It is really unfortunate that the creation date of the account is no longer displayed.
Signed date and creation date are two separate metrics whereas the latter has been established and has been around for a long time.
The account creation date was THE METRIC to find a trader that has been on the platform a long time.
“Not signed” sounds very bad, but “Account created 700 days ago, but not signed” would be trustworthy.
It is unfortunate to reassign the meaning of the term Payment account age. Bitcoin also has two fields for the old and the new transaction id: txid vs. hash
A mix of the two ages is now used. Signed age is used for buying using risky methods, and to become a signer, most other methods still use the account age. I think the difference hasn’t been made completely clear everywhere since the concepts are now so mixed. I agree it’s not great.
I have too agree
From what I gather, for my OLD account with multiple transactions. and Zero issues. Is not signed
To become signed I need to make a deal with a signed person.
Presently the only signed account I could sell too is at an 8.5% rake on the price.
That’s a damned joke and is essentially “you want a check be ready to pay b*tch”
Where as before this update I had an old account that at least gave it credibility.
Unless I misunderstand this. I’m unaware of how to get my account signed.
And I agree, the “age of account” no longer being showed is really annoying as I never sold to young accounts before. Now I have NO IDEA if they are seasoned or a brand new throw away scam account!
the fact that the the creation date is not displayed is a bug that will be fixed.
But it is true in a free market the Latin proverb caveat emptor applies, but in order to do so many metrics have to be available. Some may be attacked by sibyl attacks, but probably not all at once and it is in the responsibility of the participants to be prudent in the decision making.
Taking away one of the best established metrics (former account age) and replace it if a new not tested one, was a centralist act, that must be amended.
Maybe it was a democratic process within the DAO, but Bitcoin is not democratic, because this decision applies coercion to the existing users and they are disadvantaged; democracy is coercion.
Bisq and the DAO are a social experiment and we should learn from this mistake.
Maybe it was a democratic process within the DAO, but Bitcoin is not democratic, because this decision applies coercion to the existing users and they are disadvantaged; democracy is coercion.
I am afraid Bisq is soon a very small and closed mob.