It's not too good if one winner wins all prizes.
Some improvements:
* to be qualify for reward, the price should be within say 3% of feed price
* when distributing the reward, weight by for example duration*quantity but not by quantity only (what if a whale places orders every block? so a minimum duration is needed? if 10 minutes is too long, how about 1 minute?)
* weight by log(quantity) instead of quantity so smaller participants will earn relatively more rewards than whales (decreasing edge effect). (but what if a whale places thousands of orders?)
Thoughts?
//update: edited the 2nd rule
3% of feed price - it should be set by market forces, not by comitee. too small and it wont work,
too big and it is useless.
why small participants should earn more ? give more to the poor ?
It's a double-edged sword.
If we are not sure whether it will benefit the system, we need to limit the possibility of harming the system to lowest.
We need to encourage whales to do good things, discourage whales to do bad things, although it's free to do anything in a free market.
Last time when the committee placed more than 5K$ of bitusd onto the market with 8% premium, the orders were eaten in minutes. Some whales don't want the system has liquidity.