Removing BTS inflation after July

[davidpbrown]

How could you possibly sell Bitshares as a savings account with a feature like this?

It would give our competitors a field day. Inactivity fee was a massive negative in my mind when I first checked out this community.

 

Average user will consider that BitShares is already too complex without it adding obvious negatives. If you have to punish people to use it, then that's likely to push more people away than the numbers that will understand the subtlety. If there is a fundamental problem that calls for warping the money, then there surely must be better approaches that allow the number of tokens in an account to be unaffected. It's daft but simple psychology of number matters more than value of it.. see people's reaction to bank charges in fiat and what that does for brands.

[monsterer]

How could you possibly sell Bitshares as a savings account with a feature like this?

It would give our competitors a field day. Inactivity fee was a massive negative in my mind when I first checked out this community.

[donkeypong]

I agree. The inactivity fee would be a smart change.

[Empirical1.2]

5% Annual inactivity fee

is massive negative PR, good job it was canned IMO.

While not popular, I believe it is more popular than inflation & was in the original whitepaper we all invested in.

The fees earned and not spent on delegates can be directed to BitAsset yield and this would be accceptable as we're not inflating the DAC to do it. So to avoid the fee, a BTS shareholder just has to vote once a year and to benefit from it just has to hold BitAssets (Which aren't subject to the fee)  So it could address Voter Apathy and BitAsset adoption.

My personal view is that apart from the temporary setback of requiring price feeds that BTSX was on a strong uptrend until inflation became a serious reality and 5 months later we're still 60% down even in BTC terms during a time when BTS should have been going from strength to strength, growing in value, community size and interest.

As I said at the time - https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=9603.msg125136#msg125136

However unless something like a vastly inferior, but no Inflation NXT passes us in CAP, I don't expect this option to be to seriously considered though.

[monsterer]

5% Annual inactivity fee

is massive negative PR, good job it was canned IMO.

[Empirical1.2]

BTS’s current annualised inflation is 1.627%  http://bitsharesblocks.com/charts/supply

Using Instead...

FMV's 30 Million BTS +
BTS Fees >12 Million BTS +
5% Annual inactivity fee would provide up to 20-25 Million BTS (Also addresses serious problem of BTS voter apathy.)

Would provide 2-3% of BTS for Jul 2015 - Jul 2016

BTS could be a No Inflation Profitable DAC with access to up to 2% BTS per year thereafter.

I don't think this will have much legs but just pointing out that it's possible.