Show Posts
436
General Discussion / Re: [COMMITTEE INPUT REQ.] Fee Schedule for Shareholder Consultation
« on: February 25, 2016, 04:02:33 am »1. Please keep in mind that lifetime members get 80% cash-back. Worker proposal is a LTM-only feature. So a 150$ creation fee means $30 for them. Is it really that expensive? Or you're just too miserly/lazy? If you're able to get your worker voted in, you can always ask for reimbursement of the worker creation fee by including it in the payment.I agree that $150 is way too high. [...] The cost should be just high enough to ensure serious proposals, but without being a barrier. Don't forget that a cost like this will be more of a barrier in some localities than in others. So I think $25 would be a better starting point. If we get too many unserious proposals, then we can raise it in the future. But I doubt we'd need to.
I totally agree. It is not in BitShares interest to deter or make prohibitive making worker proposals. We need development.
2. If we don't set a barrier on the creation of workers, funds in the reserve pool can be stolen much more easily. If alt withdraw his votes from the refund workers NOW, every LTM can create a worker with whatever amount of payment and vote for herself and get paid FROM NEXT HOUR, no need to beg for other stake holders' approval. And worse, she can create a worker every hour so others have no chance to vote against her. And even worse, she can create more than 1000 workers so technically no one can vote against all these workers. Current design of worker feature is flawed, the only way we can secure it is the fee.
Makes sense?
Thanks for mentioning the LTM factor.
Having to be an LTM in order to post a Worker is something at face value is not easily factored in.
At a $50 rate it ends up being $10 for a Worker and a 90 day vesting for them to get their $40 back. At $150 they are vesting $120.
While $150 on it's face is really does appear on the high end, it shows that some of the fee schedules we are dealing with can only be understood in light of the LTM being applied to understand the true price.
If there is an effective way for us to communicate this so that on it's face it doesn't have the same reactions we see filling this thread, then we can probably better handle it.
With the scale of economies on one end $50 with $10 being the true cost, the $150 with $30 being the true cost is still within proximity to what I think would be ideal.
To be clear this particular fee I do not think should be a reason for not approving the current proposal. I do however want to see a way to communicate the LTM-only related fees more clearly. For the sake of future Workers I think it will be an important element in the messaging to be considered.
... We have already been told about things like Plasma.. but there are other things they could be working on or focused on now that they are no longer welcome here if the forum remarks are any barometer on that matter. Sad really.
