Quote from: Bhuz on January 30, 2016, 07:12:27 pm

Quote from: JonnyBitcoin on January 30, 2016, 06:41:29 pm

Quote from: Bhuz on January 30, 2016, 06:33:32 pm

Quote from: JonnyBitcoin on January 30, 2016, 06:13:16 pm

Smartcoin trade/transfer fees are paid to prevent spam and earn income for the reserve pool.
If the user doesn't have BTS the fee pool allows this fee to be made in smartcoin for conveinience.
If this system is only for user convenience then any smartcoin fees collected surely need to go to the reserve pool which is where BTS fees always go?

As far as I understand the only reason for these fees is to allow a trade/transfer  to pay in the trade fee if they don't have bts available.

I think you got the point.

I would say:
"If the user doesn't have BTS, the fee pool allows that user to pay the fee with the market's asset for conveinience."
and
"As far as I understand the only reason for the pool is to allow a trade/transfer to be paid in the relative asset token if the user doesn't have bts available."

So why should these collected fees we are discussing go anywhere else than back to the reserve pool once sold for bts?

Well, the first step is to actually sold them!

After that, yes, refill the pool is probably the more rational thing to do

yes I agree completely. Anything else would be illogical and the committee have no right to spend this on anything other than topping up the fee pool with any excess being returned to the reserve pool.

Yes, while the "accumulated fees" is increasing, the balance of fee pool is decreasing accordingly. So the committee need to periodically sell the accumulated fees for BTS to refill the fee pool.

Quote from: JonnyBitcoin on January 30, 2016, 02:09:39 pm

Unclaimed issuer income / trade fees/ fee pool. @puppies @abit @Akado

These fees collected that the committee has control over and we are debating their use in the main forum.

Why are these even collected? I thought fees were paid in bts and sent to the reserve pool.

what is the point of these fees and why does the committe have control over them.

These fees are mainly inherited from BTS1, when we had "you get what you asked for" market matching algorithm, which means if you want to sell 100 USD for 10000BTS, and another guy wants 90 USD for 10000BTS, the difference (10 USD) will go to the accumulated fee pool.

We no longer use this algorithm in BTS2, so we won't have so many accumulated fees in the future. As you can see, the usd accumulated fee pool accumulated 10 USD in 20 days (see https://cryptofresh.com/a/USD).
(The committee collected those fees 11 days ago, but the proposal to collect fees are proposed 20 days ago. See https://cryptofresh.com/u/committee-account).

Quote from: abit on February 02, 2016, 09:40:26 am

Ask xeroc for funds. Ask xeroc for electing your witnesses so that you can publish price feeds.

Those two can be done even without xeroc's help - each new account in the web GUI is well funded by default.

Not enough.
Xeroc votes with 9.8 billion for his own witnesses (from the faucet account). Every new account get funded with 1 million only. Unless you create 10K accounts and all vote for your witness. You can try create 5K accounts (with a script maybe) so your combined voting power will be higher than faucet.
Or maybe you only need to vote for all current active witnesses + your witness, so the total number of active witnesses will increase by 1, so you're voted in?

//Update: init9 is voted in with 0 votes, so there is at least one witness position available in testnet. However I think it's best if at least 3 witnesses provide price feeds to a MPA.

Or you can cooperate with ShareBits.io, they provides such service. Contact fuzzy or some Freebie people in this forum. https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/board,108.0.html

and I do get the other side as well -  selling something ( the 20% prepaid fees) and paying the promoter 80% ( 4x the price of the product itself) as an incentive for him, is more than odd, some might call it Ponzi/scam whatever.
So do not interpret this as me being in the LTM camp at all.

That's called "sales margin" (according to someone's post). When you buy a nice suit from a shop and paid $500, how much do you think the shop will earn (by promoting it)? Cost for the suit is perhaps less than $50.

@abit , have you got a rational explanation for the 90-day vesting period in case of LTM?
What kind of abuse is it supposed to prevent?

I have no idea..

Quote from: abit on February 02, 2016, 12:13:59 am

Quote from: jakub on February 02, 2016, 12:08:19 am

Quote from: merivercap on February 01, 2016, 11:43:39 pm

Instead of 20cents, LTM's pay 4 cents to the network so it was a way to recoup the difference.

Not true, IMO.
Both non-LTM and LTM users always pay 6 BTS (=20% of 30 BTS) to the network.
So there is no difference to be recouped.

@abit , could you confirm this^?

Yes, I can confirm this.
But I think the network (read: stake holders) should get some from users.

Maybe the network should get something, but why on earth 20%?
This is pure profit, not a compensation for anything, as most people think.

And this is important because this unjustified 20% charge (by the network) is a financial barrier that prevents businesses to fully opt out from the referral program.
As we have it now, we make the referral program compulsory to a large degree (causing lots of conflicts within the community) while it could be fully optional.

I do think network should profit (maybe not now but sooner or later we need it).
Currently the network need to pay out 43k BTS to witnesses and 80k BTS to workers every day, but average daily income is only 8k BTS or so, among it about 900 come from transfers, 6k come from account upgrades. If we decrease transfer fee for LTM from 6 BTS to 1 BTS, it means we need at least 6x volume to keep same revenue. If we decrease account upgrade fee to 0, it means we need 54x transfer volume to keep same revenue.

Quote from: merivercap on February 01, 2016, 11:43:39 pm

Instead of 20cents, LTM's pay 4 cents to the network so it was a way to recoup the difference.

Not true, IMO.
Both non-LTM and LTM users always pay 6 BTS (=20% of 30 BTS) to the network.
So there is no difference to be recouped.

@abit , could you confirm this^?

Yes, I can confirm this.
But I think the network (read: stake holders) should get some from users.

Looks like you run into a strange state. The active witness list and active committee member list are incorrect. But the block id of head block 2821722 is correct. (This should be able to be solved via --replay-blockchain).

(and I'm sorry that my assumptions of wrong version was incorrect but I kept insisting it)

In regards to the stuck issue, if you don't have another program running and listening on port 8090 or some other required ports, or for some reason the port isn't released cleanly, so current node is blocked from listening on the port / connecting to the network.. maybe p2p.log will help. Or a reboot.

If the non-LTM could get a smaller percentage from referrals, it might encourage them to go LTM to get a bigger piece of the pie once they see it working.

This makes some sense.
For example LTM get 80% from referred user, non-LTM get 30% from referred user and unable to claim until upgraded to LTM.