🔎 [ANN] KycNotList.com — No KYC / No AML Crypto Exchange Monitor

[TryNinja]

Let's say these are the only 2 victims, and you pay out $10k the way you described. One victim receives $9346, the other victim receives $654. That means the victim who stayed under the guaranteed amount loses almost everything because someone else deposited 10 times more, and probably triggered the exit scam with that! Wouldn't a per-user distribution be better, so they both receive $5k?

Another idea is to see the $10k escrow as a per-person max cap, so the $100k is treated as a $10k deposit along with the $7k one.

$100k victim receives $5,882.35
$7k victim receives $4,117.65

Or how about this scenario (and I think this would be fit for another topic, as it doesn't only apply to your service): let's say an exchanger with an escrow deposit wants to exit scam. Someone deposits an amount large enough to run away. But they don't want to lose their escrow deposit, so they create a large exchange transaction on their own platform, with a signed Letter of Guarantee, and claim to be a victim. That way they get most of their escrowed amount back!

How does one solve this?

Even if it's limited per person, first come first serve, etc... the scammer can always fake orders to get at least some of the escrow amount back.

[LoyceV]

Another idea is to see the $10k escrow as a per-person max cap, so the $100k is treated as a $10k deposit along with the $7k one.
$100k victim receives $5,882.35
$7k victim receives $4,117.65

I think that's even better.

Or how about this scenario (and I think this would be fit for another topic, as it doesn't only apply to your service): let's say an exchanger with an escrow deposit wants to exit scam. Someone deposits an amount large enough to run away. But they don't want to lose their escrow deposit, so they create a large exchange transaction on their own platform, with a signed Letter of Guarantee, and claim to be a victim. That way they get most of their escrowed amount back!

How does one solve this?

I don't think it can be solved, other than being aware of the possibility. So the escrowed amount should never be considered a personal maximum for safe deposits, users should stay at least an order of magnitude under the amount to have any realistic chance of seeing their money back in an exit scam.

[KycNotList]

@TryNinja @LoyceV

You’ve raised a very important point.

We already responded to both affected users yesterday, explaining that compensation amounts will be paid in proportion to their losses, and it would be unfair of us to change the terms now and pay less than promised. But on the other hand, you are right: our website includes a warning advising users not to make individual transactions exceeding the amount of their deposit.

Your theory makes perfect sense, but I think that in this case, the victim who lost $100,000 is a real person-after all. It's unlikely that Tomboy would have committed fraud $7,000.

I think it would be fair this time to contribute a little of our own funds so that the victim’s payout of $7,000 is slightly higher-perhaps we could increase it to $4,100.

But, of course, we can’t keep doing this indefinitely, since this is no small amount for us, and by making this contribution out of our own funds, we’re sacrificing the development of our project. That’s why we need to clearly define the payment rules and post them on our website, so that in situations like this, everything is transparent and clear to everyone.

But here, too, we need to understand that a scammer might not create one large sum, but rather many small ones, so that after the scam, they can request a withdrawal from different accounts.

I would be very grateful for the continuation of this discussion so that you can help us draft more effective rules for distributing deposits in the future.

[LoyceV]

Your theory makes perfect sense, but I think that in this case, the victim who lost $100,000 is a real person-after all. It's unlikely that Tomboy would have committed fraud $7,000.

I think so too. It was a hypothetical scenario.

That’s why we need to clearly define the payment rules and post them on our website, so that in situations like this, everything is transparent and clear to everyone.

I realized in 2018 that the escrow shouldn't return the money instantly when asked, but it took me until now to realize there are more complications when it comes to distributing money to actual victims.

I would be very grateful for the continuation of this discussion so that you can help us draft more effective rules for distributing deposits in the future.

Let's continue here: Escrow funds to "guarantee a service": how to distribute funds after exit scam?

[marto25]

Similar mission — we run a curated directory of privacy-first crypto services, including no-KYC exchanges.

If you'd like to be listed or cross-reference:

NULL_ROUTE Privacy Directory — Free Listing for No-KYC Crypto Services