Just like bug bounties but instead of finding bugs in code we reward buyers for finding cuts in listed substances.
We put an honesty policy in place on the markets so that every vendor must disclose all cuts found in their listed substances. Vendors can use reagent tests for testing their stock and whatever the results they clearly state them on their listings.
Now let's say someone buys a substance that has no stated cuts, they then use a reagent test kit and find it has been cut with something. Now they submit a bounty on the listing which gets forwarded to the market staff without alerting the vendor. A mod or member of staff then anonymously buys a small amount of the substance and if they confirm it has been cut a red warning banner gets placed onto the listing stating the cuts found. The mod gets automatically refunded and the vendor gets charged for the buyers bounty reward. Alternatively if staff don't find any cuts then the buyer will lose their ability to submit bounty claims. New buyers also would not be able to submit bounty claims to prevent users creating multiple accounts and submitting claims on every listing.
This would not apply to vendors that openly state cuts in their substances and so bounties submitted claiming already stated cuts would be ignored.
The result of this would be a more transparent and competitive market giving buyers more confidence in what they are buying and less deaths from unknown impurities.
As you probably know fentanyl is killing a lot of heroin users right now, mostly because users aren't aware what they're taking has been cut. It's 10 times more potent than heroin meaning when it's been cut a normal dose of heroin can contain a lethal dose of fentanyl. The problem isn't with fentanyl itself, doctors use it everyday without killing anyone. If the buyer knows what they're getting they know how much they should take and what the effects should be. The problem is with not knowing what's in the substance you're taking which takes things completely out of your hands.
In the legal world we also have situations like this where the food and drink industry gets contaminated. The way we deal with this is to have inspectors that get paid to test samples of products and make sure they are up to standard. There's no reason we can't deploy this same model here on these markets.
Using this method of monitoring user comments the markets can respond to repeat negative comments/feedback on listings or vendor profiles. This can also be used to alert of vendors attempting an exit scam.
This seems like it could pose a huge security risk. Consider the following:
FBI sets up two accounts: one vendor (account A) and one buyer (account B). A listing is created by account A that promises no cuts. Account B buys the cut free item, pretends to test it, and then files a bounty. Now account A is expecting a small amount of that substance to be purchased by site staff. Sure enough, a small order comes in and now the FBI has a lead on the location of a staff member.
Granted, there are some logistical issues that would be to be worked out, such as legitimate buyers attempting to buy from that vendor, and creating account B such that it gets access to the bounty program, etc., but these issues aren't insurmountable.