The Burden of Communication is Two-Way.
If I have no knowledge of events except for what Tokenly will allow me to see, or in the case of the online Counterwallet, what Counterwallet will let me see; and if what I am allowed to see is incomplete or erroneous, then I shouldn’t be judged as having been impatient, 2 hours after a bitcoin transaction was requested. Thirty minutes is the standard.
There is “no” option in Tokenly to change any fee. There is “no” warning that what you are asking might “not” occur (at least in the next several hours). It just accepts the request. Then when you go looking for the transaction in Tokenly, it is “nowhere” to be found. “Oh kay,” us lay users are easily led to think, “my request must not have worked. Let me try it again…”
But people: “DON’T try it again”, because you’re messing with a tar-pit, and your about to become stuck in it for a bit. And pay extra for every transaction you post that gets “double-confirmed”. Granted, is just a few cents and dollars. But what if that’s all you are trying to transfer anyway? Then your transfer ends up costing more than it is worth.
Impatient? Or lacking sufficient information that is Counterparty’s burden to provide…?
How can I be judged as being “impatient”, when two hours has passed, my funds are still in my account, free to use? It would seem that that is a “bug” whether purposeful or not. Why would Counterparty “not” at least “tell” you that the funds are already claimed by a previous transaction, if not straight bar you from using them? “They do tell you…” No, it depends. Sometimes they only give you “small hints.”
Problem: If you use Tokenly for a transaction, you can continue until you are depleted of BTC fees to double, triple + post the same transaction, all the while being “none the wiser” that these transactions are actually posting and awaiting confirmations. Tokenly doesn’t tell you this. That information is completely unavailable in the app. And if it is, it “not” obvious. Something needs to change about that. Fix it or remove it.
Then go to Counterwallet “any time” before the Tokenly transaction is still unconfirmed, Counterwallet will allow you to double, triple+ spend that money that should be tied up. If a 3rd party organisation only waits to see that the transaction has posted, it could erroneously allow you to continue your merry way when, a few hours or days later, they are going to be telling you, “We’re sorry, but the transaction was unsuccessful.”
Double spend is a term that has two meanings
- as you said, 2 parties are alerted that they have successfully received funds when only one company should have been allowed those funds
and
- this issue, where you are allowed to execute 2 or more transactions on funds whose “first” “confirmed” transaction will be successful (mmm, which one will it be…?). Poor implementation. Poor job educating your clients about the problems that (could and do) await them.
Counterparty’s blockchain explorer is not infallible, which is one of the reasons why there are other solutions out there. Counterparty’s blockchain explorer is smart enough to show you what “eventually” happened. Man they’d get it from the masses if they showed you what was happening before that on double+ transactions.
Chain.so with Tokenly extension shows you that. I had been allowed to send 2 transactions, 2 hours apart, for the same balance. And the “second” transaction was confirmed before the “first”. This, without any part of the active system(s) informing or educating me that such might happen.
Fix this.