Ah ok, I hadn’t realised that. Obviously I just got unlucky with going in at a point when transaction times were getting longer very rapidly. I guess now that many clients use dynamic fees it’s very easy to get stuck at the bottom of the pile because many subsequent transactions will start using higher fees, compounding the issue. Perhaps bisq could incorporate eventually a small derivative component into its fee calculation in an effort to cope with rapid changes in network congestion levels? I do also think there would be a place for allowing the user to increase the fee manually with the minimum set dynamically as it is now. That way I can choose to overpay if I value speed in times of high volatility.
I totally get the decentralized thing and I love the concept; that’s why I’m here not on an exchange. As you say, the tricky thing right now is knowing how to set the variables when things are changing so quickly. As I’ve said in another thread I do think there’s room for allowing buyers to explicitly choose to “break the rules” by cancelling the transaction before fiat transfer. Sure, you can do this by asking the arbitrator, but that’s unnecessary work for the arbitrator (there’s no dispute involved) and it’s extremely non-obvious that this is possible in the UI before the trade expires.