# Payment account age

**URL:** <https://bisq.community/t/payment-account-age/8679>\
**Category:** Site Feedback\
**Created:** [November 7, 2019, 6:13pm UTC](https://bisq.community/t/payment-account-age/8679 "2019-11-07T18:13:58Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 6

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![tieck](https://bisq.community/letter_avatar/tieck/32/5_5575768a8748004e209b776fc1b2916d.png) [@tieck](https://bisq.community/u/tieck)\
**Post date:** [November 10, 2019, 9:20am UTC](https://bisq.community/t/payment-account-age/8679/6 "2019-11-10T09:20:59Z")

</div>

As I understand this message:

> [@\[New v1.2.1\] "Bank Account Signed by an arbitrator" - Can arbitrators see our account info?](https://bisq.community/t/new-v1-2-1-bank-account-signed-by-an-arbitrator-can-arbitrators-see-our-account-info/8622/8):
>
> That was an oversight. Next version it will have the account age back.

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.

---

_[View the full topic](https://bisq.community/t/payment-account-age/8679)._