Can we solve the fee dispute udder the committee infrastructure?

[fav]

you know nothing about what bitcrab doing in china, you know nothing about why BItCNY have so much liquidity in china, you know nothing is not your fault, but please try to know something before you post this fucking shit

This kind of attitude is not helpful for anybody.

I was asking questions because I want to know what people are doing in China. So far no answers.

exactly. all we see are debates about tx fees. most of us can't read chinese so we're dependent on news from time to time, just like you guys.

[Akado]

-5% -5% -5%

you know nothing about what bitcrab doing in china, you know nothing about why BItCNY have so much liquidity in china, you know nothing is not your fault, but please try to know something before you post this fucking shit

@wallace
Enlighten me then. What is the Chinese community doing since 2.0 release?

[Samupaha]

you know nothing about what bitcrab doing in china, you know nothing about why BItCNY have so much liquidity in china, you know nothing is not your fault, but please try to know something before you post this fucking shit

This kind of attitude is not helpful for anybody.

I was asking questions because I want to know what people are doing in China. So far no answers.

[wallace]

I understand the referral businesses need to keep a high fee. however these merchants are not the only BTS relevant part that need to be cared, and I am not sure what kind of success they can get, but what I can feel everyday is that the China community stop growing, and even begin to shrink, one of the main factors is the high fee. surely traders, market makers and common users need lowering fee, their benefits must also be considered.

What exactly you are trying to do there in China? How do you use Bitshares? What features are most valuable? If you really value some feature, why you wouldn't be willing to pay for it?

Right now many important features of Bitshares aren't yet implemented, so the use cases aren't really that plentiful. I haven't even imported all of my funds yet because there aren't anything I want to use them for (although voting seems to becoming important so maybe I should import the rest in the near future).

If you are so eager to use Bitshares for something, why not tell us what you are doing?

Important thing here is to understand how Bitshares can offer something so valuable to users that they are ready to pay for it. Remember, the point is to get and keep the DAC profitable. One way of achieving it is to get lots of users and collect low fees. But that is usually more difficult way than building a superior platform that gives so good service that users are ready to pay higher fees without problems.

in my view, if you have some opinion to a proposal, you should become an active committee member or find one committee member that can represent you and set him/her as your proxy. and let the votes tell the majority's opinion.

we need more active committee members to fill the slots, and these committee members should represent different parties, please take action, if you need to add you shares to some opinion.

There is not yet GUI tools for committee members, which is propably the biggest reason we haven't seen many candidates so far. In addition, there aren't really that many people here who have a good understanding of blockchain technology and economics. I suppose we need to discuss these things for a while so that more people can understand better what we are doing and how we can achieve our goals. IMO real economists are in need here.

This is why I wouldn't rush things. Let's discuss first everything thoroughly and then make decisions.

BTW, I'm a little bit interested in becoming a committee member. I'm not in any way a professional economist but I've tried to read a lot about blockchain economics so I might be a good fit on the committee position. Lack of GUI has been the reason why I haven't yet done anything about it. If I have time next weekend, I try to look and understand enough of the command line wallet so that I can publish my committee membership application.

-5% -5% -5%

you know nothing about what bitcrab doing in china, you know nothing about why BItCNY have so much liquidity in china, you know nothing is not your fault, but please try to know something before you post this fucking shit

[Samupaha]

I understand the referral businesses need to keep a high fee. however these merchants are not the only BTS relevant part that need to be cared, and I am not sure what kind of success they can get, but what I can feel everyday is that the China community stop growing, and even begin to shrink, one of the main factors is the high fee. surely traders, market makers and common users need lowering fee, their benefits must also be considered.

What exactly you are trying to do there in China? How do you use Bitshares? What features are most valuable? If you really value some feature, why you wouldn't be willing to pay for it?

Right now many important features of Bitshares aren't yet implemented, so the use cases aren't really that plentiful. I haven't even imported all of my funds yet because there aren't anything I want to use them for (although voting seems to becoming important so maybe I should import the rest in the near future).

If you are so eager to use Bitshares for something, why not tell us what you are doing?

Important thing here is to understand how Bitshares can offer something so valuable to users that they are ready to pay for it. Remember, the point is to get and keep the DAC profitable. One way of achieving it is to get lots of users and collect low fees. But that is usually more difficult way than building a superior platform that gives so good service that users are ready to pay higher fees without problems.

in my view, if you have some opinion to a proposal, you should become an active committee member or find one committee member that can represent you and set him/her as your proxy. and let the votes tell the majority's opinion.

we need more active committee members to fill the slots, and these committee members should represent different parties, please take action, if you need to add you shares to some opinion.

There is not yet GUI tools for committee members, which is propably the biggest reason we haven't seen many candidates so far. In addition, there aren't really that many people here who have a good understanding of blockchain technology and economics. I suppose we need to discuss these things for a while so that more people can understand better what we are doing and how we can achieve our goals. IMO real economists are in need here.

This is why I wouldn't rush things. Let's discuss first everything thoroughly and then make decisions.

BTW, I'm a little bit interested in becoming a committee member. I'm not in any way a professional economist but I've tried to read a lot about blockchain economics so I might be a good fit on the committee position. Lack of GUI has been the reason why I haven't yet done anything about it. If I have time next weekend, I try to look and understand enough of the command line wallet so that I can publish my committee membership application.

[roadscape]

IIRC, non-witness feed producers will be used for prediction markets and maybe other UIA markets too.

In this sense, having feed producers provide market data together with "reasonable operating parameters" is logical.. it provides a simple way to get a market going and distribute the control to any degree. Seems like a good solution for the privatized asset model... whoever issues an asset should control who is authorized to provide feeds and market dynamics.

SmartCoins are issued by committee-acount, which is also meant to represent business interests in this space.
Ultimately, they should *want* to be responsible for the markets.

Ideally, IMO, feed producers are paid, and it's an entirely separate role from that of a block producer. Not sure it's high priority though.

[jakub]

We are sysadmins, not central bankers. I'll happily provide a feed with a script recommended by the committee or the core developers, but please, don't expect me to make political or business decisions.

Are you not providing a service for the BitShares DAC? the job description includes price fees and the corresponding price parameters.
Sorry to say, but with that attitude, I am confident you will be replaced quickly

I disagree. The witness job description includes testifying things, not deciding things.
The witnesses testify that they have seen and validated the transactions they include into blocks.
They testify the external price of asset by publishing the price feed.

The fact that the price feed data structure includes things like short squeeze ratio or core exchange rate is a bug, IMO, because those things cannot be testified, they must be decided. Decisions are part of the job description of committee members.

I also think that triox's response was very appropriate.
Witnesses staying away from business decisions & political issues is actually what we want.

[pc]

We are sysadmins, not central bankers. I'll happily provide a feed with a script recommended by the committee or the core developers, but please, don't expect me to make political or business decisions.

Are you not providing a service for the BitShares DAC? the job description includes price fees and the corresponding price parameters.
Sorry to say, but with that attitude, I am confident you will be replaced quickly

I disagree. The witness job description includes testifying things, not deciding things.
The witnesses testify that they have seen and validated the transactions they include into blocks.
They testify the external price of asset by publishing the price feed.

The fact that the price feed data structure includes things like short squeeze ratio or core exchange rate is a bug, IMO, because those things cannot be testified, they must be decided. Decisions are part of the job description of committee members.

[triox]

.. note that the core exchange rate is in the hands of the WITNESSES and not the committee .. so you need to convince them .. not the committee members ..
still worth a discussion IMHO ..

We are sysadmins, not central bankers. I'll happily provide a feed with a script recommended by the committee or the core developers, but please, don't expect me to make political or business decisions.

Are you not providing a service for the BitShares DAC? the job description includes price fees and the corresponding price parameters.
Sorry to say, but with that attitude, I am confident you will be replaced quickly

Yes, but it's supposed to be a technical service, not decision-making one. Shareholders can't be expected to track political/business stances of dozens of witnesses on top of the committee members.

I see this as a serious problem with the governance model. Witnesses shouldn't have the power to set fee structures or market parameters.

[xeroc]

.. note that the core exchange rate is in the hands of the WITNESSES and not the committee .. so you need to convince them .. not the committee members ..
still worth a discussion IMHO ..

We are sysadmins, not central bankers. I'll happily provide a feed with a script recommended by the committee or the core developers, but please, don't expect me to make political or business decisions.

Are you not providing a service for the BitShares DAC? the job description includes price fees and the corresponding price parameters.
Sorry to say, but with that attitude, I am confident you will be replaced quickly

[triox]

.. note that the core exchange rate is in the hands of the WITNESSES and not the committee .. so you need to convince them .. not the committee members ..
still worth a discussion IMHO ..

We are sysadmins, not central bankers. I'll happily provide a feed with a script recommended by the committee or the core developers, but please, don't expect me to make political or business decisions.

[xeroc]

.. note that the core exchange rate is in the hands of the WITNESSES and not the committee .. so you need to convince them .. not the committee members ..
still worth a discussion IMHO ..

[cube]

I'd like to keep bitUSD transfer fees the same.  Can we make transfer fees for bitCNY lower and keep bitEuro and BitUSD the same?  I'm sure it's hard to implement regional pricing, but doing it by currency type might be good for now.

For me this^ is the best and easiest solution. It would solve most of the problem which stems from regional differences.
Are there any disadvantages to that? I cannot see any but maybe I'm missing something.

I like to see that too.  But I think technically it would be a challenge and users may have to give up some of the privacy aspect of a crypto transfer.

Why would this solution compromise my privacy?

This is how I understand merivercap's proposal:
When I transfer bitUSD or bitEUR I pay the equivalent of $0.20. But when I transfer bitCNY I pay the equivalent of e.g. $0.10.
Is it technically possible? Maybe by using different configurations for asset pool fee funding?

I think this would solve 80% of our problem, which is good enough.

This would be technically possible. Essentially, you just tune the core_exchange_rate differently for both assets.
CNY maybe pricefeed - 5%
USD maybe pricefeed
However .. that would lead to harvesting the fee pool which has to be funded more often .. Either by individuals or subsidized through the BTS shareholders via a worker proposal

This is a neat idea!  Let's discuss this further.

If we could pull off this trick (i.e. have different pseudo-regional pricing policy) that would be yet another spectacular advantage in comparison to other decentralized solutions.

 

[jakub]

I'd like to keep bitUSD transfer fees the same.  Can we make transfer fees for bitCNY lower and keep bitEuro and BitUSD the same?  I'm sure it's hard to implement regional pricing, but doing it by currency type might be good for now.

For me this^ is the best and easiest solution. It would solve most of the problem which stems from regional differences.
Are there any disadvantages to that? I cannot see any but maybe I'm missing something.

I like to see that too.  But I think technically it would be a challenge and users may have to give up some of the privacy aspect of a crypto transfer.

Why would this solution compromise my privacy?

This is how I understand merivercap's proposal:
When I transfer bitUSD or bitEUR I pay the equivalent of $0.20. But when I transfer bitCNY I pay the equivalent of e.g. $0.10.
Is it technically possible? Maybe by using different configurations for asset pool fee funding?

I think this would solve 80% of our problem, which is good enough.

This would be technically possible. Essentially, you just tune the core_exchange_rate differently for both assets.
CNY maybe pricefeed - 5%
USD maybe pricefeed
However .. that would lead to harvesting the fee pool which has to be funded more often .. Either by individuals or subsidized through the BTS shareholders via a worker proposal

It's not perfect, but I think I'd support this.
It's like having a global company selling the same product in different geographical regions at different prices.
One could say that this arrangement is "unjust" as it means the more expensive region is "subsidizing" the less expensive region but from the entire company's perspective it makes total sense.

EDIT: We definitely need the Asian and African market but maybe the concept of "financial independence" is valued lower there than in the "Western" world.
It would make sense as those markets are at different stage: the Western market is mature and people already have plenty of options so what matters there is some kind of lifestyle choice.
Whereas in East Asia and Africa people are to be banked yet so what they care about is price, not lifestyle.

If we could pull off this trick (i.e. have different pseudo-regional pricing policy) that would be yet another spectacular advantage in comparison to other decentralized solutions.

[xeroc]

I'd like to keep bitUSD transfer fees the same.  Can we make transfer fees for bitCNY lower and keep bitEuro and BitUSD the same?  I'm sure it's hard to implement regional pricing, but doing it by currency type might be good for now.

For me this^ is the best and easiest solution. It would solve most of the problem which stems from regional differences.
Are there any disadvantages to that? I cannot see any but maybe I'm missing something.

I like to see that too.  But I think technically it would be a challenge and users may have to give up some of the privacy aspect of a crypto transfer.

Why would this solution compromise my privacy?

This is how I understand merivercap's proposal:
When I transfer bitUSD or bitEUR I pay the equivalent of $0.20. But when I transfer bitCNY I pay the equivalent of e.g. $0.10.
Is it technically possible? Maybe by using different configurations for asset pool fee funding?

I think this would solve 80% of our problem, which is good enough.

This would be technically possible. Essentially, you just tune the core_exchange_rate differently for both assets.
CNY maybe pricefeed - 5%
USD maybe pricefeed
However .. that would lead to harvesting the fee pool which has to be funded more often .. Either by individuals or subsidized through the BTS shareholders via a worker proposal