Escrow jurisdiction

[uchegod-21]

I make this thread to know the the jurisdiction of escrows here in Bitcointalk. What do I mean?
Imagine that a project escrows $20k with a reputable escrow agent here in the forum and based on the escrowed amount, I decided to swap $5k with the project, and coincidentally the project scams. I'll confidently launch a refund request from the escrow, just to know that a non forum user was also scammed about $30k is hoping for the same escrow for compensation.

I want to be selfish here. BTT is the oldest cryptocurrency forum in existence. We are big, can't the escrow here be to protect just the forum users?
Or the escrow can be two;

Pool 1: For Bitcointalk users
Pool 2: For the general public.

If pool 2 is exhausted, the escrow agent will be so sure no one was affected in the forum before using pool 1.

I mean, let's protect us first before others.

[rat03gopoh]

If the escrow also offers services outside the BTT forum, publishes them on its own site, and there is no upfront something contract like a members-only protection fund, those funds should be available to all victims regardless of forum membership status.

[Trêvoid]

Hi, you can check my active intermediary model here: https://trevoid.com/threads/ghostswap-non-custodial-privacy-first-crypto-exchange.25/post-29

While protecting the Bitcointalk community is a noble goal, my Active Intermediary model provides a more robust technical solution. It replaces the "who gets paid first" dilemma with a "who is protected by the process" framework.

I Trêvoid acting as an active intermediary, instead of holding a deposit to be distributed after a disaster, I am integrating the escrow into the workflow.

I currently hold a $2,000 security deposit from GhostSwap.

I know active Intermediary model I have implemented requires significant manual effort, but it shifts the focus from reimbursing losses to preventing them.

If we want to protect community , we have to do the work. I choose to be the gatekeeper, not just the vault.

[Darker45]

I'm sure such an escrowed amount comes with a detailed contract.

And if an instruction is given to the escrow that the fund is pretty much for all users who have valid claims, then the refund is probably done on a "first come, first served" basis, although it must be a pain in the neck for the escrow when he/she's holding only $20,000 and the first claimant has a valid $30,000 claim.

But I don't think it's wiser to collect all the claims first within a certain period of time before deciding who gets how much. It must be messy.

[Trêvoid]

I'm sure such an escrowed amount comes with a detailed contract.

And if an instruction is given to the escrow that the fund is pretty much for all users who have valid claims, then the refund is probably done on a "first come, first served" basis, although it must be a pain in the neck for the escrow when he/she's holding only $20,000 and the first claimant has a valid $30,000 claim.

But I don't think it's wiser to collect all the claims first within a certain period of time before deciding who gets how much. It must be messy.

how would you prevent the scammer from reclaiming their own escrow fund via fake victims and fake valid letter of guarantee ?

[uchegod-21]

If we want to protect community , we have to do the work. I choose to be the gatekeeper, not just the vault.

I have gone through your model and it is honestly trying to do something different, but it needs to be heavily refined. The current model might sound cool but I don't think it's the best we can have from it. For instance;

Batch Execution: By splitting a large transaction into smaller, manageable chunks (for example according to security deposits I have $2,000 - with $10k I split into 5 swaps), I limit the blast radius. If the service stops responding, the remaining pending swaps remain in our control, effectively protecting the user from the full loss.

I don't know if you considered a time factor here. If I am to swap $10k worth of coins, I will have to wait for 5x time that I needed to wait for a single transaction. The network fee, if there's congestion and more. This means I'll likely use a whole day for swapping.

how would you prevent the scammer from reclaiming their own escrow fund via fake victims and fake valid letter of guarantee ?

Your won model do not also address this concern.

Addressing the "Exit Scam" Risk: To prevent the scammer from reclaiming their own escrow via fake victims. Since I am the active intermediary, I hold the "source of truth." I do not need to rely on users to report a scam. If anything goes wrong, I will make everything public and create scam accusations.

Does holding the source of truth mean denying someone with a valid letter of guarantee compensation because you suspect they are fake?
What other measures will you apply?

I suggest that if a BTT member is holding an escrow, a percentage even if less than 25% should be set aside for forum members.

[JeromeTash]

I don't know if you considered a time factor here. If I am to swap $10k worth of coins, I will have to wait for 5x time that I needed to wait for a single transaction. The network fee, if there's congestion and more. This means I'll likely use a whole day for swapping.

Better safe than sorry. I would rather spend the whole day swapping than having to lose all my funds to the scammer


I think everyone should be compensated regardless of whether they are Bitcointalk members or not. People look up these services through the announcements in the forum and signature adverts, and when they see that there is an escrow in place, they definitely start to trust the service. Now imagine the pain they will go through once the service has exit-scammed but then they are not eligible for compensation because they are "outsiders"

[hugeblack]

It might be better to discuss how to minimize exit scam by highlighting some of the RED flags that were visible in the tomboi campaign, rather than focusing on how to distribute escrow funds, which at best does not cover 50% of the stolen amount.

As for how the distribution will be done, there will be no fair system, so let's leave it to the terms of whoever manages the escrow service.

[examplens]

It might be better to discuss how to minimize exit scam by highlighting some of the RED flags that were visible in the tomboi campaign, rather than focusing on how to distribute escrow funds, which at best does not cover 50% of the stolen amount.

As for how the distribution will be done, there will be no fair system, so let's leave it to the terms of whoever manages the escrow service.

It is very difficult to do exit scam prevention because not everyone has the same habits. As we have seen, there are cases where the user sends $100k in one order even though the escrow only covers $20k. So, he apparently ignored the recommendations to be within the escrow amount.
Perhaps a feature like the one that Splash.tf has, if the daily volume is shown at any time, could show whether a larger order is currently active, which exceeds the escrow guarantee. However, scammers will easily bypass that, too.
Plus, many services don't even decide to escrow funds, even though they prove to be reliable over time.

[Trêvoid]

I don't know if you considered a time factor here. If I am to swap $10k worth of coins, I will have to wait for 5x time that I needed to wait for a single transaction. The network fee, if there's congestion and more. This means I'll likely use a whole day for swapping.

I’m confident it won’t take more than 30–40 minutes. The top priority is completing it safely and avoiding scams that’s what I’m fighting for. I could just say I'm holding escrow funds but I won't.

Your won model do not also address this concern.

I am the active intermediary  I hold the privileged view of the transaction lifecycle. I initiate the swaps, monitor the blockchain, and already have definitive proof (transaction hashes, confirmed receipts, and chat logs) to refute any claims. Scammers can not reclaiming their own escrow fund or do any scams, i will have all proof.

Does holding the source of truth mean denying someone with a valid letter of guarantee compensation because you suspect they are fake?
What other measures will you apply?

since im gatekeeper, i ensure denial of claims is based on objective data , not just suspicion.

For example with GhostSwap

Any users who interact with the GhostSwap directly bypassing our intermediary service do so at their own risk and are not eligible for coverage from the security deposit.


i don't think my method will enable any scams, and we'll see the results.

It might be better to discuss how to minimize exit scam by highlighting some of the RED flags that were visible in the tomboi campaign, rather than focusing on how to distribute escrow funds, which at best does not cover 50% of the stolen amount.

As for how the distribution will be done, there will be no fair system, so let's leave it to the terms of whoever manages the escrow service.

It is very difficult to do exit scam prevention because not everyone has the same habits. As we have seen, there are cases where the user sends $100k in one order even though the escrow only covers $20k. So, he apparently ignored the recommendations to be within the escrow amount.
Perhaps a feature like the one that Splash.tf has, if the daily volume is shown at any time, could show whether a larger order is currently active, which exceeds the escrow guarantee. However, scammers will easily bypass that, too.
Plus, many services don't even decide to escrow funds, even though they prove to be reliable over time.

Do not try to educate the user to be "smart." Build a system that makes it impossible for them to be "too exposed."

Thats what i did and lets see how it will goes.