Preventing vendor exit scams and flip-outs by decreasing market commission rates over time

Just had an interesting thought for marketplace admins to chew on, but it would be a big change.

So get this: a brand new vendor on "DNM2.0" starts out paying, I dunno, maybe 5 or 6% commission to the marketplace on each sale, and maybe even as high as 10% to start out. Every week, their commission percentage is reduced by the market, say 0.05% each week (as an example). This gives a direct profit incentive to vendors to preserve their good name and reputation, and increases the costs of burning a name via exit scam or doxxing a customer or something. At 0.05% per week, that would take about two years to reach 0% commission (from 5% to start), which seems about right (maybe have it bottom out at 0.5% or something just to help prevent vendor self-buys and feedback padding). After it bottoms out, the market could even start paying the vendor weekly bonuses of gradually increasing flat amounts (say, start at $20 and add $2.50 per week). This is worthwhile to the market because having a long-standing prestigious vendor drives business to their site. Obviously the market can't do these bonuses as a percentage of sales, since again, the vendor could self-buy, etc., so it may have to require a certain sale minimum of some kind, maybe only counting buyers of some standing themselves. Hmm I guess that gets a little complicated, but it could be really worth it...

Anyway, I think this is maybe not a terrible idea, and might even be better than the conventional "Vendor bond" system we're used to. It could also be combined with vendor bonds, of course.

Curious as to what folks here think, I'm sure there's some really stupid flaw in this plan that I haven't thought of yet, but I think it might have potential.


Comments


[7 Points] Vendor_BBMC:

Marketplace commissions are never the root cause of exit scams. They are deducted automatically and we don't even think about them.

Personally, I would trade on any marketplace that took 15% commission, but could somehow guarantee not to steal my 85%. Unfortunately, this isn't possible to do in software, because the person owning the marketplace has full control of the code, and root admin access.

My general point of view is that marketplace commissions are generally too low at 4% - 6%. Most vendors couldn't sell drugs or find customers without DNMs, and escrow is the only way that two anonymous parties can trade with confidence.

I like to see big vendor bonds for new vendors on DNMs, to prevent some guy who just grew his first pot plant from becoming a vendor.

I've got an idea which will prevent a few people from getting scammed:- Don't buy from stealth-obsessed one-stop shops

In real life, drugs are a valuable and finite resource. Real drug dealers usually only deal in the one drug they have a (non-DNM) source or "plug" for. That's why I don't sell 84% coke, amnesia haze, pressed MDMA pills, moroccan hash, or ketamine.

"Vendors" who sell everything, bought everything they sell from real darknet vendors. You will never find a real-life "team" who have great sources for every drug and aim to bring you low low prices. If they were so well-connected, they would have heard about darknet markets years ago instead of last month.

Scammers are greedy, so they scam every drug. Scammers are usually psychopaths who don't trust anybody else and avoid responsibility, so they are usually a "Team" or "Crew". All fighting to use the same laptop and having access to the same bitcoin wallet I assume!

So don't buy off exit scammers, and you are unlikely to get scammed. Avoid vendors who say "we" instead of "I", vendors who call you "my friend" in messages, one-stop shops, who are "new. yet experienced somehow". Avoid vendors who talk all day about stealth, but only two sentences about their drugs. Avoid vendors with "pharma", "RX", a country or city name, or a QuickEmart name.

The DutchPharma4U team will scam you. People from the Netherlands don't say "Holland" or "Dutch".

Also, if a vendor says "Be safe", run a fucking mile. He's pretending to be on the same side as you junky scum. "Those police, eh? Grrrr" (shakes fist). They generally don't use drugs. Some high-functioning psychopaths like Pelican_Vendor can use some drugs and not show their true self, but then they get into cocaine and forget which shill account is good cop and which one is bad cop. You won't see a real-life shop owner pretending to be other people. Only scammers sneak about. That's why you KNOW that Pelican will exit scam, and you can hold me to that statement.


[2 Points] None:

[deleted]


[2 Points] pinochetHA:

This could definitely work in making certain types of exit scam cost prohibitive. A possibly odd but probably feasible comparison is Tor guard nodes. By requiring a relay to have good uptime and bandwidth over a period of time before it can become a guard node we force a would be attacker to spend some resources on getting his malicious guard node established. Similarly the would be exit scammer is hit with high commission fees which are going to hurt and slow down his progress. Of course this particular sword is double-edged as he also loses all his progress when he exit scams and must invest his time and money again to become re-established with the increased expenses the commission fees create.

The only flaw I can see with this idea is that it assumes the exit scammer is rational and rationally motivated. For professional exit scammers who do this shit all the time and are planning their next moves, increased commissions will fuck things up. They will do the maths and see how much it hurts them. For a newish but kinda established vendor an exit scam isn't always planned a long time in advance. They can be emotionally motivated by a fight with their girlfriend/family, scared about being caught or influenced any number of other factors, and they can just say fuck it and pull the plug. A 5% difference in commission is not going to even be worth consideration for them. For someone in that situation money in your wallet right now is worth a lot more than some nebulous offer of cheaper commissions over time, which they will only enjoy assuming they invest effort in their business accepting the involved risks and difficulties, don't get caught and their market doesn't exit scam/get busted etc. The thinking of this kind of exit scammer is short term rather than rational and long term.

The system you propose fails well however, as when this "casual" exit scammers realizes how dumb they were to throw away a good rep and decide they want back in they learn the hard way how much it costs to exit scam.

TLDR; Its a good idea and could improve things.


[1 Points] Morvu:

buyers will win? well...i only see vendors increase prices and buyers have to pay..


[1 Points] None:

Markets don't lose out when vendors bail. They have no incentive to combat exits


[1 Points] magicthrowaway12312:

Bottom line is don't FE and you have very little chance of being scammed.

and even then, sometimes a lost pack is a cost of doing business.

It still beats the hell out of actually having to go out and deal with drug dealers IRL.


[1 Points] stickykitty1:

Hansa has a decreasing market commission system, although it decreases very slowly, and I don't pay that much attention to it. Still, every time I reach a new level, I think to myself: all my hard work is finally paying off. ;-)


[1 Points] BrazzerBo:

When you try to act like government you will get corruption.