Author Topic: poll for the "1 BTS for transfer" proposal  (Read 48316 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Empirical1.2

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1366
    • View Profile
I suggest discussing a reasonable fee schedule that reduces fees but not too dramatically, covers network costs, ensures spam deterrence, and enables micro-transactions.  I think something like .1% fee with $.005 minimum and around $.10-.20 maximum would work.

 +5%

I  think something like 0.1% with a minimum of $0.01 and maximum of $0.1/$0.2 would be better.
If you want to take the island burn the boats

Offline tbone

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 632
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: tbone2
of couse low fee could bring us more liquility than high fee.
you even doubt this?
I have no idea about this duscussion
The crucial thing here is: how much more?
Yes, I doubt that it will change liquidity by more than 5%.
If you think otherwise, you need to prove it somehow, so that we have some rational basis to assume it's worth destroying the referral business incentive.
nobody can tell you the exactely numuber
and I have no interesting for destroy the referral business totally.
like stan had said, you need to think bigger, don't focus on the poor transfer/trade fees
referral business can work perfect with low trade/transfer fees, just think other more special service, take money from those service.

alt, I do believe your intention are good.
But can you honestly say you are sure that lowering transfer fees to 1 BTS will make a significant change?
Would you honestly be willing to lose people like Ronny (the owner of OpenLedger), just to execute this experiment and find out that nothing has changed?

The current transfer fees, most probably, are not the primary reason for low user adoption and low liquidity.
We need to remove the primary reason first. Then we can revise the fees.
it's not about the fees directely, let me explain it more clearly

As I have heard from many people, they said BTS community only know money,
they will dilution as they like, they set a much higher fees sent to refer account
they do everything for money, require payment for every hour's work.

this is what others see BTS community
is this what you want to see?
everyone do everything would ask for a payment from dilution
if bytemaster, xeroc, cass, svk, abit can ask for payment for their work, why others need to work freely

I don't belive a community like this can success.
my advice is don't earn money from transfer/trade fees, just need to avoid spam attack
we develop special service to earn money, the special service people can choose whether need to use it.
we can eary more money from special service.
and try our best to stop dilution, pay from the network service's income.

Think about this.  We have costs.  And if income is too low, those costs cause dilution.  So you are in favor of dramatically reducing fees, and at the same time you are so against dilution.  Do you see the contradiction? 

In any event, I think your point about having low fees for transfers and higher fees for "special services" is reasonable.  I don't think most people here would disagree with that.  But if we set the fees crazy low, we're just throwing away money and achieving nothing except making the referral program less effective.  Also,  we can't have a real conversation if you're talking about a 1BTS flat fee.  If you want to be taken seriously, you should stop that immediately. 

I suggest discussing a reasonable fee schedule that reduces fees but not too dramatically, covers network costs, ensures spam deterrence, and enables micro-transactions.  I think something like .1% fee with $.005 minimum and around $.10-.20 maximum would work.

By the way, I would also advance the idea of having a different fee for CNY vs. USD transactions.  So with the example above, perhaps the same .1% fee and $.005 minimum, but a maximum of around $.03-.05.   Making this work might not be trivial, but I'm sure it's very possible.  And it might help us arrive at a solution that works for everyone.  That way we can move on and work together to solve the BitAssets liquidity problem.  What do you think?

Offline bitcrab

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1920
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: bitcrab
  • GitHub: bitcrab
I hope you do not announce it in recent days,  if you announce it today I can only reject it, no other choice.
@bitcrab
And what is the reason for you having no choice?

because I plan to propose to do the real fee reduction to 1 BTS if I get enough support from forum.
so it will be better to announce your worker proposal after I finished this issue, either fail or succeed finally.
my proposal do not cost BTS, while yours will cost a lot.

I'm sorry bitcrab, but who are you exactly?

does below answer your question?

Email:bitcrab@qq.com

Offline fav

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4278
  • No Pain, No Gain
    • View Profile
    • Follow Me!
  • BitShares: fav
I hope you do not announce it in recent days,  if you announce it today I can only reject it, no other choice.
@bitcrab
And what is the reason for you having no choice?

because I plan to propose to do the real fee reduction to 1 BTS if I get enough support from forum.
so it will be better to announce your worker proposal after I finished this issue, either fail or succeed finally.
my proposal do not cost BTS, while yours will cost a lot.

Why do you continue to push for fees that are below our costs?  This is very irresponsible.  Also, even a flat fee at our cost would effectively kill the referral program.  If you succeed, that would be the second time you pushed your agenda through a back door.  That is terrible behavior.  You need to be stopped and removed from the committee.

 +5%

Offline wallace

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 215
    • View Profile

yes, because currently I do think lowering the fees is the right way to lead bitshares to success.

but why and how? this hasn't been explained. Business decisions made on assumptions while we already have people working for us because of the referral system and current fee structure.

Is it really worth it send OpenLedger and POS away just because of an assumption? What about other people? @JonnyBitcoin is working on his exchange, there are other projects that we might not be aware of.

We're just going to send them away, because of assumptions? No facts or proof? We're doing this when we've shown signs of growing? After just 2 months? What's happening is actually positive and you want to mess it all up just because of an assumption.

Wow, just wow.

I didn't get why lowering fees means send OL and jonny away?

I dont know about Jonny but OL is definitely working based on the current fee model and without it, has no incentive to work. Like other businesses that might want to join.

Plus 1 bts fee makes the network easily vulnerable to spam

as I know OL is an exchange based on bts chain, a industry level trade experiences and plenty of users and liquidity. the propaganda we made to the exchange is based on this. if only a refreral system can bring users that's not our orignial goal, just if, and I don't see the actual real users number support this. what we need is to attract users, current high fees prevent a lot of crypto people join into bts, don't tell me I'm wrong, I'm in chinese QQ group and a lot of users complain this. they have no incentive to promote our prodcut, I'm very disappointed about this, maybe you guys don't mind this, you think these people are only speculators, but I think these people just what currently we need.
give me money, I will do...

Offline Akado

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2752
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: akado
Can we just take this to voting and get done with it please? I think we need @kenCode , @ccedk, @JonnyBitcoin and @monsterer / @Shentist  to tell us if they agree/disagree with this and the impact it would have to their businesses so everyone gets enlightened. Wasn't Metaexchange thinking about the possibility to migrate to BitShares? How would this affect you?

Then finally vote and get this done with. We have already lost too many time to this kind of discussions instead of addressing other important matters.

If we only dedicated so much time to find new ways to provide liquidity instead of insisting on this matter, I'm sure we would already have figured something out. Instead, we're constantly beating the same stuff over and over again..
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

Offline alt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2821
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: baozi
You ask why?  Should I explain it to you like you're 5?  bitcrab is arguing to have a fat fee that is LESS than the cost to the network, and LESS than the spam deterrent.  He wants us to lose money on transfers, and he doesn't mind opening up an attack vector.  Do you think that is responsible behavior?

yes, because currently I do think lowering the fees is the right way to lead bitshares to success.

How can we have a rational conversation if you say you're ok with lowering the fees to BELOW spam deterrent?  Do you even know what that means?
if you are talking about avoid the spam sttack, the attacker should make order and cancel order, that's free 1 day ago, and now the cost is 0.1 BTS

Offline kenCode

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2283
    • View Profile
    • Agorise
I hope you do not announce it in recent days,  if you announce it today I can only reject it, no other choice.
@bitcrab
And what is the reason for you having no choice?

because I plan to propose to do the real fee reduction to 1 BTS if I get enough support from forum.
so it will be better to announce your worker proposal after I finished this issue, either fail or succeed finally.
my proposal do not cost BTS, while yours will cost a lot.

I'm sorry bitcrab, but who are you exactly?
kenCode - Decentraliser @ Agorise
Matrix/Keybase/Hive/Commun/Github: @Agorise
www.PalmPay.chat

Offline Akado

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

yes, because currently I do think lowering the fees is the right way to lead bitshares to success.

but why and how? this hasn't been explained. Business decisions made on assumptions while we already have people working for us because of the referral system and current fee structure.

Is it really worth it send OpenLedger and POS away just because of an assumption? What about other people? @JonnyBitcoin is working on his exchange, there are other projects that we might not be aware of.

We're just going to send them away, because of assumptions? No facts or proof? We're doing this when we've shown signs of growing? After just 2 months? What's happening is actually positive and you want to mess it all up just because of an assumption.

Wow, just wow.

I didn't get why lowering fees means send OL and jonny away?

I dont know about Jonny but OL is definitely working based on the current fee model and without it, has no incentive to work. Like other businesses that might want to join.

Plus 1 bts fee makes the network easily vulnerable to spam
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

Offline alt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2821
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: baozi
of couse low fee could bring us more liquility than high fee.
you even doubt this?
I have no idea about this duscussion
The crucial thing here is: how much more?
Yes, I doubt that it will change liquidity by more than 5%.
If you think otherwise, you need to prove it somehow, so that we have some rational basis to assume it's worth destroying the referral business incentive.
nobody can tell you the exactely numuber
and I have no interesting for destroy the referral business totally.
like stan had said, you need to think bigger, don't focus on the poor transfer/trade fees
referral business can work perfect with low trade/transfer fees, just think other more special service, take money from those service.

alt, I do believe your intention are good.
But can you honestly say you are sure that lowering transfer fees to 1 BTS will make a significant change?
Would you honestly be willing to lose people like Ronny (the owner of OpenLedger), just to execute this experiment and find out that nothing has changed?

The current transfer fees, most probably, are not the primary reason for low user adoption and low liquidity.
We need to remove the primary reason first. Then we can revise the fees.
it's not about the fees directely, let me explain it more clearly

As I have heard from many people, they said BTS community only know money,
they will dilution as they like, they set a much higher fees sent to refer account
they do everything for money, require payment for every hour's work.

this is what others see BTS community
is this what you want to see?
everyone do everything would ask for a payment from dilution
if bytemaster, xeroc, cass, svk, abit can ask for payment for their work, why others need to work freely

I don't belive a community like this can success.
my advice is don't earn money from transfer/trade fees, just need to avoid spam attack
we develop special service to earn money, the special service people can choose whether need to use it.
we can eary more money from special service.
and try our best to stop dilution, pay from the network service's income.

Offline BTSdac

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1219
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: K1
About the transfer fee , there are so many discuss ,  forum is not a good place to achieve the final agreement,  since we have voting system base on shares value,
so I suggest that create a new proposal that reduce the fee , and let all of us vote it by shares . 
github.com :pureland
BTS2.0 API :ws://139.196.37.179:8091
BTS2.0 API 数据源ws://139.196.37.179:8091

Offline lil_jay890

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1197
    • View Profile

yes, because currently I do think lowering the fees is the right way to lead bitshares to success.

but why and how? this hasn't been explained. Business decisions made on assumptions while we already have people working for us because of the referral system and current fee structure.

Is it really worth it send OpenLedger and POS away just because of an assumption? What about other people? @JonnyBitcoin is working on his exchange, there are other projects that we might not be aware of.

We're just going to send them away, because of assumptions? No facts or proof? We're doing this when we've shown signs of growing? After just 2 months? What's happening is actually positive and you want to mess it all up just because of an assumption.

Wow, just wow.

I didn't get why lowering fees means send OL and jonny away?

Because it blows up the referral program

Offline wallace

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 215
    • View Profile

yes, because currently I do think lowering the fees is the right way to lead bitshares to success.

but why and how? this hasn't been explained. Business decisions made on assumptions while we already have people working for us because of the referral system and current fee structure.

Is it really worth it send OpenLedger and POS away just because of an assumption? What about other people? @JonnyBitcoin is working on his exchange, there are other projects that we might not be aware of.

We're just going to send them away, because of assumptions? No facts or proof? We're doing this when we've shown signs of growing? After just 2 months? What's happening is actually positive and you want to mess it all up just because of an assumption.

Wow, just wow.

I didn't get why lowering fees means send OL and jonny away?
give me money, I will do...

Offline Akado

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2752
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: akado
Chinese community members of BM serious dissatisfaction >:( >:( >:(

lol, so what, they already sold

The fundamental issue that is dividing us is this:

Do we want adoption?

or do we want profitability?

Nothing was shown that proves 1 bts fee will create the desired adoption and that it will compensate for all the damage caused.
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

Offline tbone

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 632
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: tbone2
I hope you do not announce it in recent days,  if you announce it today I can only reject it, no other choice.
@bitcrab
And what is the reason for you having no choice?



because I plan to propose to do the real fee reduction to 1 BTS if I get enough support from forum.
so it will be better to announce your worker proposal after I finished this issue, either fail or succeed finally.
my proposal do not cost BTS, while yours will cost a lot.

Why do you continue to push for fees that are below our costs?  This is very irresponsible.  Also, even a flat fee at our cost would effectively kill the referral program.  If you succeed, that would be the second time you pushed your agenda through a back door.  That is terrible behavior.  You need to be stopped and removed from the committee.

why? just because a few people think this is not something you like?

You ask why?  Should I explain it to you like you're 5?  bitcrab is arguing to have a flat fee that is LESS than the cost to the network, and LESS than the spam deterrent.  He wants us to lose money on transfers, and he doesn't mind opening up an attack vector.  Do you think that is responsible behavior?

yes, because currently I do think lowering the fees is the right way to lead bitshares to success.

How can we have a rational conversation if you say you're ok with lowering the fees to BELOW spam deterrent?  Do you even know what that means?