Fee reimbursement for trade Xo27vzoy

[cbeams]

Maker: a80317e25e8b975af1ed3d337185fa73f186437dabdbda88d5a195184f451b2a
Taker: 9849425da8c0a13f7382cfdd97082814c9241c6ce6f34111666098de003594be
Deposit: 1e4a385ecedf9a6cb32ec1cc1be59c94940dc493b3570bb1faa39c6901cdb7ec

Deposit transaction was not broadcast. The above deposit transaction is for a different trade (known issue). Lost maker and taker fees will be reimbursed with #101.

[cbeams]

@KanoczTomas, this one is an example of the bug I mentioned where a previously valid deposit transaction shows up in a failed tx. If you follow the maker and taker transactions in a block explorer, you'll find that they never make their way into a deposit tx. And if you work backward in a block explorer from the deposit tx shown above, you'll find that completely unrelated maker and taker transactions feed into it. You'll also find that the deposit tx is older than the maker and taker txs for this trade, which is impossible.

So, in the end, you can just follow the instructions in the description above:

Lost maker and taker fees will be reimbursed with #101

Hope the explanation above helps. Like I mentioned, it's a nasty bug, and pretty confusing the first times you run into it.

Let me know if you have further questions (here or in Slack).

I'm putting this back in the TODO column, as it should be straightforward to process now.

[KanoczTomas]

Ah ok. thanks for the clarification! The explanation is perfect ...

[cbeams]

Closing as reimbursed via the batch transaction documented at #101 (comment).