Author Topic: poll for the "1 BTS for transfer" proposal  (Read 47168 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline merivercap

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 661
    • View Profile
    • BitCash

This describes the issue well... that chart is certainly telling.

As mentioned up-thread, there must be a compromise somewhere in this. Although the referral program is practically worthless right now we should probably not give up on it,  and although transactions are really expensive right now we should probably not give up on offering a cheaper solution.

I really don't get why should I pay 80% of fee to ccedk just for helping to register my account, instead of paying this fee to network? Ok, ccedk helped me, let them be rewarded for this, but to pay ~$80 to them to get out of their slavery is too much. These funds should go to network, which shares I have.

Because businesses are the ones who bring people in. A healthy business will attract much more people and thus help the network. No services, no users. Simple as that. They're the ones with the potential to bring in thousands of users, not you or me.

I agree.

Also I think it's good to think of the referral program as a feature to help businesses primarily with marketing, and not a revenue source for the network.   Even if the network earned fees on the referral program, the network might as well pour the referral income back into expanding the marketing anyways.   Businesses or asset issuers will have an option to use the referral program feature for marketing or just pay the basic network fee and find other ways to market.

The bigger question is what should basic network fees be?  In order to gain the maximum network effect, I think we keep network fees to a bare minimum 1 cent to have the broadest appeal.   The small dilution could probably cover software development and maintenance.  FBA's can cover more advanced features.  Those in China and developing countries will be happy because fees will be more in line with the cost of living.   I think it will be good for the committee to keep fees higher for Smartcoins in the US & Europe.    However if the low fees turns out to drive much faster growth I think the committee can consider lowering fees in the US & Europe as well.  Privatized Smartcoins, UIA's, FBA's can choose either mode.  I really believe that in the US and the demographic we at Bitcash will be going after the referral program will drive more growth, but it will be interesting to see.  That's another reason it's better for us to create a privatized Smartcoin because we'll have more flexibility to adapt based on our particular business model.   
BitCash - http://www.bitcash.org 
Beta: bitCash Wallet / p2p Gateway: (https://m.bitcash.org)
Beta: bitCash Trade (https://trade.bitcash.org)

Offline yvv

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1186
    • View Profile
I would suggest to add intrest for not moving bts in your wallet instead of lower transaction fee. Low transaction fee means easier to spam . Keep in mind ,bts is a platform for assets trading not just a simple bank account

If you had all of BTS in your possession, you would run out of them in about one month, if you try to spam 1000 tps network with 1 BTS per transaction fee. Who is going to do this?
High-frequency stock trading. Have you heard it  before

I even educated myself about how HFT works. It works by buying a place for server which is close to stock exchange processing center, such that the owner of the server can overrun orders made from remote hosts. It is irrelevant to distributed blockchain, since such blockchain has no central processing facility.


Offline yvv

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1186
    • View Profile

This describes the issue well... that chart is certainly telling.

As mentioned up-thread, there must be a compromise somewhere in this. Although the referral program is practically worthless right now we should probably not give up on it,  and although transactions are really expensive right now we should probably not give up on offering a cheaper solution.

I really don't get why should I pay 80% of fee to ccedk just for helping to register my account, instead of paying this fee to network? Ok, ccedk helped me, let them be rewarded for this, but to pay ~$80 to them to get out of their slavery is too much. These funds should go to network, which shares I have.

Because businesses are the ones who bring people in. A healthy business will attract much more people and thus help the network. No services, no users. Simple as that. They're the ones with the potential to bring in thousands of users, not you or me.

A healthy business should be rewarded by profit which it gets by charging fees for its service. I don't use ccedk services, and I am obligated to pay them $80 minimum just for signing me up to bitshares. Why the fuck is this? This is not the way to do business.

Offline twitter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 279
    • View Profile
I would suggest to add intrest for not moving bts in your wallet instead of lower transaction fee. Low transaction fee means easier to spam . Keep in mind ,bts is a platform for assets trading not just a simple bank account

If you had all of BTS in your possession, you would run out of them in about one month, if you try to spam 1000 tps network with 1 BTS per transaction fee. Who is going to do this?
High-frequency stock trading. Have you heard it  before
witness:

Offline Akado

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2752
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: akado

This describes the issue well... that chart is certainly telling.

As mentioned up-thread, there must be a compromise somewhere in this. Although the referral program is practically worthless right now we should probably not give up on it,  and although transactions are really expensive right now we should probably not give up on offering a cheaper solution.

I really don't get why should I pay 80% of fee to ccedk just for helping to register my account, instead of paying this fee to network? Ok, ccedk helped me, let them be rewarded for this, but to pay ~$80 to them to get out of their slavery is too much. These funds should go to network, which shares I have.

Because businesses are the ones who bring people in. A healthy business will attract much more people and thus help the network. No services, no users. Simple as that. They're the ones with the potential to bring in thousands of users, not you or me.
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

Offline yvv

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1186
    • View Profile

This describes the issue well... that chart is certainly telling.

As mentioned up-thread, there must be a compromise somewhere in this. Although the referral program is practically worthless right now we should probably not give up on it,  and although transactions are really expensive right now we should probably not give up on offering a cheaper solution.

I really don't get why should I pay 80% of fee to ccedk just for helping to register my account, instead of paying this fee to network? Ok, ccedk helped me, let them be rewarded for this, but to pay ~$80 to them to get out of their slavery is too much. These funds should go to network, which shares I have.

Offline merivercap

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 661
    • View Profile
    • BitCash
BTS referrer program bring a price more higher than reasonable, no referral will be happy if he get known the price is so high and 80% are paid to the referrer. on the other hand, it's not easy for the referrer to recommend a product/service with so high price.

please understand why Chinese are sensitive to the price, China is a country where alipay is free, wechat payment is free, most inter bank transfers are free.
I have discussed the reasonable transfer fee above, for BTS the reasonable transfer fee can be 2-5 BTS.

fee are the renenues of the network, but also are costs of shareholders/users. transfer fee are friction, friction always slow down economy.

in the updated plan, there will be 3 mode, both mode A and mode C are flat fee, but for A the fee totally go to network, for C referrer will take 80%, the flat fee will be set by committee, but I think A will own a lower fee than B. BTS is the fundamental asset in the system, need to be applied mode A with transfer fee as low as possible.

for public smartcoins, as now there are privatized smartcoins, so its ok for public smartcoins to be applied mode B. users do not like referral program/high fee can play with privatized smartcoins.
Some logical reasoning:
1) If A is free to choice, why people choose C? So Fee of A should be lower than C for non-LTMs, but higher than C for LTMs.
2) based on 1), if volume raises of doesn't change, choosing A means the network will gain some, referral program and LTMs will loss some, and probably the asset issuer will gain some. To be fair, the network and the issuer need to compensate the referral program and LTMs in some way.

why need to compensate referral program?
the referral program + high fee cause a lot of old users leave, should referral program compensate the whole system?
Can you proof your claim?
The purpose of the referral program is to motivate business to attract new users. It never was the idea to pay the "whole system" (whatever you mean by it)

then do you mean because there is a referral program, so we cannot have a mode A?

It seems we are all very close and we can get this done with BSIP10.  What about something like this @bitcrab?
 
Mode A: 1 cent per transaction to the network (no incentive for referral program or membership)
Mode B: 1% per transaction, 1 cent minimum fee (example max. $1/$10/$20),  lifetime/annual members: 1 cent
Mode C: flat 20 cents per transaction, lifetime/annual members: 1 cent

In all three modes 1 cent goes to the network so it's fair and the network doesn't care which mode anyone selects.  Mode B & C adds an extra fee layer that all goes to referrals.

so that seems like: issuers can select to pay to referrers for marketing if they like, if they do not like, they can select not to hire them.
this solution is close to mine, I am ok with it, but I am not sure whether the businessmen will support this.

Yes it is very close to yours and @abit's proposals.   Business people should like it because there is a choice right?   

BitCash - http://www.bitcash.org 
Beta: bitCash Wallet / p2p Gateway: (https://m.bitcash.org)
Beta: bitCash Trade (https://trade.bitcash.org)

Offline yvv

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1186
    • View Profile
I would suggest to add intrest for not moving bts in your wallet instead of lower transaction fee. Low transaction fee means easier to spam . Keep in mind ,bts is a platform for assets trading not just a simple bank account

If you had all of BTS in your possession, you would run out of them in about one month, if you try to spam 1000 tps network with 1 BTS per transaction fee. Who is going to do this?

Offline bitcrab

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1917
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: bitcrab
  • GitHub: bitcrab
BTS referrer program bring a price more higher than reasonable, no referral will be happy if he get known the price is so high and 80% are paid to the referrer. on the other hand, it's not easy for the referrer to recommend a product/service with so high price.

please understand why Chinese are sensitive to the price, China is a country where alipay is free, wechat payment is free, most inter bank transfers are free.
I have discussed the reasonable transfer fee above, for BTS the reasonable transfer fee can be 2-5 BTS.

fee are the renenues of the network, but also are costs of shareholders/users. transfer fee are friction, friction always slow down economy.

in the updated plan, there will be 3 mode, both mode A and mode C are flat fee, but for A the fee totally go to network, for C referrer will take 80%, the flat fee will be set by committee, but I think A will own a lower fee than B. BTS is the fundamental asset in the system, need to be applied mode A with transfer fee as low as possible.

for public smartcoins, as now there are privatized smartcoins, so its ok for public smartcoins to be applied mode B. users do not like referral program/high fee can play with privatized smartcoins.
Some logical reasoning:
1) If A is free to choice, why people choose C? So Fee of A should be lower than C for non-LTMs, but higher than C for LTMs.
2) based on 1), if volume raises of doesn't change, choosing A means the network will gain some, referral program and LTMs will loss some, and probably the asset issuer will gain some. To be fair, the network and the issuer need to compensate the referral program and LTMs in some way.

why need to compensate referral program?
the referral program + high fee cause a lot of old users leave, should referral program compensate the whole system?
Can you proof your claim?
The purpose of the referral program is to motivate business to attract new users. It never was the idea to pay the "whole system" (whatever you mean by it)

then do you mean because there is a referral program, so we cannot have a mode A?

It seems we are all very close and we can get this done with BSIP10.  What about something like this @bitcrab?
 
Mode A: 1 cent per transaction to the network (no incentive for referral program or membership)
Mode B: 1% per transaction, 1 cent minimum fee (example max. $1/$10/$20),  lifetime/annual members: 1 cent
Mode C: flat 20 cents per transaction, lifetime/annual members: 1 cent

In all three modes 1 cent goes to the network so it's fair and the network doesn't care which mode anyone selects.  Mode B & C adds an extra fee layer that all goes to referrals.

so that seems like: issuers can select to pay to referrers for marketing if they like, if they do not like, they can select not to hire them.
this solution is close to mine, I am ok with it, but I am not sure whether the businessmen will support this.
Email:bitcrab@qq.com

Offline merivercap

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 661
    • View Profile
    • BitCash
BTS referrer program bring a price more higher than reasonable, no referral will be happy if he get known the price is so high and 80% are paid to the referrer. on the other hand, it's not easy for the referrer to recommend a product/service with so high price.

please understand why Chinese are sensitive to the price, China is a country where alipay is free, wechat payment is free, most inter bank transfers are free.
I have discussed the reasonable transfer fee above, for BTS the reasonable transfer fee can be 2-5 BTS.

fee are the renenues of the network, but also are costs of shareholders/users. transfer fee are friction, friction always slow down economy.

in the updated plan, there will be 3 mode, both mode A and mode C are flat fee, but for A the fee totally go to network, for C referrer will take 80%, the flat fee will be set by committee, but I think A will own a lower fee than B. BTS is the fundamental asset in the system, need to be applied mode A with transfer fee as low as possible.

for public smartcoins, as now there are privatized smartcoins, so its ok for public smartcoins to be applied mode B. users do not like referral program/high fee can play with privatized smartcoins.
Some logical reasoning:
1) If A is free to choice, why people choose C? So Fee of A should be lower than C for non-LTMs, but higher than C for LTMs.
2) based on 1), if volume raises of doesn't change, choosing A means the network will gain some, referral program and LTMs will loss some, and probably the asset issuer will gain some. To be fair, the network and the issuer need to compensate the referral program and LTMs in some way.

why need to compensate referral program?
the referral program + high fee cause a lot of old users leave, should referral program compensate the whole system?
Can you proof your claim?
The purpose of the referral program is to motivate business to attract new users. It never was the idea to pay the "whole system" (whatever you mean by it)

then do you mean because there is a referral program, so we cannot have a mode A?

It seems we are all very close and we can get this done with BSIP10.  What about something like this @bitcrab?
 
Mode A: 1 cent per transaction to the network (no incentive for referral program or membership)
Mode B: 1% per transaction, 1 cent minimum fee (example max. $1/$10/$20),  lifetime/annual members: 1 cent
Mode C: flat 20 cents per transaction, lifetime/annual members: 1 cent

In all three modes 1 cent goes to the network so it's fair and the network doesn't care which mode anyone selects.  Mode B & C adds an extra fee layer that all goes to referrals.   
BitCash - http://www.bitcash.org 
Beta: bitCash Wallet / p2p Gateway: (https://m.bitcash.org)
Beta: bitCash Trade (https://trade.bitcash.org)

Offline fav

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4278
  • No Pain, No Gain
    • View Profile
    • Follow Me!
  • BitShares: fav
Great... Let's cater bts to poor Chinese people... That will definitely help the market cap.

Bts should change its name to bitcharity. It's already a charity to cnx, why not add the nation of china while we are at it...

that's the plan here. maybe they should just fork it? :D

Offline bitcrab

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1917
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: bitcrab
  • GitHub: bitcrab
the current BTS referral program are not welcomed in China.

How the f*ck would you know? Or.... the referral program is not welcomed by YOU?
 
Get real. Go out, hit the streets, take an honest poll of the Chinese people en masse. Ask them if they would like to receive $50 for every lifetime member that they sign up. Go to a college campus and have some kids go out and canvas with you.
 
Get out there in the real world and see how many people you can talk to about Bitshares, get them excited, start a Meetup group, show them the mobile wallet, send them 100 BTS, get them signed up on ccedk.com or OL, shake some hands, encourage others to do the same.
 
Your hubris far outweighs my ability to describe it.

not weird, MMM have tens of thousands of followers in China.
but in China BTS community, no people interested in this kind of things.
Email:bitcrab@qq.com

Offline deer

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 65
    • View Profile
Great... Let's cater bts to poor Chinese people... That will definitely help the market cap.

Bts should change its name to bitcharity. It's already a charity to cnx, why not add the nation of china while we are at it...

YEAH,u r so damn right.
 And the "rich" unchineses people are busy earing the little tiny fee.  ;D

Offline lil_jay890

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1197
    • View Profile
Great... Let's cater bts to poor Chinese people... That will definitely help the market cap.

Bts should change its name to bitcharity. It's already a charity to cnx, why not add the nation of china while we are at it...

TravelsAsia

  • Guest
Again, as usual, you ignore everyone else's points but your own. You are MY B*TCH, not the other way around, boy.

How about attacking the idea and not the person? Show a little class.