Contact info on national currency account


#1

Is there a reason why ‘contact info’ isn’t included in all the payment accounts? The us money order account doesn’t include an email field.

The cash deposit account includes the email field.

Why is the email/contact field excluded on some payment accounts?


#2

Bisq values highly privacy (it’s one of the main motto).
So, afaik, Bisq demands the exact amount of information needed for the trade … but no more.
If the email field isn’t asked everywhere, it’s because it’s not needed everywhere.

There was a US Postal Money Order trade today,
… so it seems that it works indeed without the email field.


#3

I would argue that including contact info on all payment accounts doesn’t necessarily reduce privacy, especially if it’s optional. Including contact info allows the traders to build a relationship and reduce arbitration. Also, it allows the trader to complete silly AML requirements if they feel the need to do so.

I know this is all devil’s advocate stuff. Perhaps better for github discussion. Of course, the payment method works. I’m just wondering if it could be better optimized for successful trades?

:sunflower::sunflower::sunflower:


#4

Mostly peer to peer communication is not included in Bisq in order to limit the attack surface of social engineering attacks, so I assume that is the primary reason.


#5

@peoples I am all in favor of the “optional” inclusion of contact information, especially in the context of providing traders with another avenue of solving a minor glitch without involving an arbitrator.

In the case of my arbitration, the other party failed to provide the needed email address for a Canadian Interac e-Transfer, which stalled the trade for a few days and consumed a fair amount of my time between messages with the arbitrator within Bisq and posts here in the forum. If I had been able to send some form of communication to the other party, we might have concluded business much faster without burdening arbitrators with such trivial matters.

Another approach could be a secure messaging system within Bisq (that traders can choose to opt in or not). If the problem cannot be resolved between traders via these avenues, only then would we involve arbitrators. My 2 cents. :wink:


#6

P.S. If a secure messaging system were to be implemented within the Bisq software, a notification pop-up could be programmed to appear and remind traders that their communications will be made visible to an arbitrator if one is required to intervene later. I think this would do wonders for ensuring that the parties to the trade “behave” and put forth their best efforts in good faith to resolve any matters that are within their capabilities.

Of course some matters will be outside the traders abilities to solve, necessitating an arbitrator, such as errors in the software, etc. Solutions like this could go a long way to achieving the target of 1% arbitrator involvement (instead of the current 10%) as stated by @ManfredKarrer in another thread.

:sunflower::sunflower::sunflower: :slightly_smiling_face:


#7

Good idea!
Yes we are considering to add either optional contact info or better a chat system in Bisq. We just lack of dev resources atm to work on that.