@xeroc ,
I started to reply to your replies but I when I finished, I felt sick and I erased all this, as I realized I don't want to do that any more.
We are wasting our time in those endless discussions.
My point is only this: manipulating with the fees should be the last thing on our list, to be considered only after a serious attempt has been made to bootstrap liquidity.
I've shown BitShares to many people, there were many different questions and concerns, but none of those concerns was ever related to fees.
This makes me think that most probably fees are *not* our issue.
But I cannot prove that, just as you cannot prove the opposite.
You are welcome to make suggestions and analysis of specific fees. Speaking in generalities of all or nothing only leads to inaction. If you want to make a case for specific items now is the time to do so.
The rest of the community has decided that manipulating the fees is higher priority than you think it should be. You can buy more BTS and try and change the balance of power though.
I am curious to know what you consider a 'serious attempt' though at liquidity. We been at this 4 months going on 5... what is your definition on this? Why hasn't it taken place since 2.0 began?
Perhaps in your part of the world the fees are nothing to be concerned with. However being a global distributed network in a world of inequalities of economies, there has to be a happy medium. Remember this is about life, liberty, and property for all.. not just the folks in advanced economies of the world.
Anyhow.. we have almost two weeks to get into specific items that people want to reconsider. I am just curious about your comments about serious attempts not being made and how that might look in lieu of fee changes.