Reimbursement proposal/request about proposals

[sqrrm]

I don't know that a different kind of request is necessary for this case. A normal compensation request could be used and would work just as well. The only reason I see to add a specific reimbursement type is to be able to easily differentiate them from compensation requests. Maybe that's worth it, additional work to add the feature should be minimal since it's just the same as compensation request issuance.

No strong feelings if this is worth it or not. Perhaps I missed some important point, if so, please enlighten me.

[cbeams]

I was thinking about this same (potential) problem recently too. I don't have an opinion about how to implement payouts for this within the DAO, but I'd guess that it's not worth doing anything fancy. With regard to proposal #48, this sort of thing could be one reason that we want to keep (at least some) trading fees paid in BTC—so that we can use them to batch-reimburse failed trades, etc as necessary.

[ManfredKarrer]

@sqrrm Yes I think technically its exactly the same as a compensation request but conceptually it is something else and for the user I think its better to distinguish both.
The importance of that depends on the new dispute resolution model we have in mind. We will need a bit longer to get that well thought out and wrtten in a proposal but when we will use that new model we should have it integrated in the DAO as well and not just squeeze it in to an existing feature IMO.

@cbeams Yes good point. But the balance between received BTC and BTC needed for reimbursing for failed trade fees is (should be) very asymetic. And anyway as soon we get a bit more dev power we should try to fix those issues so that they become super rare.
We also can use the current BTC donation fund for that. I will suggest also to add a bonded role for the one who is controlling that fund (me atm).

[ripcurlx]

I'm also not sure if we would/should need a new type of compensation request for this. The only reason for me having a certain type for this would be the case if the volume is so huge on Bisq and we need to add some filtering during the voting process as more and more scammers are attracted to Bisq. But even in that case I'm not sure if the number of requests would be that high that it is not manageable anymore during voting.

[ManfredKarrer]

@ripcurlx I think it is better to distinguish between what we issued for work and what we reimbured because of trade victims (scams or peer not reacting). we show the amount of bsq in the UI and if it would be mixed it think important information is lost.

[ManfredKarrer]

Implemented in bisq-network/bisq#1813

[ManfredKarrer]

I will close that proposal as its accepted and implemented.

[ManfredKarrer]

@ripcurlx @sqrrm If you like please update the voting, so its reflect your support as discussed on phone. Might be not so clear if one just reads the comments here...