I realize the specific fees are subject to change, but so far no proposed fee schedule has been published has it?
I think this needs to be done soon, to give the community time to discuss and make plans.
Although the devs will be the first set of self appointed DPoS 2.0 Delegates (which I think is a wise and good decision), until alternatives can be voted in, how can alternatives determine if they even want to vie for the position without knowing what the fees and specific conditions will be? Are there specific account restrictions (naming conventions), KYC (if so why?) and how many Delegate positions should we start out with? What should the registration fee be?
I don't see why the registration fee of a DPoS 2.0 Delegate (capital D) should be anywhere near what it was for pre-graphene delegates (little d). How much (if any) pay should they receive? I agree with BM that nobody should work for free. What is a reasonable amount since the duties of a DPoS 2.0 Delegate are like a Board Of Directors position, not an hourly laborer. What difference does it make if there are many "frivolous" Delegate registrations, they are nothing special until shareholders vote them in. Thus there's little reason for a high Delegate registration fee to discourage them. Who cares, it makes no difference.
Setting a high registration fee limits who can participate as a Delegate candidate and IMO that's not a good precedent.
Is this community even ready to accept the reigns of decision making power when the devs are ready to pass it on? Is there a large enough group of dedicated, qualified candidates with integrity to fill the slots (however many there will be)?
Perhaps we should come up with Delegate Oath of Office and Minimum Delegate Requirements