Forum

[dotcomwriter]

I have been on this forum since 2016. I have seen discussions on successful trades from trusted members, individuals getting scammed, trusted accounts hacked and used to scam others, DT members misusing negative feedback, and trusted escrow going rogue among others. The technological industry is fast changing and that has made me thinking a lot. Therefore, I came with the following suggestions, constructive contributions are welcomed.

1) Why should we not have an internal wallet service, where when an individual advertises any crypto for sale, they should be required by the system to have the respective amount within their internal wallet of the respective crypto for the post to be approved for publication. This will help stem out scammers who advertise what they don't have and minimize scam incidences in the forum.

2) Why should the system not be updated to ensure that it offers escrow. System escrow can be trusted by everyone. I know individuals offering escrow services may be against this since they earn from it. But think of this, internal escrow creates a sense of security, and everyone involved in the trade will feel safe. The internal escrow can also be used by campaign managers to ensure trust and timely payment.

The above are just suggestions, anyone is welcome to agree or disagree. I'm also aware that updating the website to have some of the suggested features requires financial commitment from the administrators.

[SFR10]

1) Why should we not have an internal wallet service, where when an individual advertises any crypto for sale, they should be required by the system to have the respective amount within their internal wallet of the respective crypto for the post to be approved for publication. This will help stem out scammers who advertise what they don't have and minimize scam incidences in the forum.

a) Target for the hackers
b) Added workload in regards to the publication process
c) There's also this:

19. Possible (or real) scams and Trust ratings are not moderated (to prevent moderation abuse).

2) Why should the system not be updated to ensure that it offers escrow. System escrow can be trusted by everyone. I know individuals offering escrow services may be against this since they earn from it. But think of this, internal escrow creates a sense of security, and everyone involved in the trade will feel safe. The internal escrow can also be used by campaign managers to ensure trust and timely payment.

Not against this but highly doubt it gets implemented.

[Severos]

1) Why should we not have an internal wallet service, where when an individual advertises any crypto for sale, they should be required by the system to have the respective amount within their internal wallet of the respective crypto for the post to be approved for publication. This will help stem out scammers who advertise what they don't have and minimize scam incidences in the forum.

a) Target for the hackers
b) Added workload in regards to the publication process
c) There's also this:

19. Possible (or real) scams and Trust ratings are not moderated (to prevent moderation abuse).

What if it's implemented in a different way, when placing your BTC address in your profile you're required to sign a message using it, if the message is valid the balance will be considered as 'available'. It won't remove scammers, but will make it harder for them to use random addresses claiming its theirs, and will be easier for normal users to view valid funds instead of going through the process of manually confirming it with dealers.

[SFR10]

What if it's implemented in a different way, when placing your BTC address in your profile you're required to sign a message using it, if the message is valid the balance will be considered as 'available'. It won't remove scammers, but will make it harder for them to use random addresses claiming its theirs, and will be easier for normal users to view valid funds instead of going through the process of manually confirming it with dealers.

Good suggestion (as long as the whole process is automated and not mandatory) but not sure same can be done for other "cryptos" (based on OP's concern). For verified addresses, a "green check mark" can be added next to them and for unverified addresses, a red "X".
On a side note: This thread belongs to "Meta".

[Hydrogen]

1) Why should we not have an internal wallet service, where when an individual advertises any crypto for sale, they should be required by the system to have the respective amount within their internal wallet of the respective crypto for the post to be approved for publication. This will help stem out scammers who advertise what they don't have and minimize scam incidences in the forum.

Bitcoin having an open ledger system where wallet amounts are visible to the public could diminish a need for competing wallet services which could be man hour, resource and capital intensive. Many users on this forum have their wallet address listed in their profile and have demonstrated they can move funds from those addresses. It could reduce a need for new wallet platforms to be introduced given how a certain degree of transparency is already built into the system.

2) Why should the system not be updated to ensure that it offers escrow. System escrow can be trusted by everyone. I know individuals offering escrow services may be against this since they earn from it. But think of this, internal escrow creates a sense of security, and everyone involved in the trade will feel safe. The internal escrow can also be used by campaign managers to ensure trust and timely payment.

There are many existing escrow services, some of which could have more capital, better engineers and employees and overall more support.

You have a point in that expansion and one stop shopping are generally good policies to adopt. But I don't know if potential advantages would be cost effective or worthwhile in these cases.