[PAID TESTERS NEEDED] Zenland Escrow Contract | Custom Agents | Up to $20 (open)

[TryNinja]

TryNinja, please log in to Zenland App using a new Metamask address and post this address and your Telegram username in this thread. We will use the quotas of the next week, this week is almost over anyway

Thank you.

In this case, here is my original post:

Sounds fun.

1. Your Telegram username: @TryNinja
2. Wallet address for payment (BTC): 1EBP4gc9LHTPLxDmChb9YM6MBQY2d82cys

ETH address, if accepted: 0x708e0f39E61Ca441401CC8F1767E8c14c64917b6

[DubemIfedigbo001]

I logged in to Zenland using this wallet address  0xD2245bAbf3A48e2fB293C6b59923200b1ebFA439.  Waiting for the next step.

[Frankolala]

Telegram username: @Frankolala
Btc address:: bc1qymald8m889fjfmt0fyc406f3lxywuwhxu65lft

[nelson4lov]

Zenland Escrow Review

I was invited to try a Zenland escrow contract as an agent. The contract is 0x621340a3883bFF299E9AEb8c466598395408a53B on Bsc Chain (contract on bscscan: https://bscscan.com/address/0x621340a3883bFF299E9AEb8c466598395408a53B)


Contract terms: 
Exchange of 1 BUSD to 0.000022 BTC

However, there is a small mistake in the contract details, USDT is used instead of BUSD as quoted below:

This escrow contract initiates the exchange of 1 USDT for 0.000022 BTC. To fulfil this agreement, I, as the buyer, have locked in 1 BUSD

What happened:
The buyer was supposed to receive BTC from the seller. The seller sent an invalid TX hash since it doesn’t include the buyer's BTC address as a recipient. The buyer pointed this out to the seller who insisted it was a blockchain congestion problem which isn’t the case. The seller persuaded the buyer to coerce him/her to release the BUSD when the seller hadn’t fulfilled his end of the contract. 

Given the seller's dishonest behaviour and no further response from the seller, after I requested an appropriate transaction hash to be sent as proof, I was inclined to resolve the escrow contract in favour of the buyer and I did. Agent fee is currently set between 1-3 % for the agent for successful resolution as seen below: 





I took a 1% fee and returned the other 99% to the buyer.
 

Observations:

• Messages in chat by the agent can’t be edited once sent.
• The buyer protection time countdown is stuck at 1 days, 0 hours, 0 minutes in the UI even if it is enforced at the contract level.
• After the buyer protection time is elapsed, the seller can call

Code:

release()

and take 100% of the buyer's money and there is nothing the buyer can do about it. [/li]

• Contract code looks good and secure but lacks comments and some gas optimizations can be done to reduce the gas costs for users (buyer, seller, agent) eg: changing some require statements to custom error and other best practices like using constants instead of magic numbers.

[paid2]

Same please, consider updating my payment address to LTC: ltcaddresspaid2

Thank you! 

Payment received, thank you

[Zenland]

The next 4 contracts of the second week have been created on Binance Smart Chain and Polygon. nelson4lov, Danydee, DubemIfedigbo001, and TryNinja have been invited to them as escrow agents.

https://bscscan.com/address/0x621340a3883bff299e9aeb8c466598395408a53b
https://bscscan.com/address/0x54767383e44c00994d1e6d55311a0d51b4eedff6
https://polygonscan.com/address/0xfdc525526bfb59d08b2fe4456e203a76c01b673a
https://polygonscan.com/address/0xd949edc1db7a49f0bb494929051b046fd291c6c8

Since nelson4lov has already executed his arbitration, we're sending instructions on how to proceed further to the other 3 testers in PM.

All reviews that were posted so far are just great and full of wonderful ideas that we could potentially grow into whole new features. They all will be discussed with the team. Regarding the questions and concerns posted by the testers, we will soon make a post covering them all. Thank you.

[TryNinja]

The case so far:

The escrow was for the exchange of 1 USDC for 10.000.000 SHIB.

I check the chat logs, the Contractee has sent 1 USDC on the Polygon network to the escrow contract, which I confirmed onchain.

The Contractor then sent the Contractee 10.000.000 units of a token on the Polygon network of contract 0x61b66853bdefe04dc058774b808163d65a9c947d, which is an ERC20 with the symbol “SHIBA”.

The Contractee contested the idea by claiming that those are not the real SHIB tokens, but a random/fake token with the same name on the contract.

The Contractor isn't collaborative, the contract is disputed.


My decision:

I sent the following message on the chat so both parties understood my way of thinking:

As the dispute agent, it is my understanding that the “real” SHIB coin in question refers to Shiba Inu, a famous token on the Ethereum network of contract 0x95ad61b0a150d79219dcf64e1e6cc01f0b64c4ce (Coingecko page: https://www.coingecko.com/en/coins/shiba-inu).

The token also has an official bridged version on the Polygon network of contract 0x6f8a06447Ff6FcF75d803135a7de15CE88C1d4ec

What the Contractor sent was a token deployed just 1 hour before the escrow transaction, with no transaction history or apparent real value.

For that I’m siding with the Contractee for 100% minus the agent’s fee of 1%.

Suggestion:

Write the contract address and network of the token in question on the “Contract details” field so there is no confusion on what both parties are agreeing to.

Then I split the money, which finished the case: 99% to the Contractee (buyer), 0% to the Contractor (seller), 1% to the Agent.


Thoughts:

• The link (coingecko page) on my message sent on the chat was broken. Screenshot:
  
  
  

• On the contract main details card, the Contractee (buyer) comes first and the Contractor (seller) comes second. When splitting the money, it's the opposite: the Contractor (Seller’s Percentage) comes first and the Contractee (Buyer’s Percentage) comes second. This change of orders and wording can be confusing, which is bad specially when you’re splitting the money, a sensitive action that can cause money losses.
  
  For a moment, I almost did the opposite of what I wanted and sent 99% to the Contractee (buyer) which was trying to scam the Contractor (seller). This would be a disastrous outcome.
  
  
  
  
  Suggestion: Be more consistent with the wording for both parties. I personally still don't like the words Contractee and Contractor as a non-native english speaker. Multiple times I caught myself having to think more than I should to avoid mistaking who's who. "Contractee = buyer = sent the USDC" and "Contractor = seller = sent the fake SHIBA".
  
  I would prefer if the contractee/contractor names would be ditched and the contract creator could choose if he's the buyer or seller.
  

• Hovering the “Seller’s percentage”, “Buyer’s Percentage” or "Agent’s Percentage” information icon on the Splitting Money card shows up a tooltip that blocks the input until the mouse leaves the area. It took me a couple seconds to understand why I couldn’t write on the input.
  
• The reputation page was down at the time of my review. Error “Cannot read properties of null (reading 'toLowerCase')” on line 74 of Profile.tsx: params.id.toLowerCase() !== auth.whoAmI.nickname.toLowerCase())
  
• After the dispute was concluded, I was sent directly to the Contracts page and an error message popped up with the text “Not found”. It would be better to show the final outcome and the previously disputed contracts on my list.
  

[nelson4lov]

Since nelson4lov has already executed his arbitration, we're sending instructions on how to proceed further to the other 3 testers in PM.

I want to confirm that I have received payment. Thank you to the Zenland team for the opportunity to review the agent side of their decentralized escrow service.

[DubemIfedigbo001]

my feedback is this

I was invited as an agent in a contract consisting of a buyer who purchased an iPhone 7 128GB, the buyer received the item and observed that the phone is locked with a message which states that the phone has been reported as stolen. The seller keeps claiming that the damages was done during shipment of the phone, I saw from the seller's argument that the damage on the phone cannot be from the shipment, that in fact the phone seems to be stolen. The buyer couldn't react to that accusation, but instead pressured the seller to release his money as the goods was in a good condition when he sent it. The seller opted to involve an agent and leave the phone in the police station

My Judgement
From the drama and the failure of the seller to react to the allegation that the phone was actually stolen and not a packaging damage was evident that the seller was the defaulter here. The seller was only interested in his money being released at the expense of his reputation being tarnished with the allegation of theft, and having considered carefully the evidence of the buyer below, and asking the seller for his own evidence of acquiring the device legally, which he never replied to.



Also checking their reputation and reviews, I also observed that the seller has neither a good review nor reputation, while the buyer has over 7 reviews with excellent reputation..
I finally resolved the dispute in favour of the buyer, I sent 99% of the funds back to the buyer and 1% to agent.

Observatons
I saw that there is a documentation that helps even new and old users get more acquainted with the way Zenland operates and I must say its a very good feature.

I also observed the presence information and interaction channels like telegram and discord.

I observed the seperate buttons loading the contract and chats. It made the presentation cleaner and gives a very good user experience for the agent.

The contract creation date and the Due date had an excess of 4 days as against the 30 days buyer protection time, it was 34 days actually

I also saw these feedbacks when I sent funds to specific addresses, both "success" and "not found". please fix the bug


Recommendations

• use a conventional title for the disputed parties like buyer/seller and not contractor/contractee
• make provision for being precise when asking any party a question, like a button where you can choose to either ask the buyer or the seller specific questions in the chat and the indications of who the question is meant for.
• There should be extra layers of security like 2FA, Google auth etc because a compromised Zenland account might possibly mean a compromised metamask wallet since it is connected
• there should be a history of the dispute an agent settled and not disputes vanishing never to be found again

Conclusion
This platform is really promising, Thank you very much for the opportunity given to me to test it out, I wish Zenland the best in becoming a top escrowed tool, and I would love to be one of the actual agents in the near future

[Danydee]

Here is my review  




I was assigned to a contract involving (Instagram Likes) trade, Contractee buying 50 (*premium) instagram likes from Contractor for 1 USDC.


The terms: Contractor must provide 50 likes to the post provided by contractee, the likes must come from quality accounts that have profile picture and simple and understandable name.


.The contractor marked the trade as fulfilled, and say that, I quote: [Done! I've sent over the likes. They're from real-looking accounts.]

.The contractee complains about the profiles that they have no posts and profile pictures.

.The contractor respond to that that they are real people with no posts on Instagram.

.The contractee do not agree and ask for refund or the fulfillment of the contract.

.Which the contractor reject and ask for release.

.Then the contractee raised the dispute.





-At first look on the instagram post, there was only 43 likes not 50.. and from the 12 accounts I was able to access there were few that were clearly bad quality: no profile pictures, non understandable names, private, or no-posts profiles with no following accounts and followers.

-At this point the contract is not fulfilled!

I solicited the Contractor/Seller on the chat, and after no responds I made the distribution like following:
 (Contractor/Seller: 5%)  (Contractee/Buyer: 92%)  (Agent: 3%)


*I was about to send this two messages on the chat after the distribution but once the distribution is made acces to the contract is not still availlable!

1) Decision: Contract not fulfilled by Contractor!

2) Apart the fact that Likes/Followers Etc.. should not be traded (should be natural interactions), demonstrating/proving of such transaction (providing likes) seems to be thing closer to impossible! Think about it!

*About my decision, I would rater have redistributed to the contractor nothing but I wanted to significate to the buyer especially ragarding to the nature of transaction and the difficulty around it!



PS:

- While browsing I faced sometimes (a blank page), the page do not show or load, but is sure that this is a minor problem that will be solved.



And at last,
I would like to thanks and congratulates you for your work !  This is what the real entrepreneurship is.. remedy to the market's needs !

[Danydee]

Payment received from ZenLand.  Thank you!

[DubemIfedigbo001]

I confirm that I've received payment, thank you Zenland, I enjoyed the testing and I look forward to being one of the actual agents on full launch. Goodluck to the Zenland team.

[Su-asa]

Telegram username: suasa01
Btc address:: bc1q9shzpnvy30yl4tcpqc2w3nsa67jthy7ug2xua6

[Diornov]

Hello. I want to personally thank everyone who completed the review with our new custom agent feature.

Also, I wanted to let you know that as soon as we conclude our beta test campaign, we will launch the official Zenland Custom Agents of Bitcointalk Thread.

- as soon as I resolved dispute, it disappeared from my profile. No where to be found.

When I clicked on send button the contract automatically vanished

-The contract is no longer visible at all once the funds have been sent, perhaps it would be practical to keep them for a while in case of a problem with one of the parties?

At the beginning, we thought that keeping resolved dispute cases in an agent's profile might be a privacy issue. However, since we received many requests, we've updated the permissions for agents to view their old resolved contracts. Now agents will be able to see their contracts after they have been resolved.

-Perhaps a page/history for the agents, so that they can be trusted in disputes?

- Agent reputation page

There was a problem with rendering the reputation page for agents, but everything should work fine now.
Here is how the agent reputation page looks like - Agent Reputation Page
Here is how a regular user reputation page looks like - User Reputation Page

We are planning to expand the analytics for the agent reputation page to make it easier for contract parties to choose the right agent. We need more people using Zenland to gather the data.

Another question: is there an appeal system for the agent's decisions?
Or is his decision final and absolute?

Agent's decision is final. Once the money is sent from the contract, the case is closed. There is no appeal system as for now, but we currently have two options:

First, if a custom agent is bribed: We are launching custom agent features on Bitcointalk because here we have a community. If the buyer/seller believes that the contract was resolved unfairly, they can open a scam thread here on the forum, and we will double-check everything from our side and disable the agent if necessary.

The second option is the Zenland Forum, where custom agents will be submitting difficult cases to solve. As a community, we can help find the right consensus in more complex cases. These cases can be used as a precedent by other custom agents to help solve cases more efficiently in the future.

Also, the smart contract is build in a way that once the agent is invited into the contract, only agent can send money out of the contract. Buyer and seller loses rights to release the money.

• The buyer protection time countdown is stuck at 1 days, 0 hours, 0 minutes in the UI even if it is enforced at the contract level.

In Contract Details, the buyer protection time is static to show the counterparty all the contract details before approving it. It's very important to read the draft contract before approving it.

• After the buyer protection time is elapsed, the seller can call release() and take 100% of the buyer's money and there is nothing the buyer can do about it.

Yes, we designed it so the buyer will not 'burn the money out of spite by never releasing it', as Satoshi once said here Bitcointalk Thread. If the buyer is not satisfied with the delivery, instead of freezing the money, they can always dispute the contract and stop the buyer protection time.

Suggestion: Be more consistent with the wording for both parties. I personally still don't like the words Contractee and Contractor as a non-native english speaker. Multiple times I caught myself having to think more than I should to avoid mistaking who's who. "Contractee = buyer = sent the USDC" and "Contractor = seller = sent the fake SHIBA".

• I would prefer if the contractee/contractor names would be ditched and the contract creator could choose if he's the buyer or seller.
  
• Hovering the “Seller’s percentage”, “Buyer’s Percentage” or "Agent’s Percentage” information icon on the Splitting Money card shows up a tooltip that blocks the input until the mouse leaves the area. It took me a couple seconds to understand why I couldn’t write on the input.
  
• The reputation page was down at the time of my review. Error “Cannot read properties of null (reading 'toLowerCase')” on line 74 of Profile.tsx: params.id.toLowerCase() !== auth.whoAmI.nickname.toLowerCase())
  
• After the dispute was concluded, I was sent directly to the Contracts page and an error message popped up with the text “Not found”. It would be better to show the final outcome and the previously disputed contracts on my list.
  

Thank you, TryNinja, for your thorough review. We need more testers like you. The incorrect positioning of Seller/Buyer/Agent fields is fixed. New tooltips for the agent page are added. The TypeError on the nickname check is also fixed. Agents can now see their old contracts.

- I personally find buyer/seller term easier than contractor and contractee.

use a conventional title for the disputed parties like buyer/seller and not contractor/contractee

I have personally changed the terms in the chat and in most notifications from Contractee to Buyer and Contractor to Seller. The only place these labels are left is on the contract creation page.

- Quote option in chat
- Written chat in text box should stay if you by mistake reload the web page.

Last question: I haven't found a way of adding 2FA, is this planned for the future?

• Contract code looks good and secure but lacks comments and some gas optimizations can be done to reduce the gas costs for users (buyer, seller, agent) eg: changing some require statements to custom error and other best practices like using constants instead of magic numbers.

make provision for being precise when asking any party a question, like a button where you can choose to either ask the buyer or the seller specific questions in the chat and the indications of who the question is meant for.

Thank you for your contributions. I'm adding them to our To-Do list.

[Zenland]

Thank you once more to users who took the time to go through the arbitration process and post their reviews.

The campaign is ongoing and as usual, we will soon review all previous applications over and post the next list of accepted listers. Meanwhile, we'll be happy to have more applications from new users interested in testing out how being a Zenland agent works.

We wish everybody a great weekend,
Zenland Team

[paid2]

At the beginning, we thought that keeping resolved dispute cases in an agent's profile might be a privacy issue. However, since we received many requests, we've updated the permissions for agents to view their old resolved contracts. Now agents will be able to see their contracts after they have been resolved.

Nice, but maybe you could consider using a system like on Agoradesk: like an auto-deletion of the contracts after a period of time. I mentioned Agoradesk because they state at the beggining of each chat "this chat will be saved for 180 days in case of dispute etc...etc..". This could help regarding the privacy problem.
Maybe 30 ou 60 days would be enough, but the idea is the same.


All the best with the ongoing test campaign!

[GxSTxV]

GxSTxV please log in to Zenland App using a new Metamask address and post this address and your Telegram username in this thread.

Thank you for this chance once again.

My telegram : @masterxce
LTC address : LR6PWXp88D2MM2VsQXV7w7nsNtPwuN78jW

Metamask address : 0x16f8F8F2ad7BBfeaBA8E4484eB82Af3F66F2c5f6

[Becassine]

Hello

Adress LTC: ltc1qmh0fer6ze0ms7xh6999wnpw7lf4gedmkung8jn
Adress Metamask: 0xB4693f2231B3cFC20012FceCc7c595a82ce3E457

Telegram @Becassine

[Zenland]

The first contract for the fourth week has been created on Polygon. GxSTxV has been invited to it as an escrow agent.

https://polygonscan.com/address/0x78D06Ff315a0d9D43d3eD66008D94c6Ee31F176C

A list of new testers will be posted soon. Thank you.

[GxSTxV]

My review for this new experience as a custom agent :

Well, I was invited for a disputed case as it appeared on my notifications list, on a 1 USDT exchange to USD in Payoneer case on Polygon Network.

First, I had to check and read all the chat multiple times to understand everything and find who’s trying to scam the other. So here the buyer who created the contract with these details:

I want to receive to my payoneer account 1 USD and I'm sending the seller 1 USDT

Is trying to receive 1 USD to his Payoneer account In exchange of 1 USDT that is already been reserved in the contracts.

First thing, I have checked the contractor and contractee profiles, and found out that

The buyer is very active on ZenLand and has many finished contracts which makes him more trusted than the seller who is having his first contract and it’s being disputed. (it’s just a point but doesn’t determine who’s trying to scam the other )

The seller is claiming to send the 1$ to the buyer address « keng533@gmail.com » so the contract state was signed and changed to fulfilled. The buyer than didn’t receive the funds as he claimed after almost an hour, also he was claiming that the screenshot sent to him is fake. That’s why he opened a case and disputed the contract.

My conclusion :
The Seller is a scammer, he didn’t send any money using Payoneer to the buyer .
Why? Because first Payoneer sending money limit is 50$ as a minimum to send.
Second, the screenshot the seller sent was obviously fake from a Paypal account.
Maybe the buyer didn’t notice the terms of Payoneer for sending a minimum of 50$ at least, but the seller here  definitely didn’t send any money. And that’s my job to only detect who is true and who’s lying.

Here the seller deserves 0% of the funds, the agent will only take 1%, and 99% for the buyer.

My honest review about the whole experience was really perfect and didn’t face any issues. The contract settlement approved in few seconds without any issue.
You will only need experienced agents to review every dispute and check the details of every case, the good thing is you can ask for more details and easily settle the case.

It’s a great thing to see you once again here, you are really doing a great job in creating a perfect solution for  escrow services.