Exchanges are only sending to basecoin. Users are worried when receiving stealth txs.

Noobs need the process of confidently receiving stealth funds to be noob-friendly, even grandma, executive, or trainee / intern friendly.

The Vinex exchange very early in Veil history tried sending withdrawals to SV addresses, but customers thought they only received a single Satoshi of Veil as their wallet was locked at the time. This lead Vinex to suspend withdrawals to stealth addresses due to support workload.

If the wallet is locked when processing the block containing the transaction, it will (in the recipient's wallet) have a placeholder value of one satoshi only. After unlocking it is necessary to `rescanringctwallet`. This needs to be automated if a received transaction has been detected, and a friendly message needs to be generated for the GUI QtWallet user and for RPC-using exchanges alike.

My write-up in Discord:

The only exchange that did implement stealth withdrawals was Vinex, early on, but when people began receiving stealth transactions while their wallets were locked and therefore it just looked like they received a (placeholder amount of) 1 satoshi of Veil, support requests increased. It turns out that if your wallet is locked when you receive a stealth payment you have to unlock your wallet and do rescanringctwallet in the Debug Console (or the equivalent command in Terminal).

In the future, so that exchanges can send and receive stealth transactions I would like to see the wallet give a message like "You have received a payment. Please unlock your wallet so the amount can be decrypted." Then it should automatically rescanringctwallet, which only takes a few seconds in most cases. [There would be no need to add "stealth" to describe "a payment", because Veil transactions are normally stealth and eliminating basecoin transactions as a norm, such as from mining pools or to and from exchanges, will achieve this overwhelmingly.]

Much of this, I believe is already planned for the RingCT release, but I am posting this on the suggestion of a user, in relation at least to the friendly notification mentioned in the second paragraph. I don't see any specific related issues although I believe plans and intentions have been previously discussed. Please add any references if found.