(1) This is what we currently know about
mobile development:
What's going on with LimeWallet?
i've talked with matias and pablo .. it will ported to 2.0, but this needs time !
Is it possible to deploy BitShares GUI on Android & iPhone?
Yes
Does anyone have any more detailed information?
We all remember the Moonstone case - they invested massively in their alternative GUI development and their plans got unexpectedly derailed by the 2.0 announcement.
It would be a good thing to avoid such surprises in the future. So could we know more about CNX plans in this area?
***************************************************************
(2) This is what we currently know about
SmartCoins being valued at parity:
Can we adjust the settlement price to artificially lower the SmartCoins' value so that it's close to parity?
I am not apposed to a policy of adjusting the force settlement price such that the average of all trades in a given day occur at around $1.00. This would have to be a very slowly adjusted parameter (long term moving average of the premium).
It would produce a currency that has the guarantee that on average it can be sold for $1.00. Perhaps this is an opportunity to create a new asset called BUX that implements this policy. Changing the policy on USD without sufficient warning could be detrimental.
Could we know more about this? This is very important from the business perspective (as it requires different marketing strategy for SmartCoins depending if they're valued at par or above par).
Are we aiming to have SmartCoins defined similarly to roadscape's proposal?
The floor could be lower... for example, if the floor is set to $0.97, then the worst case scenario is that it's still competitive w/ PayPal. If the average premium is around 3%, it means USD will float right around $1.00.
So don't guarantee $1.00 .. instead, offer $1.00 on average, but guarantee that one can ALWAYS get 97% of face value.
***************************************************************
(3) This is what we currently know about the possibility of introducing
a transfer fee threshold related to the BTS value being transferred:
Actually this question never got answered (please let me know if it was) though it has been proposed on several occasions, e.g.:
a transaction with value <= 1000 BTS you have to pay say 5 BTS
if it is higher the normal transaction transfer fee will be applied
Is it a plausible solution for SmartCoins and some UIAs (i.e for those assets which are actively traded so that their value can be determined at any point in time)?
I think it's a crucial issue as this way we could:
- create a friendly environment for business based on receiving small tips
- still maintain a solid financial basis for the referral program
***************************************************************
(4) Is it possible to have
different transfer fees depending on the pricing policy of the referral business?
This is an interesting question from ElMato which never got answered (again, please let me know if it was):
What happens if we set (as a registrar) the network_fee_percentage to 100%
Will the users registered by this registrar only pay $0.04? and nothing to the registrar?
Could a referral business "subsidize" its customers by giving up some of the referral revenue? (e.g. so that effectively a pay-as-you-go user would get a 50% discount while the referrer's revenue stream would be 50% lower)