Quote from: examplens on September 08, 2025, 11:27:45 PM

Quote from: snapswap.io on September 08, 2025, 06:37:28 PM

And this is not about being less strict, it’s simply that databases are not universal. Even very "strict" scoring with one provider cannot guarantee the same result across another system. That’s why we’re in discussions with liquidity partners to gain access to their AML APIs, so our checks can align more closely with theirs and further reduce this risk.
So our AML process already minimizes risk as much as possible, but it cannot be eliminated 100% because different providers rely on different datasets.

If the transaction is already on hold with you while it is being checked, why can't you ask the LP to also check the AML score before you take any action, regardless of the refund or continuation of the swap?
You know that some of the most useful liquidity providers often do not release funds even after the client passes the KYC procedure?

Thank you for your question. Unfortunately liquidity providers only run their AML checks once they actually receive the funds, it’s not possible to have them pre-check coins.

In the rare cases where a liquidity partner does require KYC, we work together with both the partner and the user to solve the issue. Normally, once the requested documents are provided, the funds are released. I fully understand that this is not ideal, which is why we’ve built our system to minimize such cases as much as possible.

Quote from: God Of Thunder on Today at 01:29:27 AM

Quote from: snapswap.io on September 08, 2025, 05:01:18 PM

If we could be completely sure that once our AML check is passed, the liquidity partner would never freeze the funds, then yes, we could call ourselves a 100% no-KYC exchange. But in reality, every liquidity provider or exchange uses their own compliance parameters and different services. AML scoring software works by maintaining large blockchain address databases and labeling them with different risk categories. Each provider builds and updates their own database, and sometimes one provider might be slower or faster than another in adding new flagged addresses. That’s why two different AML systems can give slightly different results.

The explanation makes sense. But the community is more careful with this type of exchange because of what exemplens asked in his latest post above. The liquidity provider still doesn't release the funds after the user completes the KYC. In such cases, the exchange that operates the business gets the negative flag, not the liquidity provider. So, you have to be careful with it.

Reputation is everything in this business. Once you ruin your reputation in a community for such a reason, people may check your reputation, and you are unlikely to get any customers from that specific community.

Quote from: snapswap.io on September 08, 2025, 09:51:54 AM

We also warmly welcome everyone to try our service make trades and share an honest review with suggestions, for UI/UX as well as technical parts. every bit of input helps us move forward and improve.

I am afraid that most people do not want to try new services until they get good feedback or build some reputation. If you are looking for honest feedback and reviews with suggestions, I would recommend launching a short review campaign in this forum.

Hello, and thank you for your thoughtful feedback.

You are absolutely right that reputation is everything in this space. That’s why we focus on being transparent and sharing detailed information about how we handle the exchange process. As I mentioned earlier, our long-term focus is to rely more on our own liquidity and DEX integration.

Quote

I am a campaign manager who can help you run a campaign that fits your budget. Please expect a private message from me.

I really appreciate your offer, though I’ve already spoken with Royse and we’ll be starting a campaign with him soon.

Right now we’re focused on fixing some post-launch bugs, but campaigns are definitely in our plans and I agree that building reputation through reviews is very important.

Thanks again for the advice and for reaching out.