Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - theredpill

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6
61
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: Worker Proposal Review
« on: November 11, 2015, 05:00:29 am »
Not really because at the current maximum TPS is going to take a while to get the 67108864 tx through and so the network can prevent from happening or maybe decide to put 20k usd and buying more memory

62
General Discussion / Re: Bitshares price discussion
« on: November 11, 2015, 01:25:17 am »
China money?

63
General Discussion / Re: Bitshares price discussion
« on: November 11, 2015, 01:21:55 am »
All coingecko coins are down aprox 10% and bitshares up 5% in dollar terms now

64
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: Worker Proposal Review
« on: November 11, 2015, 12:13:35 am »
Then if the asset paid is not BTS the network could automatically auction that asset to the better bid in lets say 10h period and then split the money to the referal program

65
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: Worker Proposal Review
« on: November 10, 2015, 11:55:58 pm »
If you think about is the taker that is paying the fee anyway, by putting the fee only in the taker you just simplify the system eliminating the need of charge back the fee to the maker every time he cancels one order.

66
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: Worker Proposal Review
« on: November 10, 2015, 11:00:50 pm »
But please let's not charge fees of makes...

By doing this and only 0.1 bts order our network is going to float in bots to capture any diference on spreed, provide liquidity while still charging 0.2 per on the taker side and making profits of it

The makers benefits too because they wanna that asset whatever is and can get for just 0.2% fee!

67
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: Worker Proposal Review
« on: November 10, 2015, 05:29:43 pm »
Thanks for this, its nice to have something of a roadmap going forward.


My feedback:
#2-5 look good.


Regarding proposal #1:

This seems to me to be a very complicated solution which requires additional code to get around spamming. 
Before we do this, do you really think that an order fee of 0.1 BTS instead of 0 would not be sufficient to achieve these goals instead? 

Imo, the problem with the perception of the fees for orders is because they are currently large, but 0.1 BTS would probably be small enough that this would no longer be the case.  At 0.1 BTS, the attacker would have to pay to fill up our TPS with spam, but the fee would seem negligible to traders.  A percentage based fee for trades of 0.2%, plus a 0.1 BTS fee per order (cancelled or not), looks good to me.

I do not think that a 0.2% fee +flat 0.1 BTS would feel different to users than current crypto exchanges.



Could you discuss your thoughts on needing to implement this new system rather than simply change the fee for cancelled orders to only 0.1 BTS?  Are you really sure that a chance to just 0.1 BTS would not be sufficient to solve the problem, or that it would still be perceived as a problem by users?


Thanks!

You read my mind Ander! Who else is with us? I have 1.6M votes currently proxy to fav.

68
General Discussion / Looking for the perfect fee structure
« on: November 09, 2015, 12:06:56 am »
I was thinking on what to do with my money and have an idea about the fees that I guess do not need to develop nothing (no more dilution) and would work for UIAs and SmartCoins as well, improve liquidity and profit.

Let's say I have 5 btc spare that I don't want to trade just now, or wanna a better price for it, where I put then? The answer is: where I trust and do not cost me money for. Because I just gonna wait a better deal. Ok so to the market maker (the ones that provide liquidity by let the maney sitting on the blockchain) we just charge the %MINIMAL_ANTISPAN_FEE% in BTS lets say 1 BTS and then charge 0.2 or 0.3 percent of whatever the taker is paying, if is an UIA, the value we are charging is 0.2 or 0.3 percent and done (not need the rate for pricing). I the same way around If I see a good opportunity sitting on blockchain for me I dont mind paying 0.2 or 0.3 percent, everybody gets happy, and charge nothing more for putting the money in and out or transfers or barrow and cover except for anti span prevention.

if the taker is lifetime member reduce to 0.05%

Please consider doing this, then we will see liquidy building with time, and them profit.
.
What do you thing?

69
General Discussion / Re: Best Exchange Website
« on: November 08, 2015, 05:33:14 pm »
Thank you Valentin

70
General Discussion / Re: Best Exchange Website
« on: November 06, 2015, 02:44:45 am »
I like all of puppies ideas.
I like all puppies ideas too.

71
General Discussion / Re: Bitshares price discussion
« on: November 05, 2015, 12:36:15 am »
Lets do the opposite of what Ander says then, we gonna be rich kkkkk

72
I can do the Portuguese Brazil part.

73
Random Discussion / Re: Motivation Monday #23
« on: September 29, 2015, 09:49:04 pm »
Thanks again mr CLains!

74
Beyond Bitcoin [closed] / Re: Brownie distribution
« on: August 24, 2015, 04:18:07 pm »
The only thing that I found not fair with the Brownie distribution is mumble attendance. But happens for the people that can not attend any mumble on Friday because the time is not good? I for once never attend any mumble but I always listen to it later on and I am always in the forums. Can we find a solution for people like me? That they can prove somehow that they listened to the mumble?

I remember in LTB that in order to prove participation, on their interviews at some point there was a "magic" word mentioned. they could fill then that "magic" word and they proved that way that they indeed listened..

So can BM or Fuzzy do something like this? During their mumble at some point they mention a "magic" word which forums members can then fill somewhere to prove participation? This will be a much fairer distribution I think..

Great idea, I would vote for this.

100 brownies X 5 bts x 4 hangouts at current market cap is more than 10$ a month just to enter 4 x a magic word. It may no feel like it's a lot but there is in this world people living with few money and having internet access.

You don't even have to listen the show if you do it with some friends, you can share the magic word.

There are a lot of people out there clicking on banners, making surveys, watching advertisements to win some satoshis. Much less than what they could have by entering a magic word in some web page.

IMHO it's a bit risky. Nothing will happen tomorrow or in two weeks but it can be in a couple of months.

They are already doing this for a long time and the LTB coin seems to have value, is this happening with them?

75
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: Witness competition
« on: August 17, 2015, 12:56:53 am »
Thank you very much @xerox

The reputation points meaning is to compare witness with themselves, for sake of sorting the reward.

For example:

Block produced 1 pts
Block missed -10 pts
Block unvalidated by sequence of blocks  - 10 pts
Block unvalidated -10000

Others criterias?

With low reputation one would still be able to produce blocks (unless they are voted out by the community or a delegate or the points reaches same arbitrary low value), but the reward will make no sense as business

I read the @arhag post, is almost the same, by I not like the fee or lock money to be fixed, also not like the lost fund part, just stop paying then and ban.

For response time problem we can put on each block a report of the response time of the witnesses of the last two or three blocks. Then define that the response to be considered of the witness is average reported time, plus his own response time, which is the deviation of the vote that he made from average results of others.


Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6