Quote from: EcuaMobi on August 03, 2015, 08:55:57 PM

Quote from: SebastianJu on August 03, 2015, 08:40:13 PM

Anyway... im open to suggestions. I believe the trust rating should show that trades went well. So if the established members think i should handle it differently then let me know.

I like that $50 policy. The problem I see is that when you receive the payment first (as you always do when acting as escrow) the actual amount you're risking is always zero, regardless of the amount of the trade. Therefore by your logic you should always leave a neutral rating when you're escrowing.

You are right. Though i state explicitly that i only escrowed, so its not that someone can think that i bought something from that user. And the amount would logically show the amount the trade was for. I mean the info fields are there and could be used i think. Since at the end we dont want that someone really RISKS some coins. The chance of being scammed when risking is simply way too high on the forum. So using escrows should theoretically eliminate every risk and no green trust should be given to any involved party then. I dont think thats what the trust rating is for.

Quote from: EcuaMobi on August 03, 2015, 08:55:57 PM

Quote

Risked BTC amount is money that the person could have stolen or did steal. For example, if you do a currency trade where the other person sends first, your feedback for them would have 0 risked BTC and their feedback for you would have risked BTC equal to the BTC value of the trade.

It's my understanding that the field 'Risked BTC amount' for positive ratings somehow says what amount we can trust a user won't scam for because he's already had the chance to scam for that much and didn't. For example if I make some work for BTC1 I usually get 50% beforehand. I receive BTC0.50, I do the job and then I receive the other BTC0.50. The person I dealt with could have scammed me for BTC0.50 after receiving the work, but he didn't therefore I leave a positive trust with a risked amount of BTC0.50.
If someone pays 100% beforehand then the amount I risked is 0. He couldn't scam me in this case even if he wanted to, therefore I don't know whether he's trustworthy for BTC1, BTC0.5 or any amount.

If you escrow a deal then both parties send you the good or payment first to you. In that case you're not risking anything. You don't have any way to know whether they would have scammed if they could. Again, the amount you risked to them is zero.

Though i think even with an escrow there are enough chances of a scam happening. I had those cases too but luckily the truth came to light. So there is still a risk. And that lies in a scammer that can forge the evidences so that event he escrow is scammed. The risk is way way smaller of course but still there. So i think a trade that ended with all parties happy is a good trade and everyone can give each other the hand and say "Yes, good trade, lets do it again." Which translates to me like a first impression of green trust.