Author Topic: poll for the "1 BTS for transfer" proposal  (Read 44625 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline puppies

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1659
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: puppies
I am trying to understand.  You seem to be saying that you have a fundamental problem with the referral program.  Are there really not any similar systems in China?  There are so many in the United States.  Near my house there is a sporting association.  They have a pistol range, rifle range, skeet shooting, and trap.  Its open to the public at a certain price, but members get a greatly reduced rate.  So a day of shooting trap might cost me $40 as a member, but would cost a non member $120. 

Why do you think the Chinese community is not interested in attempting to earn through the referral program?  We have a member of our community draining fee pools 10bts at a time.  Surely the referral program is better than picking up pennies from the "give a penny leave a penny" tray. 

I also have a hard time reconciling the wish to prevent dilution, and the wish to reduce the earnings of the network.  The fees collected by the network help offset the dilution that we pay our witnesses and workers with.  The account upgrade fee is one of the most important. 

A quick count of upgrades shows 295 since launch, including 45 in the last month alone.  That is equivalent 900,000 bts spent in the last month on this one single operation.  Even if you assume that every upgrade was a newly registered account, and thus not referred by the committee that is 180,000 bts earned by the network in the last 30 days because 45 people found enough value in upgrading. 

In contrast at the current rate of about 200 transfers a day , and 30 bts per transfer it would take about 5 months to earn for the network what account upgrade earned in the last month.  I would really like to see more in depth fee information.  I wonder if cryptofresh has compiled any of that information

Before I could accept your proposal to remove the referral program from bts but keep it on bitassets, I would need to see some evidence that this would be best for the network.  I am open to the idea, but at this point I really don't see it.

edit.  spaced the content out to aid in reading.
« Last Edit: January 30, 2016, 08:02:57 am by puppies »
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

Offline abit

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4570
    • View Profile
    • Abit's Hive Blog
  • BitShares: abit
  • GitHub: abitmore
I now believe the debate on transfer fee come from the conflict of different business culture.

In China(maybe also in some other regions in the world), the current referral program is just a trouble maker, very few people are interested in playing as a referrer, on the otherside, the high fee brought by it make the old players unhappy and drive a lot potential new joiners away. even worse, the logic behind the referral program is not appreciated by the China blockchain/cryptocurrency community. the whole China BTS community are in pain because of this.

However, maybe the referral program really play a key role in BTS development in some other regions, maybe US and western europe? I am not sure, but from the feedback from the forum it seems so.

So now let's come back to the problem I have raised before: Is it possible that Bitshares become a platform that businessmen can develop their business of different types upon it with great convenience and without disturbing each other?

Now considering the transfer fee issue, referral program and also BSIP#10, I now propose a solution as below:

1. define 2 different mode on charging transfer fee.

mode A: only charge a resonable flat fee(1-5 BTS?), all the fee will go to network, and there are no difference in LTM and common user.
With current percentage-based fee designation, set CER of your assets to 0.00001BTS, set the floor to 1-5 BTS, the result will be same to your proposal.
Quote
mode B: percent based fee, with defined min limit/max limit/percent parameters, the max limit can be defined as high as possible. and the fee will divided by network and referrer.

2. BTS will be applied mode A, issuers of other assets will decide which mode to apply. I suggest all the public smartcoins, including BitCNY, be applied mode B.
So with your proposal we come to 3 modes. The one which is missing in your proposal is CURRENT MODE:

Mode C: flat fee, 80% to referral program and 20% to network.

IMHO don't eliminate any other possibilities when you want to add your (new) options, and don't change default behavior unless the stake holders agreed. It will make the things easier to get more progress.

If we have 3 modes implemented, the committee would be able to decide which mode BTS and/or smart coins will have.

I'm capable for implementing the new mode you proposed, and I'm willing to do it if well funded.

Quote
I feel this solution is possible to end the debate. however, this need some modification in BSIP#10, and need confirm from all sides.
China community hate dilution, but if most of the relevant people support the solution described above, I'll try to persuade China community to support BSIP#10.
because the implementation of BSIP#10 will cost more than 3 months, I'll suggest to reduce the transfer fee to a balanced level first(5-10 BTS) first, and then wait for BSIP#10 implementation. and then reduce the fee in A mode to the final reasonable level. 

any thoughts? @ccedk @kenCode @jakub @BunkerChain Labs @xeroc @abit @Akado @clayop @puppies
The reason why the time needed to implement BSIP10 is long, is that stake holders don't want to or aren't able to pay for it quicker (aka quicker decision making and higher per-day dilution). Most people assume that longer payment period means lower cost, or, more time to have work done means to do more work.
« Last Edit: January 30, 2016, 08:00:59 am by abit »
BitShares committee member: abit
BitShares witness: in.abit

Offline abit

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4570
    • View Profile
    • Abit's Hive Blog
  • BitShares: abit
  • GitHub: abitmore
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
Then btc38 would earn huge interest, which is paid by dilution.
On the other side it's a good idea, it will encourage people to withdraw their BTS back to their own wallet, if btc38 doesn't return the interest to customers.
« Last Edit: January 30, 2016, 07:34:35 am by abit »
BitShares committee member: abit
BitShares witness: in.abit

Offline bitcrab

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1912
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: bitcrab
  • GitHub: bitcrab
I now believe the debate on transfer fee come from the conflict of different business culture.

In China(maybe also in some other regions in the world), the current referral program is just a trouble maker, very few people are interested in playing as a referrer, on the otherside, the high fee brought by it make the old players unhappy and drive a lot potential new joiners away. even worse, the logic behind the referral program is not appreciated by the China blockchain/cryptocurrency community. the whole China BTS community are in pain because of this.

However, maybe the referral program really play a key role in BTS development in some other regions, maybe US and western europe? I am not sure, but from the feedback from the forum it seems so.

So now let's come back to the problem I have raised before: Is it possible that Bitshares become a platform that businessmen can develop their business of different types upon it with great convenience and without disturbing each other?

Now considering the transfer fee issue, referral program and also BSIP#10, I now propose a solution as below:

1. define 2 different mode on charging transfer fee.

mode A: only charge a resonable flat fee(1-5 BTS?), all the fee will go to network, and there are no difference in LTM and common user.

mode B: percent based fee, with defined min limit/max limit/percent parameters, the max limit can be defined as high as possible. and the fee will divided by network and referrer.

2. BTS will be applied mode A, issuers of other assets will decide which mode to apply. I suggest all the public smartcoins, including BitCNY, be applied mode B.

I feel this solution is possible to end the debate. however, this need some modification in BSIP#10, and need confirm from all sides.
China community hate dilution, but if most of the relevant people support the solution described above, I'll try to persuade China community to support BSIP#10.
because the implementation of BSIP#10 will cost more than 3 months, I'll suggest to reduce the transfer fee to a balanced level first(5-10 BTS) first, and then wait for BSIP#10 implementation. and then reduce the fee in A mode to the final reasonable level. 

any thoughts? @ccedk @kenCode @jakub @BunkerChain Labs @xeroc @abit @Akado @clayop @puppies
« Last Edit: January 30, 2016, 06:20:22 am by bitcrab »
Email´╝Übitcrab@qq.com

Offline Samupaha

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 479
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: samupaha
below is the data of the transfer fee of the top12 cryptocoins in coinmarketcap:



some info:
1. the average transfer fee is $0.01.
2. the top3 high fee coins are MaidSafeCoin, Bitshares and Factom. however the other 2 are both coins for special functions - MaidSafe is for distributed storage and Factom is for notarization.

it is said that BM has said(not confirmed yet) in recent mumble session that in order to cover costs and prevent spam, the minimum fee should be $0.005-0.01

to calculate the cost of 1 transfer is not easy, it depend on several factors, especially the TPS, so now I just take BM's conclusion, if anyone has better result, please kindly share.

upon the above data, I give 2 areas for reasonable transfer fee on Bitshares platform for reference: the wider one: 1BTS-10BTS, the narrower one: 2BTS-5BTS.

It's useless to make comparisons with unsustainable systems. The real costs of bitcoin transactions are much higher because they are funded with inflation.

And also it's useless to think what the transaction cost should be in BTS, because it is meant to be calculated in USD (or in other fiat currency) and it's committee's job to adjust BTS price of transaction based on the fiat price. So this whole poll is pointless. The poll should be on USD price, not BTS price. This is again a clear sign that you don't understand how Bitshares works or is supposed to work.

Offline twitter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 279
    • View Profile
may i know which one is delicate for assets trade but BTS. how can bts network prevent from spamming by lowing the tx fee?

1.what a transfer fee is reasonable according to cost and competetion?

below is the data of the transfer fee of the top12 cryptocoins in coinmarketcap:



some info:
1. the average transfer fee is $0.01.
2. the top3 high fee coins are MaidSafeCoin, Bitshares and Factom. however the other 2 are both coins for special functions - MaidSafe is for distributed storage and Factom is for notarization.

it is said that BM has said(not confirmed yet) in recent mumble session that in order to cover costs and prevent spam, the minimum fee should be $0.005-0.01

to calculate the cost of 1 transfer is not easy, it depend on several factors, especially the TPS, so now I just take BM's conclusion, if anyone has better result, please kindly share.

upon the above data, I give 2 areas for reasonable transfer fee on Bitshares platform for reference: the wider one: 1BTS-10BTS, the narrower one: 2BTS-5BTS.

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.
witness:

Offline CoinHoarder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 660
  • In Cryptocoins I Trust
    • View Profile
1.what a transfer fee is reasonable according to cost and competetion?

below is the data of the transfer fee of the top12 cryptocoins in coinmarketcap:



some info:
1. the average transfer fee is $0.01.
2. the top3 high fee coins are MaidSafeCoin, Bitshares and Factom. however the other 2 are both coins for special functions - MaidSafe is for distributed storage and Factom is for notarization.

it is said that BM has said(not confirmed yet) in recent mumble session that in order to cover costs and prevent spam, the minimum fee should be $0.005-0.01

to calculate the cost of 1 transfer is not easy, it depend on several factors, especially the TPS, so now I just take BM's conclusion, if anyone has better result, please kindly share.

upon the above data, I give 2 areas for reasonable transfer fee on Bitshares platform for reference: the wider one: 1BTS-10BTS, the narrower one: 2BTS-5BTS.

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.
« Last Edit: January 30, 2016, 04:21:31 am by CoinHoarder »
https://www.decentralized.tech/ -> Market Data, Portfolios, Information, Links, Reviews, Forums, Blogs, Etc.
https://www.cryptohun.ch/ -> Tradable Blockchain Asset PvP Card Game

Offline CoinHoarder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 660
  • In Cryptocoins I Trust
    • View Profile
Keep in mind ,bts is a platform for assets trading not just a simple bank account
Ideally, it should be both.
https://www.decentralized.tech/ -> Market Data, Portfolios, Information, Links, Reviews, Forums, Blogs, Etc.
https://www.cryptohun.ch/ -> Tradable Blockchain Asset PvP Card Game

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
witness:

Offline yvv

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1186
    • View Profile
Girls, don't hurt each other. Make love, no war. lol

Offline CoinHoarder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 660
  • In Cryptocoins I Trust
    • View Profile
I've read your posts about diluting for a while now... The idea was soooo bad I didn't think it deserved a response.  Plus you seem like the type of person who can't take any criticism, and just bitches and calls people idiots if you don't get your way.  Another reason I didn't respond.

If you think it's such a great idea go fork BTS.

I can take critism, however blanket statements such as "The idea was soooo bad I didn't think it deserved a response" are impossible to prove wrong. I love a good debate, but if you can't bring anything to the table, other than a blanket statement with no substance, then I suppose I would prefer that you don't respond.

I am always hostile because there are so many assholes in the crypto community forums (and no one ever listens to me). I grew tired of it years ago and now I am an asshole towards everyone as somewhat of a defense mechanism, but I am capable of being reasonable from time to time. I am actually one of nicest and most reasonable people you'd ever have the chance of meeting IRL.

I am also very passionate about decentralized technology, so I have trouble holding holding my emotions back. I am one of the few that doesn't care about getting rich. I want to leverage decentralized technologies to promote my brand of anarchy throughout the world. If everything is decentralized, then I think governments will have trouble governing/regulating/enforcing things that shouldn't be governed/regulated/enforced (and will eventually admit defeat.)
« Last Edit: January 29, 2016, 11:10:22 pm by CoinHoarder »
https://www.decentralized.tech/ -> Market Data, Portfolios, Information, Links, Reviews, Forums, Blogs, Etc.
https://www.cryptohun.ch/ -> Tradable Blockchain Asset PvP Card Game

Offline lil_jay890

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1197
    • View Profile
He also wrote 'a idiot' instead of 'an idiot' :-D

You forgot to include punctuation at the end of your sentence.  ::)

Quote from: lil_jay890 link=topic=21202.msg275572#msg275572
lol.. you mad bro??
I am not mad, but I am annoyed that he can't understand written english and is wasting my time. This is pointless drivel, and you guys idiots are the reason that the Bitshares value is in the dumpster. Maybe if anyone listened to me once and a while around here Bitshares would be better off. You guys keep diluting with your unsuccesful attempts to spur liquidity on the DEX. Maybe when we are all in nursing homes the DEX will have liquidity (and actually be useful.)

I've read your posts about diluting for a while now... The idea was soooo bad I didn't think it deserved a response.  Plus you seem like the type of person who can't take any criticism, and just bitches and calls people idiots if you don't get your way.  Another reason I didn't respond.

If you think it's such a great idea go fork BTS.

38PTSWarrior

  • Guest
You have good humour.
I don't get it too. The people here have no feeling for good marketing. I have almost zero interest in doing anything for this project because of that.
Lame lame lame, and the most boring bunch.
 

Offline CoinHoarder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 660
  • In Cryptocoins I Trust
    • View Profile
He also wrote 'a idiot' instead of 'an idiot' :-D

You forgot to include punctuation at the end of your sentence.  ::)

Quote from: lil_jay890 link=topic=21202.msg275572#msg275572
lol.. you mad bro??
I am not mad, but I am annoyed that he can't understand written english and is wasting my time. This is pointless drivel, and you guys idiots are the reason that the Bitshares value is in the dumpster. Maybe if anyone listened to me once and a while around here Bitshares would be better off. You guys keep diluting with your unsuccesful attempts to spur liquidity on the DEX. Maybe when we are all in nursing homes the DEX will have liquidity (and actually be useful.)
https://www.decentralized.tech/ -> Market Data, Portfolios, Information, Links, Reviews, Forums, Blogs, Etc.
https://www.cryptohun.ch/ -> Tradable Blockchain Asset PvP Card Game

38PTSWarrior

  • Guest
He also wrote 'a idiot' instead of 'an idiot' :-D