Bitcointalk Escrows - Trade Safely!

[bitpop]

This is called multisignature trancactions: buyer commits money into a 2-of-3 transaction with the seller and a third-party arbitrator. If transaction goes smoothly, then both buyer and seller sign the transaction to forward the money to the seller. If something goes wrong, they can sign a transaction to refund the buyer. If they cannot agree, they both appeal to the third-party who will arbitrate and provide a second signature to the party that it deems deserves it. This is very safe and I prefer to use such transactions instead of third party escrow when the seller doesn't mind.

I wans't aware of such existing escrow service, thanks for further explaining it out. Are there any cases or risks that multisig escrow may not work? Maybe it would be good to raise awareness for multisig escrow, especially after the recent incident, to prevent this from happening next time. It seems a little complicated to me, or is this the reason why users don't use this? Would be better multisig escrows were used instead.

Bitrated can be scammed if I pretend to be one of the parties, then I'll have 2 of 3. Or I collude with a party.

Though as someone else said, I'm not interested in looking over my shoulder for the rest of my life. I have enough issues of my own than bitcoiners trying to kill me. Also I do it for the community, honesty is key.

Danny hamilton swears I'll scam. I don't know why. The only reason I'd ever disappear is if I died. Also, if I seem online all the time, it's because my browser is on auto refresh. So I'll be online until the computer dies long after I'm dead. Bitrated does protect against my death however.

I value someone's 0.01 as much as 10k. It's not mine and I don't touch it.

[Blazed]

What a mess this has made with Master-P pulling this crap. Before this issue escrows worked pretty well here and now I think users will try to not use escrow as much. I really hope people do not get scammed due to this shitstorm...

As franky1 is well known for frequently saying:

- snip -
DO NOT TRUST ANY SERVICE OR PERSON THAT YOU CANT FIND, TO SLAP WITH A WET FISH

If you give your bitcoins to an escrow provider, the escrow provider should first be willing and able to provide you with enough information to prove their identify and to visit them if necessary.

When I provided escrow services, I always provided enough information to identify and find me.  Surprisingly, I was never asked to prove that identity, but would have been willing to if I was asked.

If people value such a service, then they'll be willing to pay appropriately for it. If they're willing to pay appropriately, then there will be trustworthy people that are willing to provide such a service in exchange for an opportunity to be rewarded for their trustworthiness.  Unfortunately, I found when I was offering the service that it wasn't very valued by most users.  As such, the few pennies a month that I made in tips wasn't enough to justify the amount of time and effort that I was putting in to securing funds and facilitating agreements.

I am starting to think that escrows should be vetted (I know JohnK used to handle that back a few years ago). Maybe have an admin or someone extremely trusted verify identities?

[bitpop]

Danny Brewster, Mark Karpeles, etc were vetted and public and still stole everything.

[hedgy73]

What a mess this has made with Master-P pulling this crap. Before this issue escrows worked pretty well here and now I think users will try to not use escrow as much. I really hope people do not get scammed due to this shitstorm...

As franky1 is well known for frequently saying:

- snip -
DO NOT TRUST ANY SERVICE OR PERSON THAT YOU CANT FIND, TO SLAP WITH A WET FISH

If you give your bitcoins to an escrow provider, the escrow provider should first be willing and able to provide you with enough information to prove their identify and to visit them if necessary.

When I provided escrow services, I always provided enough information to identify and find me.  Surprisingly, I was never asked to prove that identity, but would have been willing to if I was asked.

If people value such a service, then they'll be willing to pay appropriately for it. If they're willing to pay appropriately, then there will be trustworthy people that are willing to provide such a service in exchange for an opportunity to be rewarded for their trustworthiness.  Unfortunately, I found when I was offering the service that it wasn't very valued by most users.  As such, the few pennies a month that I made in tips wasn't enough to justify the amount of time and effort that I was putting in to securing funds and facilitating agreements.

I am starting to think that escrows should be vetted (I know JohnK used to handle that back a few years ago). Maybe have an admin or someone extremely trusted verify identities?

Yes thats a good idea. Perhaps if the top people on the forum obtained verified recommended escrows personal information that would reduce the likelihood of them pulling off a scam because a dox would be an extremely good deterrent.

Perhaps this is where theymos, BadBear etc. could provide the assurance. As an added security perhaps escrows should deposit say 25 or 50BTC with these people as security also. Escroes would need to charge a decent fee though to justify their time and held security.

Tbh this subject feels uncomfortable for me because I trusted master-p even though I didnt have any escrow dealings with him. I also trust you Blazed, OgNasty, Mitchell and all the others on the trusted escrow list: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=855778.0

Apart from master-p obviously until the recent accusations are resolved.

[Blazed]

Well, I doubt a few of the escrows would want to provide their info and rightfully so. I really do not know what the best solution is as they all have their issues.

[hedgy73]

Well, I doubt a few of the escrows would want to provide their info and rightfully so. I really do not know what the best solution is as they all have their issues.

I dont know either, its a tricky one.

[Blazed]

Well, I doubt a few of the escrows would want to provide their info and rightfully so. I really do not know what the best solution is as they all have their issues.

I dont know either, its a tricky one.

Agreed...
Thinking I am probably better off just not bothering to escrow. I do not make much doing it and it is always time consuming.

[hedgy73]

Well, I doubt a few of the escrows would want to provide their info and rightfully so. I really do not know what the best solution is as they all have their issues.

I dont know either, its a tricky one.

Agreed...
Thinking I am probably better off just not bothering to escrow. I do not make much doing it and it is always time consuming.

I would't blame you at all. I've been approached by several people wanting me to escrow a deal and have declined. Its just not worth the possible hastle in my opinion.

Most trades are for -1BTC and at 1% or possibly 2% its just not worth the time.

Personally I can earn more in a few minutes work with my regular job.

Sad to say but escrow isn't worth the time and possible trouble to most people.

Which makes me wonder why master-p was offering 0% or free escrow service? Trust and possible future scam potential possibly?

[Dabs]

That's why I have the highest fee and a minimum. When I get an escrow contract, either I was the last one available, or ... maybe they trust me. I dunno. I'm only getting a few now.

Edit: And I force people to take a few hours or even a day to confirm the trades (online) or shipping times (if they mail stuff.)

[Quickseller]

What a mess this has made with Master-P pulling this crap. Before this issue escrows worked pretty well here and now I think users will try to not use escrow as much. I really hope people do not get scammed due to this shitstorm...

As franky1 is well known for frequently saying:

- snip -
DO NOT TRUST ANY SERVICE OR PERSON THAT YOU CANT FIND, TO SLAP WITH A WET FISH

If you give your bitcoins to an escrow provider, the escrow provider should first be willing and able to provide you with enough information to prove their identify and to visit them if necessary.

When I provided escrow services, I always provided enough information to identify and find me.  Surprisingly, I was never asked to prove that identity, but would have been willing to if I was asked.

If people value such a service, then they'll be willing to pay appropriately for it. If they're willing to pay appropriately, then there will be trustworthy people that are willing to provide such a service in exchange for an opportunity to be rewarded for their trustworthiness.  Unfortunately, I found when I was offering the service that it wasn't very valued by most users.  As such, the few pennies a month that I made in tips wasn't enough to justify the amount of time and effort that I was putting in to securing funds and facilitating agreements.

I am starting to think that escrows should be vetted (I know JohnK used to handle that back a few years ago). Maybe have an admin or someone extremely trusted verify identities?

The problem with this is that most of the time, it is not an open and shut case that an escrow is pulling an exit scam (as is the case with master-p). One example of a not clear case of an escrow scamming would be when funds held in escrow are lost and the escrow agent needs some time to come up with the funds to reimburse the parties he was providing escrow for. Another example of a not clear case of scamming would be when an escrow makes a decision in a dispute that someone (or a group of people, or someone with a number of accounts, or a group of people with a number of accounts) who is very good at making a lot of noise does not agree with, and may or may not have been made in bad faith.

re: making it possible to find the identity of an escrow agent -- for the most part it would be trivial to provide a fake identity to those that ask, especially if an identity never needs to be verified in person, so providing an identity would probably, in many scenarios give a false sense of security when zero additional security results. I also believe that Mark  (however you spell his last name) of MtGox's identity was publicly known, but this did not stop him from embezzling large amounts of customer funds (this ignores the fact that he lost 800k BTC of customer money due to security breaches), and I believe that maidak's identity was public prior to him scamming for thousands of dollars. On the other hand, the identity of the likes of John K., OgNasty, and Tomatocage is far from public, and I cannot even say with certainty that anyone knows all of their identities.

I would say that a good way to reduce risk when dealing with an escrow would be to ensure the escrow is on solid financial footing (if they have plenty of money of their own, they will be less likely to run away with others' money), and to monitor the amount of money they are holding on behalf of others and avoid using them if this amount is spiking over a very short period of time. OgNasty allows people to see (for the most part) how much BTC he is holding on behalf of others by only (for the most part) having people send BTC to his "signature" address, and while this is a viable option, other options would include making all escrow addresses public by making the xpubkey of their escrow wallet public, and those using an escrow's services would only send BTC to an address that is both PGP signed by the escrow and can be linked to a particular xpubkey belonging to the escrow.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

Quickseller, why the fuck are you even chiming in on how escrows should work?  You ought to have enough sense to just be silent.

[Dabs]

Some time ago, I got vetted by some guy in Hawaii. Then he disappeared. I think SebastianJu would remember. Oh, I remember, it was DZ or DyslexicZombei.

[redsn0w]

Quickseller, why the fuck are you even chiming in on how escrows should work?  You ought to have enough sense to just be silent.

I was also a 'bad' escrow, made a mistake ...  but definitely not like you.

[Timelord2067]

(blah)...

Personally I can earn more in a few minutes work with my regular job.

Sad to say but escrow isn't worth the time and possible trouble to most people.

Which makes me wonder why master-p was offering 0% or free escrow service? Trust and possible future scam potential possibly?

I have a short list of two or three person's I suspect are engaging in slow scams (you hedgy73 are *not* one of them). Not sure which are or are not on the Default Trust, so can't say anything (for fear of being neg-repped like the Cowboy lynch mobs of a few months ago arbitrarily zapping Newbies with neg trust for daring to ask for loans and or un-Escrowed trades) and I'm still a little unsure of the inns and outs here.

The trouble with having a strong hunch is I alas have no proof. (Not yet at least...)

[Timelord2067]

...three days later...

please REMOVE master-p from this thread @marcotheminer, some major scam accusations going on. It looks like he sold his account or something.

Yes remove master-p scam accusation thread here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1306301.0

He's meaning @marcotheminer still lists Master-P on *this* OP (seventh from top of page) as being someone who can be relied on to Escrow.

[Blazed]

Marco - please remove me from the escrow list. Escrowing here requires too much time and effort for no rewards. I am currently holding a few escrows and will release when the deals are complete etc...

[Dabs]

Marco, when you remove the other two, you'll have to move someone back up to the big five, unless you wish to call them the big four. Also, kindly update my fees to 1~2% (0.03 minimum) as per my thread, so you can still place me last.

[Mitchell]

Remove me from the list as well. The people that send me messages (and come from your thread) never read my escrow thread and ask me to escrow stuff I'll never ever escrow (Paypal, gift card and any other fiat related transfer for example).

[Gleb Gamow]

master-P needs to be taken off the list.

[Arcteryx]

master-P needs to be taken off the list.

What?! Why has this not been done already? With all the allegations against him I thought this would of been done since before boxing day. Who is the one who is doing the verification on this DT list any how?