poll for the percent based transfer fee

[xeroc]

54.8% is a large margin of agreement for a Bitshares proposal... one of the largest percentages I've seen.

Let's get moving on this. 

agreed. @abit what is the next step? get you voted in? trade your UIA?

These are the next steps:
(1) Create a worker proposal for BSIP#10 - I'll do that this coming week (something like Monday or Tuesday).
And after it is accepted:
(2) Complete the coding and perform initial testing - this area belongs to abit.
(3) Review the code - this will be done by CNX.
(4) Test the implementation on the testnet.
(5) Write the documentation - I'll try to do it with abit's help.
(6) Deploy the implementation with a planned hard-fork (unless hard-fork is not necessary, I'm not sure).

And when the above is complete, we will need to:
(a) pass a committee proposal to establish the min, max & percentage values.
(b) pass another committee proposal which will switch committee-owned smart-coins to percentage-based fee scheme.

So it's quite a long way.

Sounds like a very reasonable approach ..
One advice regarding implementation though: could it be built such that people can
a) easily choose/change the fee model for their asset
b) have an easy way of adding other fee modells as well from which issuers can choose?
c) please send a pull request to the bsip repo so that we can have it listed outside of 'issues'
d) drop me a line if you want the testnet upgraded i am looking forward zo figuring out how hard fork are actually done on a running network

[jakub]

Dated milestones are needed too, please.

Dates will be part of the description that comes with the worker proposal.
I need to agree them with abit.

[kenCode]

54.8% is a large margin of agreement for a Bitshares proposal... one of the largest percentages I've seen.

Let's get moving on this. 

agreed. @abit what is the next step? get you voted in? trade your UIA?

These are the next steps:
(1) Create a worker proposal for BSIP#10 - I'll do that this coming week (something like Monday or Tuesday).
And after it is accepted:
(2) Complete the coding and perform initial testing - this area belongs to abit.
(3) Review the code - this will be done by CNX.
(4) Test the implementation on the testnet.
(5) Write the documentation - I'll try to do it with abit's help.
(6) Deploy the implementation with a planned hard-fork (unless hard-fork is not necessary, I'm not sure).

And when the above is complete, we will need to:
(a) pass a committee proposal to establish the min, max & percentage values.
(b) pass another committee proposal which will switch committee-owned smart-coins to percentage-based fee scheme.

So it's quite a long way.

Dated milestones are needed too, please.

[CoinHoarder]

Why would anyone pay to send a transfer when they can send it for free (or much cheaper) with any other cryptocurrency?

Yet, you guys feel free to do what you like. I am no longer investing in Bitshares as it looks to be a doomed project.  You guys live in a bubble over here on bitsharestalk and have no idea how bad of a rep Bitshares has in the crypto community for many different reasons. Network effect makes successful crypto currencies, and Bitshares lacks a meaningful one. The referral program is a joke as even with the current fee structure there is little economic incentive to really make it work.

[jakub]

54.8% is a large margin of agreement for a Bitshares proposal... one of the largest percentages I've seen.

Let's get moving on this. 

I think it is unrealistic to expect the percentage-based fees to end up at the levels suggested by the poll results (min: 1 BTS max: 20 BTS rate: 0.1%).
This would mean a radical change of rules for the referral businesses and I hope the major shareholders won't allow it.

I believe we must not mix the introduction of percentage-based fees with a drastic change of business rules.
If you want to campaign for that, do that independently, after percentage-based fees are in place.
If we mix those two matters at this stage, we risk sabotaging the whole BSIP#10 initiative.

The DEX has had little to no liquidity for 2 years now. Anything that helps with liquidity should be implemented. This mantra of all we need is more adoption to fix the liquidity is a farse. If many measures aren't made to fix the liquidity issue then we will be saying that for the rest of our lives, and left holding a bag of worthless BTS.

Poor referral businesses... Bitshares will move on without them. I don't see them bringing in a ton of users anyways. The BTS price sure doesn't reflect that they are bringing in many users.

They will also still make a killing on normal transfer fees which are also ludicrously high.

OK. Fine.
Enjoy your illusion that there exist users who want to transfer 10k BTS or 100k BTS but don't do this because paying 30 BTS or 300 BTS is more than they can stand.
I've said enough on this subject.

[CoinHoarder]

54.8% is a large margin of agreement for a Bitshares proposal... one of the largest percentages I've seen.

Let's get moving on this. 

I think it is unrealistic to expect the percentage-based fees to end up at the levels suggested by the poll results (min: 1 BTS max: 20 BTS rate: 0.1%).
This would mean a radical change of rules for the referral businesses and I hope the major shareholders won't allow it.

I believe we must not mix the introduction of percentage-based fees with a drastic change of business rules.
If you want to campaign for that, do that independently, after percentage-based fees are in place.
If we mix those two matters at this stage, we risk sabotaging the whole BSIP#10 initiative.

The DEX has had little to no liquidity for 2 years now. Anything that helps with liquidity should be implemented. This mantra of all we need is more adoption to fix the liquidity is a farse. If many measures aren't made to fix the liquidity issue then we will be saying that for the rest of our lives, and left holding a bag of worthless BTS.

Poor referral businesses... Bitshares will move on without them. I don't see them bringing in a ton of users anyways. The BTS price sure doesn't reflect that they are bringing in many users.

They will also still make a killing on normal transfer fees which are also ludicrously high.

[jakub]

54.8% is a large margin of agreement for a Bitshares proposal... one of the largest percentages I've seen.

Let's get moving on this. 

I think it is unrealistic to expect the percentage-based fees to end up at the levels suggested by the poll results (min: 1 BTS max: 20 BTS rate: 0.1%).
This would mean a radical change of rules for the referral businesses and I hope the major shareholders won't allow it.

I believe we must not mix the introduction of percentage-based fees with a drastic change of business rules.
If you want to campaign for that, do that independently, after percentage-based fees are in place.
If we mix those two matters at this stage, we risk sabotaging the whole BSIP#10 initiative.

[jakub]

54.8% is a large margin of agreement for a Bitshares proposal... one of the largest percentages I've seen.

Let's get moving on this. 

agreed. @abit what is the next step? get you voted in? trade your UIA?

These are the next steps:
(1) Create a worker proposal for BSIP#10 - I'll do that this coming week (something like Monday or Tuesday).
And after it is accepted:
(2) Complete the coding and perform initial testing - this area belongs to abit.
(3) Review the code - this will be done by CNX.
(4) Test the implementation on the testnet.
(5) Write the documentation - I'll try to do it with abit's help.
(6) Deploy the implementation with a planned hard-fork (unless hard-fork is not necessary, I'm not sure).

And when the above is complete, we will need to:
(a) pass a committee proposal to establish the min, max & percentage values.
(b) pass another committee proposal which will switch committee-owned smart-coins to percentage-based fee scheme.

So it's quite a long way.

[kenCode]

54.8% is a large margin of agreement for a Bitshares proposal... one of the largest percentages I've seen.

Let's get moving on this. 

agreed. @abit what is the next step? get you voted in? trade your UIA?

[CoinHoarder]

54.8% is a large margin of agreement for a Bitshares proposal... one of the largest percentages I've seen.

Let's get moving on this. 

[jakub]

Speaking of using stable values for the fee limits, I will continue to contend that this is necessary.  Although @kenCode, to accomplish this I really don't think it's necessary to rely on anything more than the price feeds.  So for example, let's say we go with a minimum fee of $.005.  Based on the price feeds, that minimum fee can be calculated in terms of BTS, CNY or anything else.  Those calculations can be performed as often as price feeds are published, although I think daily would be more than sufficient.  So now you have the minimum fee in terms of any asset you need, ready to be applied to any transaction.  Same goes for the maximum fee ($.50-ish?).

We really should be going this route with the %-based fees worker proposal. @abit, are you able to do this?

Keeping the min and max fee pegged exactly to fiat is an overkill. I am against this.

Surely there is some volatility on BTS but not so much that it cannot be easily addressed by periodic adjustments of the min & max fee by the committee.
Let's not over-complicate things if this is not necessary.

It doesn't really matter if the minimum fee is $0.003 or $0.004 or even $0.010.

These two things are important:
- for micro-transactions, to replace the current transfer fee by an order of magnitude: from the current 30 BTS (~$0.1) to something around 1-3 BTS (~0.01).
- to maintain the revenue stream for the network and referrers at roughly the same level as we have it now.

[btswolf]

By the way, in regards to the parameters, I think 0.05%/1/250 is fine for me with current rate of BTS, which means 0.02 CNY of fee if value of transfer is lower than 2000 BTS or 40 CNY, and 5 CNY of fee if value of transfer is greater than 10000 CNY.

K.I.S.S.

[abit]

3. You stated $10K before, so will this raise your price to 12K or even 14K??

Depends on the complexity. I'm unable to make an estimation so far.

4. Not me. I'd rather let the code handle these intricacies. Don't sign yourself up for that job if you don't have to. I could see that becoming a real pain in yer arse after awhile. Just let the code manage it.

Adjusting of parameters will be done by the committee. With well defined rules/guidelines, it's not a hard job. Defining the rules/guidelines is a hard job though, it's what we're currently trying to do.

By the way, in regards to the parameters, I think 0.05%/1/250 is fine for me with current rate of BTS, which means 0.02 CNY of fee if value of transfer is lower than 2000 BTS or 40 CNY, and 5 CNY of fee if value of transfer is greater than 10000 CNY.

[giant middle finger]

how else are we supposed to show off our superior TPS if we don't incentivize people to make lots of T's?

[Empirical1.2]

I  think something like 0.1% with a minimum of $0.01 and maximum of $0.1/$0.2 would be better.

My ideas are still the same, so I support the general direction these discussions are going with percentage fees.

The overall impact on total fees earned may not be great because of increased transactions, so the referral programme might not be significantly effected. Regardless, until BTS has well pegged Smartcoins/other, there isn't a strong BTS product to sell and for referrers to market anyway.

The fees should remain as low as possible until the DEX has some resemblance of liquidity. Once there is sufficient liquidity, we can revisit the fee structure.

  Once you get that initial liquidity, especially for Smartcoins, then you will have something valuable that you need to tell the whole world about and that's where slightly higher fees and the referral programme really comes in.