Worker Proposal Review

[NotSmart]

Are you suggesting that the BTS stakeholder vote to guarantee us $30,000 regardless of any price declines?

I would prefer that, though obviously a lower amount. $30,000 should give something much more valuable.

$90 (or whatever is accepted) a day for a year in your USD. At least it will put your failcoins to some use.

[topcandle]

I thought you said bond market would be part of 1st proposal?  Where is that?

[bytemaster]

We do not assume any particular direction for the BTS price movement, and even if you use the average price over the summer you will see that we are not even asking for our costs to be reimbursed.  Ultimately, all we are looking to recover is a fraction of the BTS we had to sell to build it in the first place.

$60,000 around the earlier prices would have been much less than20m BTS. If you subtract the amount you got from your workers then that will be even less. So yes, you are trying to recover at least the BTS you sold to build.

The "botched" release that went relatively smoothly with few people losing money and minimal downtime.  Sure it wasn't feature complete, but who here would like to go back to the 0.9x wallet?

Oh please, take a look at the marketcap and if you are still blind I cant help. Of course I am sure you will have a lot of excuses ready (you see, it is all those evil market manipulators - waaaa!!!).

Let me ask again, would you be burning the extra BTS if price recovers? After all, you have said you want to be paid around the market rates. Or are you telling us you want the market rates now as well as all the potential upside?

I think you should be paid in USD. $90 a day (or lower if they can haggle you down) for a year.

You missed the part about us taking the risk of the DOWNSIDE as well by having it vest. In other words, if we don't continue supporting BTS and helping the price grow over the next year then we would lose money. Are you suggesting that the BTS stakeholder vote to guarantee us $30,000 regardless of any price declines? 

[yvv]

We have retracted #1.

But the problem of re-balancing fees is not gone.

[NotSmart]

We do not assume any particular direction for the BTS price movement, and even if you use the average price over the summer you will see that we are not even asking for our costs to be reimbursed.  Ultimately, all we are looking to recover is a fraction of the BTS we had to sell to build it in the first place.

$60,000 around the earlier prices would have been much less than20m BTS. If you subtract the amount you got from your workers then that will be even less. So yes, you are trying to recover at least the BTS you sold to build.

The "botched" release that went relatively smoothly with few people losing money and minimal downtime.  Sure it wasn't feature complete, but who here would like to go back to the 0.9x wallet?

Oh please, take a look at the marketcap and if you are still blind I cant help. Of course I am sure you will have a lot of excuses ready (you see, it is all those evil market manipulators - waaaa!!!).

Let me ask again, would you be burning the extra BTS if price recovers? After all, you have said you want to be paid around the market rates. Or are you telling us you want the market rates now as well as all the potential upside?

I think you should be paid in USD. $90 a day (or lower if they can haggle you down) for a year.

[tonyk]

All told CNX has spent about $60,000 developing the existing GUI.

In total this amounts to about 20M BTS.

We can open source it for everyone connecting to BitShares which will help Open Ledger, Meta, Bunker, Banx, Blocktrades, BitCash, and others by doubling their potential revenue by not having to license from CNX. This means higher referral rewards for users. Use for other blockchains would still be reserved to CNX.

We would be prepared to accept 10M BTS vesting over 1 year.  This will avoid creating any downward sell pressure for the next year and I think would be widely supported by all of the major partners.

This is less than 30,000 BTS per day.

Hopefully this will help kickstart a bunch of businesses and remove artificial barriers while helping to fund ongoing maintenance and improvements.  Just $90 per day.

This is a proposal for review.

I would vote for this proposal. IMO the sooner we open source the wallet software the better. Could be a huge draw for potential businesses. Out of curiosity, I wonder if someone could devise a way for the community to haggle your price?

Not so fast pinkie!
Let's see how much is left from the affiliate program after lowering the fees across the board, leaving only % fees on trading...and only trading fees on BTS it seems (so 50% and probably less of the trading volume). Leaving most of the people out of the desire for LM, and possibly even making it not profitable for traders to upgrade.
Giving up on 50% of revenue (of pretty much no revenue) in exchange for cash, in this case is like selling something worth [now] close to nothing as income stream for hard money. And it does not matter  if it cost you 100K  to  produce it. If it offers no income stream,  we are not paying your 100K  just cause you incur that much expenses.

[bytemaster]

In total this amounts to about 20M BTS.

Mentioning it in current BTS price is a red herring, as your own half done, botched release means that prices are lower than ever. Or was that part of a grand strategy to grab as many BTS as possible by marking prices in dollar?

We would be prepared to accept 10M BTS vesting over 1 year.

Is it for proposals #2-5 + limited licensing relaxation? It sounds better than the original proposal for sure.

Just $90 per day.

Again, $90 in this market. Will you be burning the extra BTS as price rise?

We do not assume any particular direction for the BTS price movement, and even if you use the average price over the summer you will see that we are not even asking for our costs to be reimbursed.  Ultimately, all we are looking to recover is a fraction of the BTS we had to sell to build it in the first place.

The "botched" release that went relatively smoothly with few people losing money and minimal downtime.  Sure it wasn't feature complete, but who here would like to go back to the 0.9x wallet?

[jaran]

All told CNX has spent about $60,000 developing the existing GUI.

In total this amounts to about 20M BTS.

We can open source it for everyone connecting to BitShares which will help Open Ledger, Meta, Bunker, Banx, Blocktrades, BitCash, and others by doubling their potential revenue by not having to license from CNX. This means higher referral rewards for users. Use for other blockchains would still be reserved to CNX.

We would be prepared to accept 10M BTS vesting over 1 year.  This will avoid creating any downward sell pressure for the next year and I think would be widely supported by all of the major partners.

This is less than 30,000 BTS per day.

Hopefully this will help kickstart a bunch of businesses and remove artificial barriers while helping to fund ongoing maintenance and improvements.  Just $90 per day.

This is a proposal for review.

Will you still open source the UI if you get hired for proposals #2-#5 or is that now off the table for those proposals and if we want it open sourced we have to pay the 10 million bts in addition to #2-#5?

[CryptoPrometheus]

All told CNX has spent about $60,000 developing the existing GUI.

In total this amounts to about 20M BTS.

We can open source it for everyone connecting to BitShares which will help Open Ledger, Meta, Bunker, Banx, Blocktrades, BitCash, and others by doubling their potential revenue by not having to license from CNX. This means higher referral rewards for users. Use for other blockchains would still be reserved to CNX.

We would be prepared to accept 10M BTS vesting over 1 year.  This will avoid creating any downward sell pressure for the next year and I think would be widely supported by all of the major partners.

This is less than 30,000 BTS per day.

Hopefully this will help kickstart a bunch of businesses and remove artificial barriers while helping to fund ongoing maintenance and improvements.  Just $90 per day.

This is a proposal for review.

I would vote for this proposal. IMO the sooner we open source the wallet software the better. Could be a huge draw for potential businesses. Out of curiosity, I wonder if someone could devise a way for the community to haggle your price?

[NotSmart]

In total this amounts to about 20M BTS.

Mentioning it in current BTS price is a red herring, as your own half done, botched release means that prices are lower than ever. Or was that part of a grand strategy to grab as many BTS as possible by marking prices in dollar?

We would be prepared to accept 10M BTS vesting over 1 year.

Is it for proposals #2-5 + limited licensing relaxation? It sounds better than the original proposal for sure.

Just $90 per day.

Again, $90 in this market. Will you be burning the extra BTS as price rise?

[CryptoPrometheus]

We have retracted #1.

To those in this thread that says the community always just rubber stamps everything, this is evidence that we dont just rubber stamp everything.


Are there any issues with any of the other proposals that we need to discuss more? 
Things definitely seem to go best when we have a dialogue between devs and community and everyone works to refine and improve each others ideas.

We should discuss everything in detail as much as possible on the forums, and use Friday's mumble to ask questions and to further clarify the finer points of the proposals. I hope that Cryptonomex does not plan to publish the official worker proposals until this has happened. IMO, these are the 2 best tools we have right now (forums and mumble), and anyone who wants to be part of the discussion should be given plenty of time to voice their concerns. If someone else wishes to step forward and present an alternative proposal, they should do so. (This includes the army of "phantom" coders that I have been led to believe are waiting to step up and fill the void. Now is your chance).

Other than that, I do not see much point pining about how things "should have" or "might have" been. I will cast my votes to hire someone capable of undertaking these challenges. If there is someone other than Cryptonomex who can do this right now, PLEASE STEP FORWARD! We need more coders! Nobody is denying this fact! Until this happens, what are we going to do? For those of you who think that throwing Cryptonomex under the bus is a good idea, and will call everyone who wants to see them improve BitShares a "mind controlled sheep", then I suggest you get busy finding or convincing another way to improve and advance BitShares. Until I see evidence that someone else is willing to step up and meet these challenges, I am going to make the best of what is in front of me, and use my time and energy to critique the current proposals.

[jakub]

We have retracted #1.

That was quick
I'm happy common sense prevails here.

[Shentist]

I know that proposal #1 has been retracted now, but I still want to argue in favor of a 0.1 BTS fee for cancelled orders.

I feel that a 0.1 BTS fee is enough to dissuade attacks.  Yes, its not as much of a disincentive as 1 cent or more would be, but it is enough, while also being small enough that I wouldnt really think about it at all while trading, and I doubt most others would either.


If an attacker wanted to completely flood us at 0.1 BTS per transaction, then to fill up our 1000 TPS capacity would cost 100 BTS a second, or 360000 BTS per hour, or more than 8M bts per day.  I would love a scenario where 8M bts a day was being burned, at that rate every BTS in existence would be burned in like 8 months.  8M bts a day would go through the entire poloniex sell side orderbook in 4-5 days. 

Thats enough of a spam disincentive imo.

where comes the 1000 TPS? i thought at the moment we have "only" 100 TPS per second.

we are talking about a problem, never occured, because not many people are using our network so far. So i think we should push it back and we are aware of a possible attack vector and we should think about better solutions.

could #2 explained better?

[Ander]

Alright, regarding #2, it looks like the problem is that assets are not covered under the change? 


I think adding a small %age fee like centralized exchanges use, for BTS trades, is a great step forward.

Could we also implement this for assets?  Is there a technical reason why we cannot do this, or another reason?


Centralized exchanges had a 0.2% trading fee on the BTC side of the trad,e but also a 0.2% fee on the altcoin side.  Doesnt it make sense to emulate this and do the same for our markets, for BTS fees and asset fees?  And then apply the referral program to these percentage fees on asset trades as well?


Currently there are no percentage fees, so adding them for BTS trades is a step forward.  But wouldnt adding them for both BTS trades AND for asset trades be TWO steps forward?  If this is a harder change, I think it would still be worth paying more for, unless for some reason it is incredibly hard or impossible.


Lets emulate poloniex/bitfinex/etc.  0.2% fee for both BTS trades and asset trades.  0.1 BTS flat fee on trades because we have to have something to prevent spam, but this is low enough to not annoy anyone.

[bytemaster]

All told CNX has spent about $60,000 developing the existing GUI.

In total this amounts to about 20M BTS.

We can open source it for everyone connecting to BitShares which will help Open Ledger, Meta, Bunker, Banx, Blocktrades, BitCash, and others by doubling their potential revenue by not having to license from CNX. This means higher referral rewards for users. Use for other blockchains would still be reserved to CNX.

We would be prepared to accept 10M BTS vesting over 1 year.  This will avoid creating any downward sell pressure for the next year and I think would be widely supported by all of the major partners.

This is less than 30,000 BTS per day.

Hopefully this will help kickstart a bunch of businesses and remove artificial barriers while helping to fund ongoing maintenance and improvements.  Just $90 per day.

This is a proposal for review.