[BSIP] Percentage-based transfer fee solution based on CER

[fav]

did not have the time to read all of it yet but

hey will need to forgo the referral income on transfers below the equivalent of $2 but will substantially increase their income on transfers above the equivalent of $10. In the range between $2 and $10 they will get on average half of the income they have now. Nevertheless, the main benefit will be indirect: it's much easier to sell a reasonably priced product.

sounds okay to me, and more rational than any other attempt I read.

Go for it.

Note: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,20653.0.html is my recap on the first 100 refs

edit: make it worth to upgrade to premium and the referral system will work regardless.

[abit]

Imo this feature need a bit more work than the "market fees of bit assets to referral program" proposal which BM proposed, so I estimate the price would be $10000-15000 (based on current feature requirement). If we need a 2-tier structure or spliting fees to asset issuers and/or FBA holders it would cost more.

[jakub]

Cooperate with CNX to figure out a fair price and if shareholders agree to fund the feature, you simply take the money and pay CNX through a contract similar to what onceuponatime did, just without all the FBA stuff ..

The thing is, we have not received any comment from CNX yet.
I look forward to that, not because I expect them to actually do the implementation but at the very least we need an estimate how complex this task is from the technical perspective.

[xeroc]

Looks like there are not many people have interest in this topic (to provide constructive comments), which is sad. But it's not too important, all we need are:
* fund (maybe from @jakub or @kenCode, we need this first to attract CNX or other developers)
* developer (maybe CNX, if not, maybe kenCode or Freebie people but better reviewed by CNX)
* set up a worker proposal (not hard to be done)
* votes for the worker proposal (if CNX agrees to develop, this is not a problem, otherwise this would be harder)
* votes for the witnesses who are willing to install the hard-fork once implemented (same to last one)

I still have these concerns:
* Need more incentives for people who want to fund this feature
* Need more incentives for issuers to discuss/enable this feature
* Need more flexibility for issuers to adjust the asset-based parameters
* Need more incentives for developers to implement
* Need more incentives for proxies/stake-holders to vote

How about you estimate the costs to implement and test this feature properly, add a 30% margin and ask the shareholders to fund the proposal through a worker.
Cooperate with CNX to figure out a fair price and if shareholders agree to fund the feature, you simply take the money and pay CNX through a contract similar to what onceuponatime did, just without all the FBA stuff ..
Sure, it involves trust, since you could easily run with the money asked for through a worker proposal .. maybe have it vested over 6 months or split it into milestones to reduce the risk for shareholders. I would definitely support the development of this feature as long as it is opt-in for asset-issuers

[kenCode]

Looks like there are not many people have interest in this topic (to provide constructive comments), which is sad. But it's not too important, all we need are:
* fund (maybe from @jakub or @kenCode, we need this first to attract CNX or other developers)
* developer (maybe CNX, if not, maybe kenCode or Freebie people but better reviewed by CNX)
* set up a worker proposal (not hard to be done)
* votes for the worker proposal (if CNX agrees to develop, this is not a problem, otherwise this would be harder)
* votes for the witnesses who are willing to install the hard-fork once implemented (same to last one)

I still have these concerns:
* Need more incentives for people who want to fund this feature
* Need more incentives for issuers to discuss/enable this feature
* Need more flexibility for issuers to adjust the asset-based parameters
* Need more incentives for developers to implement
* Need more incentives for proxies/stake-holders to vote

 
@bytemaster Our fees for micro transactions NEED to be % based ASAP PLEEEEZE. For example, the voluntary 2BTS donation in the mobile wallets ends up charging you DOUBLE network fees. 32BTS to send the money to someone and another 32BTS to send us the 2BTS donation. We NEED those donations to further the wallet development, provide customer support in the forum and app stores and provide regular updates, etc. The fee on a 2BTS send should only be like 0.002 BTS.
 
What if my daughter wants to buy just a pack of gum at the POS? She would have to pay the 60 cents for the gum PLUS another 20 cents for the fee PLUS another 20 cents if she wanted to donate 2BTS to the developers here? That's some expensive gum!!! see the checkbox:
 

[abit]

Looks like there are not many people have interest in this topic (to provide constructive comments), which is sad. But it's not too important, all we need are:
* fund (maybe from @jakub or @kenCode, we need this first to attract CNX or other developers)
* developer (maybe CNX, if not, maybe kenCode or Freebie people but better reviewed by CNX)
* set up a worker proposal (not hard to be done)
* votes for the worker proposal (if CNX agrees to develop, this is not a problem, otherwise this would be harder)
* votes for the witnesses who are willing to install the hard-fork once implemented (same to last one)

I still have these concerns:
* Need more incentives for people who want to fund this feature
* Need more incentives for issuers to discuss/enable this feature
* Need more flexibility for issuers to adjust the asset-based parameters
* Need more incentives for developers to implement
* Need more incentives for proxies/stake-holders to vote

[fuzzy]

Agreed. This is badly needed.
If I want to send someone a 2 BTS donation or tip, I have to pay like 32BTS or so in fees just to send it. That must be fixed ASAP.
 
@jakub - GREAT proposal thank you!
@xeroc - Thank you for your work on the draft and docs
@fuzzy - Can we please bring this up in the mumble today with BM?
@EstefanTT - I will definitely vote for this too

definitely anning on covering this. 

[jakub]

Agreed. This is badly needed.
If I want to send someone a 2 BTS donation or tip, I have to pay like 32BTS or so in fees just to send it. That must be fixed ASAP.
 
@jakub - GREAT proposal thank you!
@xeroc - Thank you for your work on the draft and docs
@fuzzy - Can we please bring this up in the mumble today with BM?
@EstefanTT - I will definitely vote for this too

And still waiting for feedback from @ccedk and @fav - these are our most efficient referrers and this proposal affect mostly referrers.

[kenCode]

Agreed. This is badly needed.
If I want to send someone a 2 BTS donation or tip, I have to pay like 32BTS or so in fees just to send it. That must be fixed ASAP.
 
@jakub - GREAT proposal thank you!
@xeroc - Thank you for your work on the draft and docs
@fuzzy - Can we please bring this up in the mumble today with BM?
@EstefanTT - I will definitely vote for this too

[EstefanTT]

That's an interesting solution, I would definitely vote for it.

This thread needs more attention!

[xeroc]

Running for a BSIP is much appreciated. i'll review it and publish the draft asap

[jakub]

As a referral business myself, I find percentage-based transfer fees very valuable.

People who are new to BitShares are not going to trust it with any significant amounts of money.
Initially they will want to play with it by putting a couple of euros or dollars into the system.
And this is exactly the range where we utterly fail in terms of transfer fees.
I cannot think of any other existing payment system that asks you to pay a 10% fee for a $1 payment.

[jakub]

Following an initial discussion in this thread, I'd like to propose a percentage-based transfer fee solution, in which the BTS value of a transfer is derived from Core Exchange Rate (CER).

The main goal is to make BitShares competitive for transfers below the equivalent of $5 while keeping the referral program unharmed (or even strengthened).

For more details, please refer to my initial draft for a BSIP:
https://github.com/bitshares/bsips/issues/3

Being voluntary for issuers, the above proposal is actually targeted to the referral businesses: do they perceive it as a beneficial change for the ecosystem and a fair deal for them?