So I setup 2-3 and have been happily using it. What still feels sketchy is the initial part until the vendor accepts.
You send the bitcoins to a HANSA owned temporary wallet until the vendor accepts the order. (for info see "The order steps explained")
The main reason as a buyer to use multisig instead of escrow is to not trust the market in case of an exit scam. That point is weakened a lot through this step, since the market can exit scam all pending (paid but not accepted) orders.
In 2-2 this step is a necessary evil, since if the vendor doesn't respond at all, the 2nd signature is missing and the coins couldn't be recovered.
In 2-3 you can simply get the coins back by using your own key and HANSA uses theirs if the vendor doesn't respond or declines the order.
So why the (sketchy) extra step when using 2-3?
(This post has also been posted in the market specific subreddit)
Edit: I don't quite agree with the flair, this isn't really the typical DNMNoobs question.
Also this seems to be quite frankly a flaw in HANSAs design. As /u/CGMCoop has mentioned, ease of use isn't touched in any way if you put the vendor and the market fee into one multisig transaction.
I'd argue it is quite confusing for beginners, if you read up on multisig the experience on HANSA is very contradiction because of this. It practically appears like not using multisig at all (which it doesn't at first), that's not transparent at all.
This process also isn't explained in the guides, but can be found on the subreddit.
If you deposited directly into the 2-3 address, HANSA would not be able to charge a commission.