ee -0.047971 6 April ID payout tx bd30a0448219958bd0197316e086e354de751fcc49935a8daea0936b4d641b1e -0.3250373 9 April ID payout tx 273983ff4c6178220cec6b32c68f956d23d9ab22b427fc3ceb08f4f306aa53ab -0.037026 9 April ID payout tx 2fba1c0cf2e9b1314c5ae56229b0378c2b30a4cc81846dbc07c59f813755d452 -0.022026 9 April ID payout tx a83ee511ad7fd1a7f45dc59025f6d4ec3c0d70eb07ea66d113d83b52b139eed4 -0.016026 9 April ID payout tx a344c418eb66ca34ba99f20c8acdd5efbee4612e79ac3d5900d04ba2ce0d8325 -0.2874223 9 April ID payout tx 4a2c36b7c59d925325a38a0650d360cba51282d22f7c93d0163e63f3cecc2f30 -0.156206 11 April ID payout tx 9b98a81405ddf3d08497fa61c72bf0964006d37a7dfdaad4180feeba15a375ff -0.016026 11 April ID payout tx e9bc24376a1c2491d4051c3351f3187b5eb209ec4bbda4395a91e1b92d747ab9 -0.23766 11 April ID payout tx 03d40ee973886f78ce6c034d7ab428beea47725e6c81cbd82e509e174d7572c7 -0.065026 Including the payouts and BSQ sale between 4 April and 11 April I am out 2.86981 BTC. I have paid 20512.8 BSQ.11 April ID 0.6 BTC was bought in tx 88c53a76c07e9656467dea00371c27ce7f5c171a5c9796ec785c4338447fff7d for 7334.96 BSQ bsq-tx 2dfc1302f443a6d4d33742dd927dc74ebc00a6114cca76689d594f68706a7c67 Including the BSQ-sales 11 April I have 1.88019 BTC too much and have used 78581.3 BSQ to buy BTC which the DAO owes me. I have more than 2 BTC in expenses for pending Refund Agent cases which will be paid out shortly. |
|
Reimbursement out of Bisq Refund completed out of BisqTicket closed the june 12th Summary: Trade ID: 5162117 Deposit: 368c808fe268f12a84034cfca8bb782ccadf5e03ed00e2aa4f5088562029e8f0 Summary notes: Reason for dispute: bug MediationThis trade was taken in July 2023. There was a bug showing the deposit incorrectly in Bisq so mediation was opened. Buyer sent payment, seller confirmed payment. I made a proposal to compelte the trade as normal. Arbitration was opened in July. It appears no arbitration ticket was opened and the trade was never reimbursed. Buyer and seller contacted me both at the same time this month in Matrix to enquire about the trade. Arbitration ticket closed through TXID: 7501fa44ac0f8d94f6ab06d0f2ee0edd9f3d10c8ca07e18fd4a20428d6fb2c60 BTC address ownership proof (use ctrl+G to sign/verify): Buyer: Seller |
Refunds completed out of BisqTickets closed the 15/06/24 Summary: Trade ID: wydddbo Deposit: ab2a8f1dcf7abba161d35ff45c240e215cc4f76141e07cc2c1358f80f00be5bb Summary notes: Arbitration out of bisq. Buyer sent payment but there was a bug impeding traders to conclude the trade normally. Buyer did not appear. Seller gets 5% compensation, buyer loses 10% trade amount. Less than usual as there was a bug, but buyer did not reach the mediator for a manual payout anyways. Reason for dispute: MediationBTC buyer toook offer and send payment. Buyer did make fiat payment Neither buyer or seller is at fault. It would be good if the whole amount of the multisig could be paid out to the buyer and seller as the reason for the issue was a Bisq bug. Arbitration ticket closed through TXID: 6d1e5a65969ae263f0d31c8d405076dac1022d49d25e983ddd4317cd24d5226b BTC address ownership proof (use ctrl+G to sign/verify): Summary: Trade ID: RIWBAQ Deposit: c607f73ed784cf450f9c6f6c2f46cc8f782c6dd6b9228c7d756dd3b4fe41b035 Summary notes: Arbitration out of bisq. Buyer sent payment but there was a bug impeding traders to conclude the trade normally. Buyer did not appear. Seller gets 5% compensation, buyer loses 10% trade amount. Less than usual as there was a bug, but buyer did not reach the mediator for a manual payout anyways. Reason for dispute: Bug, trader not responding. MediationBTC buyer toook offer and send payment. Buyer did make fiat payment Neither buyer or seller is at fault. It would be good if the whole amount of the multisig could be paid out to the buyer and seller as the reason for the issue was a Bisq bug. Arbitration ticket closed through TXID: 6d1e5a65969ae263f0d31c8d405076dac1022d49d25e983ddd4317cd24d5226b BTC address ownership proof (use ctrl+G to sign/verify): Message: RIWBAQ Summary: Trade ID: kqwaqo Deposit: 86ebca960eb144df7d247d592e06089aee5fd6bdcd065873dab367fdbab28ecc Summary notes: Reason for dispute: MediationBTC buyer toook offer and send payment. Buyer did make fiat payment Neither buyer or seller is at fault. Arbitration ticket closed through TXID: 6d1e5a65969ae263f0d31c8d405076dac1022d49d25e983ddd4317cd24d5226b BTC address ownership proof (use ctrl+G to sign/verify): Message: kqwaqo Summary: Trade ID: 91213 Deposit: 6ca11b8beea2afd1209afa854ec535a04cf10ef4dda036a9a244d6a764d61d79 Summary notes: Arbitration out of bisq. Buyer sent payment but there was a bug impeding traders to conclude the trade normally. Buyer did not appear. Seller gets 5% compensation, buyer loses 10% trade amount. Less than usual as there was a bug, but buyer did not reach the mediator for a manual payout anyways. Reason for dispute: bug, trader not responding. MediationBTC buyer toook offer and send payment. Buyer did make fiat payment Neither buyer or seller is at fault. It would be good if the whole amount of the multisig could be paid out to the buyer and seller as the reason for the issue was a Bisq bug. Arbitration ticket closed through TXID: 6d1e5a65969ae263f0d31c8d405076dac1022d49d25e983ddd4317cd24d5226b BTC address ownership proof (use ctrl+G to sign/verify): |
Refund completed out of BisqTicket closed the 15/06/24 Summary: Trade ID: DaP0nDXw Deposit: 3522b1c9b69f58990704e9f852be6216b5361c1dab65d27746cdb576e0c661ac Summary notes: Arbitration out of bisq. Everything correct until mediation suggestion not paid due to a bug, after manually publishing DPT, seller was unresponsive. Reason for dispute: bug, trader not responding MediationTicket closed on 6 May 2024 22:19:58 Summary: Summary notes: Proposing trade to complete as successful -----BEGIN SIGNATURE----- In April 2024 Seller opened mediation as they had trouble connecting to Bisq Arbitration ticket closed through TXID: 5007ea4a9e6798c210e8c79f0396bb368b1fdf0320487bd402ce0c5fa2620676 BTC address ownership proof (use ctrl+G to sign/verify): Payment: |
Refund completed out of BisqTicket closed the 15/06/24 Summary: Trade ID: luzbj Deposit: 847622d3eecfd475b6d639698ae8fc0d92acdf8677bbc75b4219590149280d50 Summary notes: Buyer did not pay or reply, no mediation was possible due to a bug. Reason for dispute: bug MediationArbitration ticket closed through TXID: 1cef0069f96b66d5c525337966173c1829b457ae0c3917b5f6734cbbc7e74eb0 BTC address ownership proof (use ctrl+G to sign/verify): |
Cycle 60 compensation & reimbursement
|
Cycle 60 support report
|
|
Hi, @refund-agent2. Could you help me understand the
... but I don't really understand them and why they're an ongoing issue now for so many cycles. Thanks. |
|
Never mind my question above. I understand now that I also see that the 5% reference in the "Summary notes" I quoted above was unrelated and thus a red herring for me as I was trying to understand this. I've obviously been out of touch with this aspect of the arbitration compensation model, but it's worth mentioning here that labeling the line item |
Refund completed out of BisqTicket closed the 22 Jul Summary: Trade ID: dwwdmxau Deposit:0.00561000 Summary notes: Reason for dispute: Bug, trader not responding MediationIt was not possible to open mediation, although both peers were communicating with the mediator. Arbitration ticket closed through TXID: f912e71b3f54c5394db780005edc1769525cd858b5fe2337f2309a5bbb6a9df1 BTC address ownership proof (use ctrl+G to sign/verify): |
Refund completed out of BisqTicket closed the JUL 26 Summary: Trade ID:grwobcq Deposit:31dba28754330d4d96a648e0cd1fb22003b1a3bfb0a360ad6cd7464636af2650 Summary notes: After a bug, seller was not responsive. Buyer made the payment. Reason for dispute: bug, trader not responding MediationNo mediation suggestion possible. Arbitration ticket closed through TXID: 926c1058b06b6dc510a8ae0c25d79de8f5b7df0d045cd44bd18e597e785fd688 BTC address ownership proof (use ctrl+G to sign/verify): |
Cycle 61 compensation & reimbursement
|
Cycle 61 support report
|
Cycle 62 compensation & reimbursement
|
Cycle 62 support report
|
Cycle 63 compensation & reimbursement
|
Cycle 63 support report
|
Cycle 64 compensation & reimbursement
|
Cycle 64 support report
|
and others
My role is to refund traders who cannot resolve their differences using the mediators. The traders have their BTC sent to the Donation Address owner if they escalate to me. In my role I need to pay the traders according to my judgement of the dispute and is reimbursed by a highly volatile BSQ at the end of each voting cycle. Check #80 for the present suggestion to reimburse my expenses which should reduce my exposure to the volatility.
Docs: https://bisq.wiki/Arbitrator
Team: @bisq-network/arbitrators
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: