The OP argument against P2P is a red-herring fallacy, because the issue he warns against is the danger of certain fiat payment types, which he falsely presents as danger of P2P exchanges.
Actually no. This issue
is about P2P exchanges and not about fiat payments.
...
Actually, your post above is also entirely about certain types of fiat payments, and your discussion in the other thread derailed almost entirely into specifically bank (fiat) transfer payments, and the FUD surrounding them.
(
This was really the most sensible post in that discussion.)
We don't make any extra money if more users come to P2P exchanges we recommend, but centralized exchange owners DO make A LOT more money if they can FUD newbies to their exchanges.
And it's easy to prove that the red-herring of P2P dangers is falsely being used by those centralized exchange owners to shill their business and FUD the ignorant to their exchanges:
if one simply meets the counterparty and does the same P2P deals F2F using paper fiat in the waiting room of a bank or fiat payment processor, this whole P2P FUD boogyman disappears.