Editing the sub chapter 'Fee levels in case of misuse'

1 files changed, 7 insertions, 4 deletions

diff --git a/design-documents/012-fee-schedule-metrics.rst b/design-documents/012-fee-schedule-metrics.rst
index e788597d..f7a6f4e1 100644
--- a/design-documents/012-fee-schedule-metrics.rst
+++ b/design-documents/012-fee-schedule-metrics.rst
@@ -185,10 +185,13 @@ However, refresh transactions can be triggered anonymously an unlimited number o
 
 * Abuse due to ``deposit transactions`` is unlikely as the Exchange operator will usually charge deposit fees on every denomination to generate income respectively to cover costs.
 
-* Abuse due to ``refresh transactions`` is possible and requires a differentiated treatment: The normal case for refresh operations is given, when wallets obtain fresh coins for a used coin of higher denomination than the amount to be paid. In this case, an Exchange operator will not charge a refresh fee on payments with coins of unsuitable denomination. Only in the case of abuse the Exchange operator must charge this fee when a malicious party triggers refreshes en masse. These misuse cases are:
-(1.) arbitrary transaction aborts;
-(2.) arbitrary repeated refunds (which, however, must be triggered by malicious sellers - costs are borne on a case-by-case basis).
-In extreme cases of abuse - when an exchange suffers from arbitrarily triggered refresh transactions, the Exchange operator must set the refresh fee or increase it and thus charge all coin owners whose coins were signed by that exchange.
+* Abuse due to ``refresh transactions`` is possible and requires a differentiated treatment: The normal case for refresh transactions is given anytime when wallets obtain fresh coins as change for a spent coin of higher denomination than the amount to be paid. In this case, an Exchange operator will not charge a fee on refreshes for payments with coins of unsuitable denomination. Only in the case of abuse - when an exchange suffers from arbitrarily triggered refresh transactions en masse - the Exchange operator must charge this fee or increase it. The fee charges all coin owners whose coins were signed by that exchange. Misuse cases are:
+1. arbitrary transaction aborts;
+2. arbitrary repeated refunds (which, however, must be triggered by malicious sellers - costs are borne on a case-by-case basis by sellers).
+
+* Abuse due to ``refund transactions`` is theoretically possible and can be treated by introducing or increasing the 'Refund' fee whenever a seller triggers the refund transaction.
+
+* Abuse due to ``wire transfers`` will only be a burden for an Exchange operator when sellers increase the frequency of aggregated wire transfers from the exchange to their banking accounts. This is the case for extremely often triggered wire transfers after customers' deposit transactions in order to receive sales revenues immediately. A good reason to do this may be the seller's need for liquidity. Some merchants might also gain profit from interest rates, if they receive revues long time before they have to pay for their merchandise already sold. As IBAN wire transfer can be costly, it is recommendable that Exchange operators charge the resulting costs to the sellers with the wire fee.
 
 * Abuse due to ``closing transactions`` and the involved remittances (withdrawing to the wallet failed within the given time frame, Exchange has to wire the value to the originating account) burdens the Exchange operator with costs for wire transfers; to prevent this, the Exchange operator can introduce a fee by adjusting the **closing** variable.