Worker Proposal - Refund Order Creation Fees

[bytemaster]

Basically I support this proposal, but IMHO, #446 "Distribute Market Fees on Core Asset to Referral Program" is also very important.

IMHO, the problem dealt by this proposal is partially and temporally resolved by lowering the order creation fee. However, distributing market fees is really new feature and can be implemented only by new worker proposal.

When are you going to start #446?

We will probably do this one next (but we want to slowly tackle things at a rate the community can follow).  Doing multiple proposals at the same time would be difficult to manage.

[clayop]

Basically I support this proposal, but IMHO, #446 "Distribute Market Fees on Core Asset to Referral Program" is also very important.

IMHO, the problem dealt by this proposal is partially and temporally resolved by lowering the order creation fee. However, distributing market fees is really new feature and can be implemented only by new worker proposal.

When are you going to start #446?

[xeroc]

Can we have a github repository like the BIP repo fpr bitcoin that stores all the "improvement proposals"?
Think of: BitShares Protocol Improvement Proposals:

BPIP-001: Refund Order Creation Fees
BPIP-002: Bond market
etc. ..

We can also create a Style guide that way, have all the upgrades in one git repo and have a discussion on well written docuemnts!

[BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode]

Worker proposal has been created:

Refund Create Order Fees on Cancel (1.14.7)

 {"vote_for":["1.14.7"]}

You can view it at CryptoFresh: http://cryptofresh.com/workers

[tonyk]

Paying fees in one token and getting refunds in another is very much not elegant.

I thought we were striving for the 'best' exchange out there?

It is rather inelegant from one perspective, and brilliant from another.

Paying fees in BTS is the cheapest way to pay fees because the core-exchange-rate for UIA usually charge a slight premium to handle market risk. This means that the next order you place will use the BTS to pay the fee rather than the user asset.  Think about it as getting a refund in "store credit".   If you place an order, cancel an order and then decide you don't want to do any more business with BitShares then you will have to sell the BTS (which will require placing an order) or "transferring". 

Stated another way, for bots it doesn't matter that the refund is in a different asset. For users it doesn't matter either. It will only impact those who attempt to flood with a lot of orders, then cancel all of them. They will end up converting their UIA to BTS at poor exchange rates and then having to sell the BTS. 

Bottom line, we presume someone placing an order will eventually want it filled. By refunding them in BTS they can eventually get it filled and end up with 0 BTS.

So, the worker proposal includes improving the system with the ability to chose the token you pay the fee in (with)?
Or this is just a pipe dream on my side (theoretical explanation on yours) on things to come in the future...i.e. features planed for '17 the earliest?

[bytemaster]

Paying fees in one token and getting refunds in another is very much not elegant.

I thought we were striving for the 'best' exchange out there?

It is rather inelegant from one perspective, and brilliant from another.

Paying fees in BTS is the cheapest way to pay fees because the core-exchange-rate for UIA usually charge a slight premium to handle market risk. This means that the next order you place will use the BTS to pay the fee rather than the user asset.  Think about it as getting a refund in "store credit".   If you place an order, cancel an order and then decide you don't want to do any more business with BitShares then you will have to sell the BTS (which will require placing an order) or "transferring". 

Stated another way, for bots it doesn't matter that the refund is in a different asset. For users it doesn't matter either. It will only impact those who attempt to flood with a lot of orders, then cancel all of them. They will end up converting their UIA to BTS at poor exchange rates and then having to sell the BTS. 

Bottom line, we presume someone placing an order will eventually want it filled. By refunding them in BTS they can eventually get it filled and end up with 0 BTS. 

[tonyk]

Paying fees in one token and getting refunds in another is very much not elegant.

I thought we were striving for the 'best' exchange out there?

[yvv]

So, right now the fee is $0.04 for normal user no matter if the order is filled or cancelled. An it is proposed to keep the fee the same for cancelled order and raise to $0.2 for filled order, is it correct?

[clayop]

Percentage fee does not apply to user issued assets.  The scope of this proposal is to empower the blockchain, not to set the parameters.

AFAIK, UIAs already implemented percentage fee (market fee), am I wrong?

And you're right. This proposal is not about the parameter. So will you leave setting of the parameters to the committee members? If so, will there be an additional fee parameter or existing parameters (order creation, and order cancellation) are enough?

[lil_jay890]

Using GitHub for these proposals seems like a fine idea. General questions:

What happens if one of your workers is not paid, for say, 1 day out of 40, due a temporary slip in the rank?

When could work on this feature begin?

What's the projected date of completion?

Is this feature something that other CNX chains/customers will use?
If so, don't they need to help subsidize the cost? Muse, Identabit, etc

Good point Roadscape... BTS shouldn't have to pay for all the development costs if other blockchains plan on using this.

[bytemaster]

Great. This feature is essential for BitShares to become a successful exchange.

However, one thing should be publicly discussed. What is the desirable level of order creation fee? In the proposal, 60 BTS ($0.20) is mentioned, and currently it is 10 BTS ($0.03). But there is a large demand to reduce order creation fee in order to encourage trading activities. IMO, ElMato's calculation can be a good start.

https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,19890.msg255701.html#msg255701

If the fee is 0.1 BTS, it costs at least $20k (if all witnesses have 4 G memory, while I believe many have more)
If it is 1 BTS, $200k
If it is 10 BTS, $2m
If it is 60 BTS, $12m

In addition to this, it will take 174 hours based on 100tx/s to exhaust all memory.

IMHO, if we have the percentage fee, order creation fee should be as low as to prevent spam.

Percentage fee does not apply to user issued assets.  The scope of this proposal is to empower the blockchain, not to set the parameters.

[bytemaster]

you want to pay $400 to an escrow?

Escrow, Review, Currency Conversion, and Accounting.  It is more quality control for BitShares and admin overhead for creating the worker, claiming the vesting balances, etc.  There is a lot of overhead associated with working for the blockchain

[roadscape]

Using GitHub for these proposals seems like a fine idea. General questions:

What happens if one of your workers is not paid, for say, 1 day out of 40, due a temporary slip in the rank?

When could work on this feature begin?

What's the projected date of completion?

Is this feature something that other CNX chains/customers will use?
If so, don't they need to help subsidize the cost? Muse, Identabit, etc

[fav]

you want to pay $400 to an escrow?

[clayop]

  Great. This feature is essential for BitShares to become a successful exchange.

However, one thing should be publicly discussed. What is the desirable level of order creation fee? In the proposal, 60 BTS ($0.20) is mentioned, and currently it is 10 BTS ($0.03). But there is a large demand to reduce order creation fee in order to encourage trading activities. IMO, ElMato's calculation can be a good start.

https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,19890.msg255701.html#msg255701

If the fee is 0.1 BTS, it costs at least $20k (if all witnesses have 4 G memory, while I believe many have more)
If it is 1 BTS, $200k
If it is 10 BTS, $2m
If it is 60 BTS, $12m

In addition to this, it will take 174 hours based on 100tx/s to exhaust all memory.

IMHO, if we have the percentage fee, order creation fee should be as low as to prevent spam.