[Vendor] TFC order #8 — Denmark, 12 days, no drama, receipts inside
Putting a marker down: TFC order #8 — Denmark, 12 days, no drama, receipts inside. Figures up front so nobody has to dig: 12 days. Confirmation took forty minutes on a busy evening and I had already written half an angry message. Deleted it. Nearly sent on the wrong network. The token symbol was identical and the…
Keep every transaction hash in a note file with the order reference. It has resolved two queries instantly.
Cosigning on keeping the hash. It is the only receipt in existence and people screenshot their balance instead.
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.
the memo field matters on the chains that use one
Correction: that address format is not the chain you named. Worth checking before anybody follows this.
send a test amount first if the total is large
Disagree — a quote expiry is normal when a rate is being held. Pressure to decide immediately is a different thing.
quote expiry is a real thing, not a pressure tactic
This. A test transaction on a large order costs a fraction of the fee and removes the whole class of risk.