the chargeback thing finally clicked for me and I want to write it down
the chargeback thing finally clicked for me and I want to write it down, which sounds obvious until you try to state the evidence for it.
A token symbol identifies an asset, not a network. The same symbol commonly exists on several chains with incompatible address formats, and sending across that boundary is generally unrecoverable.
Some chains require a memo or destination tag to route funds to the right account. Omitting it on those chains is one of the more common ways payments go astray.
Network fees are set by chain congestion at the time of sending. They are paid to the network, not to the recipient, and they vary by hour as well as by chain.
If somebody has the same thing measured a different way, post it next to mine and we will see whether they agree.
best — the order this archive was captured in
A test transaction costs one extra network fee and verifies the address, the network and the recipient’s crediting process before the main amount moves.
Asked which networks FGP accepted before ordering and picked the cheapest one at that hour. Saved more than the difference in price.
I would not treat a delayed confirmation as evidence of anything at all. Chains have busy hours.
Which network, exactly?
Which network, exactly?
milan_chukwu is right about confirmations. "Sent" is not a status.
Is the fee you are describing the network fee or something the supplier added?
This. A test transaction on a large order costs a fraction of the fee and removes the whole class of risk.
Correction: that address format is not the chain you named. Worth checking before anybody follows this.
I would not treat a delayed confirmation as evidence of anything at all.
Disagreeing here: that is a network fee at a busy hour and it is not the supplier’s doing.
How many confirmations does it show?
How many confirmations does it show?
Adding the cheap insurance — test amount first on anything large.
the memo field matters on the chains that use one
Agreed. Network first, address second, amount third, and in that order every time.
Escrow is not standard in this space. Wanting it is reasonable; expecting it as default is not.
The transaction hash is the canonical receipt: it is public, verifiable by either party, and it is what a support query should quote.
Escrow is not standard in this space.
This is the check that prevents the only genuinely unrecoverable mistake in this thread.
Sent a test amount first on a large order. Cost me a fraction of a percent and I have done it every time since.
Confirmation took forty minutes on a busy evening and I had already written half an angry message. Deleted it.
Which networks did they list as accepted?
Did the address you sent to match the one you were given, character for character?
Careful, that address format belongs to a different chain and sending to it would not end well.
Yes — the same token symbol on two chains catches people constantly and it is unrecoverable.
- 1How many confirmations does it show?11 comments in this branch · started by u/anya_antonsen
- 2Asked which networks FGP accepted before ordering and picked the cheapest…9 comments in this branch · started by u/niels_lindqvist