Quote from: Royse777 on Today at 12:51:23 PM

Quote from: 1miau on Today at 12:25:46 PM

It's different for ChipMixer. ChipMixer isn't an escrow fund, it's for ChipMixer's Signature campaign.

It still was escrow fund by definition.

From what was started publicly, it wasn't escrow for any refund, just Signature campaign weekly rewards. Completely different from Whirlwind.
And when it's an escrow fund, it's even more controversial that the funds are getting sent now. Funds getting sent means ChipMixer came back? Address got hacked? Something else we dont know yet?
For an Escrow fund it is essential to be handled properly, especially after things are unclear.

A good example how an escrow fund can be managed professionally in a messy situation is whirlwind's Escrow fund managed by minerjones (and Hhampuz).

If we don't fix any uncertainties, much more controversies will happen again.
And I'm saying that as a supporter of escrow funds. Maybe every project doing a Signature campaign can provide an escrow fund and in case of an exit scam, losses could be covered. Most likely, such a procedure would reduce risks of exit scams, too.

Quote from: Royse777 on Today at 12:51:23 PM

Making a written contract like not claiming the money after x days/weeks/years will result xyz can be a good idea though. I have done it with few of my clients but it was more formal like -
If the project end up with bad reputation and communication disconnected for x months then you (project owner) do not owe anything from the escrow fund. It will be use to cover loss of the campaigners and management business.

+1
That's a good suggestion how such a deal could look like. Service and Escrow provider agree to a set of publicly available rules, where (best case) every possible scenario is covered.
It's a great idea to incentive honest services.