[Warning] the "send it again and we will refund the first" message is always a scam
the "send it again and we will refund the first" message is always a scam, and I want to be careful to separate what I measured from what I felt.
The sequence that makes this boring, which is the goal.
Ask which networks are accepted before you order. Pick the one with a sensible fee at that hour. Paste the address rather than typing it and verify the first and last several characters. Check whether the chain requires a memo. Send a test amount if the total is large. Wait for confirmations before treating anything as done. Save the transaction hash with the order reference.
Seven steps, most of them seconds long, and between them they eliminate every failure mode that gets posted on this board.
The one mistake that cannot be undone, and why it keeps happening.
The same token symbol exists on multiple chains. The wallet interface shows you the symbol prominently and the network in small type. Sending on the wrong chain to an address that looks perfectly valid usually means the funds are unrecoverable by either party.
The protection is procedural rather than technical: confirm the network in writing with the recipient before sending, verify the address format matches that network, and send a small test first. None of that requires understanding the chain — it requires treating the network field as the most important thing on the screen, which the interface design does not encourage.
What is and is not the supplier’s fault, since this board generates unfair complaints.
Not theirs: the network fee, chain congestion, confirmation time, the rate moving between quote and send, and a payment sent on the wrong chain. Theirs: which networks they accept, how quickly they credit a confirmed payment, and whether the address they gave you was correct and communicated clearly.
Keeping those columns separate makes the reports here far more useful. A thread titled "supplier took my payment" that turns out to describe forty minutes of unconfirmed transaction helps nobody and follows people around for years.
Research-use-only material is not approved for human use and nothing here should be read as a recommendation to use it.
best — the order this archive was captured in
The transaction hash is the canonical receipt: it is public, verifiable by either party, and it is what a support query should quote.
Retitled from an accusation to a description while the confirmations catch up.
Asked which networks WXT accepted before ordering and picked the cheapest one at that hour. Saved more than the difference in price.
Memo requirements are chain-specific. The chain you are describing does not use one.
Pasted rather than typed the address, then checked the first and last six characters. Habit now.
[removed by moderator]
Sent to the right address on the wrong chain years ago. Nothing to be done. That is the lesson I paid for.
Correction: that address format is not the chain you named. Worth checking before anybody follows this.
Correction: that address format is not the chain you named.
gradient_goblin is right about confirmations. "Sent" is not a status.
Is the fee you are describing the network fee or something the supplier added?
Nearly sent on the wrong network. The token symbol was identical and the address format was the only clue.
Small fix — that is the network fee, not a supplier charge. The distinction matters for the complaint you are making.
the supplier cannot reverse it and neither can you
Confirmation took forty minutes on a busy evening and I had already written half an angry message. Deleted it.
ask which networks they actually accept before you order
Did the address you sent to match the one you were given, character for character?
- 1Pasted rather than typed the address, then checked the first and last six…6 comments in this branch · started by u/nabila_espinoza