Do you have a link.  Can you stick it here? I've never seen solaver's proposal.

I've been trying to get a referral program taken seriously for almost a year.

 DAC + Referral Program = Viral Gold

So to flesh out this more:  in your referral program, will applications be restricted only if you have a referral code?  In other words an account can use a bingo app if it has inputted the correct refferral code.  How will we know that app brought users in and also generated transactions?

I'm thinking in the proposal that I outlined, certain businesses like coinbase will restrict their features only to their set of addresses.  That way they can know exzactly how many users they are bringing in and how many translations are coming from their users.  In your referral affiliated code, a single address can have referral codes that overlap with other business codes.  Concern is that over time It's indistinguishable which app is genererating the most activity. 

I'm trying to think ahead to what the referral program will be like because I find it quite intriguing.  Right now I'm piecing together the bits of clues that Bytemaster has been dropping on the members.  So far what I can say it sounds like:

1) Incentive businesses to build on the blockchain by transaction fees.  This would likewise consider a increase in the current .5 bts transaction cost. 
2) Will be a one tier referral, similar to Max's.  Meaning fees will not be distributed in pyramid incentive structure.
3) Ideally, benefits to the business will be based on both users signed up and by transaction volume.  Unlike the standing delegate system, this is a direct performance based outcome.  (eg. Not a performer, your just not paid at all.) 

So right now, since the actual referral program is in the conceptual stage, I'd like to kick a few ideas around which may help guide the discussion and possibly enhance the referral program.

The way I see a business on the blockchain being compensated for their direct contribution is by allowing them to register a specific set of addresses.  A Business would pay a fixed fee for reserving these public addresses and it will be associated only with them.  It could be something like as BTS- COMPANY-XYZ-098jfHB5XMLmzFVj8ALj6mfBsbifRoD4miY.  I believe this was done in the Bitcoin universe for Edward Snowden, where every address that had 1snow delimited in the first few characters was all allocated to him.  Thus we can know any transaction done with these addresses, is linked to this businesses.  Like Coinbase, the Business will have the new users that they bring in subscribe to that particular address.  This allows the Bitshares network to pseudonymously track users and the transactions that particular business is creating.  Any program, such as a reddit/gambling/messaging app, uses only that specified set of addresses. Fees will proportionally go back to the business's bts account.  Sure anybody can sign up to these specially delimited addresses, but its a moot point, since the transaction fee that user created will go right back to the Business.

The vision in the end is to have many different and diverse companies offering a wide range of services.  They each would have their own pet addresses.  How are the transaction fees allocated from here?  Bitshares might distribute transaction fees proportional to first users brought in and also to total transaction volume.  I envision there will be a ultimate list of reserved addresses (btssnow, btscoin, btspts, btsnotes,btsmoon,, etc) sorted first by total registered addresses and then by total transactions.  So really the Businesses that have the most registered users on the blockchain and then to most transactions will receive the largest percentage of transaction fees.  This would align with the goal was not only to get users, but users who are active in the Bitshares blockchain. Its not most registered users (since there could be many empty accts).  Or even most transactions.  Sorting it twice allows for a double performance metric: most transactions after most users.

This are just some ideas I thought the the community should think through.  How practical do you think this is?  What do you think of this type of incentive scheme being implemented into Bitshares?

factset might be good alternative to reuters and bloomberg. 

http://www.factset.com/data/datafeeds/realtime

"A trader listened to the firm's "chief" economist's predictions about gold, then lost a bundle. The trader was asked to leave the firm. He then angrily asked him boss who was firing him: "Why do you fire me alone not the economist? He is too responsible for the loss." The Boss: "You idiot, we are not firing you for losing money; we are firing you for listening to the economist." -Nassim Taleb

http://www.businessinsider.com/nassim-taleb-on-economists-2013-12#ixzz3Y9OIsgT8

At the risk of making an appeal to authority I will point out that BitShares X has been reviewed by Dr. Charles Evans  (http://www.pecuniology.com/who.php) who maintains that my economic model is solid.  I only make this appeal to authority to counter the claims that I have no 'authority' because I am "self-taught".   So lets ignore the appeal to authority or lack of. 

kenCode. 

I think what your missing is:
Why Bitshares?  And what brought you here?

IMO allow a new pegged asset to be created which can earn transaction fees / trade fees for its creator, but still require that 51 delegates agree to list it before it becomes active.

That way all these new feeds are essentially voted in by the community, and the best ones still stand a chance to earn some revenue for their creators via collected fees.

Its an idea worth considering.  I'm more favorable to having a high fixed cost (eg. $1000) and a yearly rent of (eg.$500) to unlock the feed feature in a bitasset.  This "Skin in the Game" by the yearly rent will ensure that only serious players get involved and to flush out those who are unsuccessful and cannot pay rent.  Just like your idea, (albeit its a market guardian vs delegate gatekeeper) I think these costs are necessary for preventing dilution via fragmented index markets.  Instead we will have a better outcome of more focused and purposefully branded UIA's. 

Think of it like registering to be a public offering today.  You have upfront costs filing for an IPO.  And once you have IPO, there are yearly regulatory and maintenance upkeep like 10k, 8k reporting, etc.  These stringent standards will benefit the traders and consumers.