>
>
> Hold on, now I'm confused about something. You said the buyer could go
> in and lock the payment. So now neither buyer nor seller has access to
> the funds.
>
> At this point, who has the ability to release the funds?
Hi Patrick,
I described the complete system in one of my posts yester
On Tuesday, June 3, 2003, at 04:49 AM, Danny Van den Berghe wrote:
That is not my job.
Because the chargeback handling page is open end, the merchant can put
anything in
there that will help his case.
My system will be only bare bones reversible spend facility. The bare
minimum.
The 'complaints
>
> > UPS provides an XML interface to their tracking system. So you could
> > automatically key off such events as (1) item shipped (to a
> > certain address) and (2) item delivered. This would, in practice,
> > be enough to implement G.O.D. with what exists today.
>
> ... and great idea. Neces
On Monday, June 2, 2003, at 07:10 PM, Craig Spencer wrote:
Yes, but they are not going to do it (don't ask me why). So if
you want something that is practical and works you have to design
something that does not require their active cooperation.
Great reality check (I expect nothing less from Cra
On 2 Jun 2003, at 18:14, Patrick Chkoreff wrote:
> I am trying to envision a purchasing system where the release of funds
> is very tightly coupled with the physical acts of shipping and
> receiving goods. A well capitalized shipping company like UPS might
> be able to devise a system like this
A friend of mine and I discussed a similar topic years ago about how the grocery store
chains could succeed with an automated
delivery service. One of the topics was locked coolers on the outside of a house like
a large mailbox.
The delivery driver would have essentially held a key with that d
