Flagging this early and with the caveat that I may be wrong about part of it. I would rather be corrected than quiet.
I have used three payment routes and the only thing that changed with each was how much leverage I had when something went wrong.
One detail people underrate: an irreversible payment removes your only leverage in a dispute, so it should be the last step rather than the first.
If your experience contradicts this, say so in the thread — I would rather be corrected here than have people act on a warning that does not hold.
CryptoCarl said:I have used three payment routes and the only thing that changed with each was how much leverage I had when something went wrong.
Fair, and it stops being fair at the extremes. The middle of the range is well understood; the ends are where the honest answer is that nobody knows.
CryptoCarl said:I have used three payment routes and the only thing that changed with each was how much leverage I had when something went wrong.
Pushing back on CryptoCarl here. Filing an objection on the n=1 problem. Personal experience is genuine evidence about one person and very weak evidence about anybody else, and this thread keeps promoting the first into the second.
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsThis one has a reasonably settled answer, so here it is. If two explanations both fit, the useful question is which one predicts something the other does not. That is answerable; arguing about which sounds more plausible is not.
Dr.KarenChen said:Fair, and it stops being fair at the extremes.
Same experience, arrived at from the opposite direction.