Aside from the 'how to pay' question, there's another serious question entailed in all of this; how does one rationally deploy trust and assess risk in these transactions on the fire. No amount of scrutiny (of the question) will yield a scenario where both parties can operate in a zero trust environment. I suppose an escrow could qualify, but still, both the seller and the buyer end up extending some form of trust to the escrow holder. If you hold a personal check until it finally clears, sure, you as the seller might be extending zero trust, and therefore entail zero risk, but the buyer is extending maximum trust, and maximum risk. So you see, no one on the fire can transact in a zero trust environment.
As a person that sells here on the fire, I've found it beneficial to extend trust to my buyers. This exposes me to potential fraud, but I know my degree of risk, and, I know the benefits of a properly executed transaction that had trust built in as a material part of the transaction. I 'earn' a positive reputation, and so do my buyers.
Now, for the large dollar amount transactions, such as firearms and such, it would certainly be beneficial if the fire had an escrow service, but we don't, and so we end up extending trust anyway. So long as we've done due diligence (buyer and seller), we should have access to a better determination of risk. You can't separate the two.
I'm a guy, I use my head and gut. I've shipped more than a fare share of stuff before ever receiving payment and experienced that same from others.
