poll for the "1 BTS for transfer" proposal

[Stan]

there is a bit off topic

I guess most of you don't know bitcrab because of he handle his business so professional, never ask for a cent from community. so you even don't know his exist.
there is a world in China: a baby who cried louder can get more candies.

and I guess you also don't know, bitcrab is one of the guys who first translate bitshares whitepaper to Chinese,  almost all Chinese fans got to known BTS because of him.

Ironically, you call this guy  toxic to bitshares
you don't learn to respect our old friend, no new friend will come
you don't learn to respect share holders(how many times you have said, fork it  if you not satisfied), no money will support us

Never let it be said that we don't appreciate old friends.

[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.

frankly speaking, what described above is something I really worry.

I am not saying that the current Bitshares referral program is pyramid scheme, but under some condition it may become something which is not very far from that.

set transfer fee to a level several times the reasonable level.
then "force" users to prepay and motivate them to refer others to prepay.

"create pain which does not exist before and force users to prepay to lessen the pain" - what I want to say is that this model is not welcomed in China BTS community.
I am not against referral program generally, but I don't think the current Bitshares referral program is healthy enough,  some improvement is necessary. we need a model like "make users feel comfortable for the fundamental service and attract them to pay more for advanced features".

in China a lot pyramid scheme/ponzi trap occured in recent years, for example:
VPAL - a ponzi trap which has some link to ripple.
MMM - come from Russia and catched a lot of followers in China and India, make a lot of people lost money.

just today, it is announced that the "ezubao" is a ponzi trap.

so we need to keep a distance away from this kind of things. and should be careful to invite potential users to prepay.

this conclusion are based on China context, and it is why China community has a strong request for a "make users feel comfortable for the fundamental service and attract them to pay more for advanced features" model.






 

[Stan]

I would very much like to see fewer rash and hateful words here.
I'm extremely disappointed with certain members of this community based on the tone of their posts in this thread.
While others are standing out for their clear and genuine efforts at reaching some understanding.

I understand a certain degree of skepticism and mistrust here, but we mustn't let it get the best of us.  We can solve this issue, like so many before it.

I for one stand to benefit greatly from the referral program, yet I wish for a solution to the great fee debate which gives the Chinese members of our community the tools they need to succeed, and therefore the tools we need for all of us to succeed.  Others have already pointed out the obvious, and I will reiterate, we are a global blockchain, a global community.  We need to look after the interests of as many members of our community as we can manage.  We will be as strong as our diversity, and we haven't yet begun to exhaust options for devising a plan which can accommodate the many communities of which we are comprised.  Let's not let haste, or greed, for our little piece of the pie, distract us from the greater purpose here.

I'm generally in the don't change things until we've had a chance to see what's really happening as a result of current parameters camp, but we are faced with a situation in which a significant portion of our community is expressing a strong desire for another way of doing business, and we would do well to listen.  Try to understand where bitcrab is coming from, and respond accordingly... don't just react.  @merivercap and @abit, among others,  are really keeping it real on this front.  Respect.

We must have real dialogue between all interested parties, not just throwing stones. There must be a way to resolve this issue to the benefit of everyone involved.  May reason and goodwill prevail.

C'mon, we're only on page 19 of this thread.. I think we'll have it around page 34.  Someone start a prediction market for the fee debate already. 

The whole world is counting on us... no pressure. 
@bytemaster alluded to some thoughts on the matter in the last mumble... I'm curious when he will weigh in... page 20?

Page 20 is up and BM has not weighed in.  This is a positive development for bitshares.  BM is letting the self-governing merchanism of bitshares to function.  Let the community, and its proxies and committee to discuss and sort things out.

  for your much-needed sensible post.  There are numerous emotionally charged responses before your post - some resorting to name calling, personal attacks and using expletives.  It is regretable that part of the bitshares community has lost the better part of themselves.  I urge all parties to remain calm.  Please voice your concerns and offer ideas and counter proposals instead. 

I firmly believe that we the bitshares community is well capable of civil discussions even in the face of sensitive topics.

This is correct.
We are very pleased watching the community take over.

[twitter]

there is a bit off topic

I guess most of you don't know bitcrab because of he handle his business so professional, never ask for a cent from community. so you even don't know his exist.
there is a world in China: a baby who cried louder can get more candies.

and I guess you also don't know, bitcrab is one of the guys who first translate bitshares whitepaper to Chinese,  almost all Chinese fans got to known BTS because of him.

Ironically, you call this guy  toxic to bitshares
you don't learn to respect our old friend, no new friend will come
you don't learn to respect share holders(how many times you have said, fork it  if you not satisfied), no money will support us

Agree, our community is far too un friendly to everyone and no good listener  at all[emoji12]

[cube]

I'm not a committee member, so I don't have access to this "fee schedule proposal".

You have access to the Committee telegram channel.  All known proxies were invited.  You were there once but you probably forgotten about it.  Please come into the channel. There are discussions going on and we need your input.

Also, name one bitcoin processor that profits from a) referrals or b) transaction fees.
Whatevery we pay them, it is already an extra profit for them.

You are right. Most payment processors are a 'commodity product' these days and they cannot command any more than a few small percentage of transfer fees.  If our competitors are charging a much lower fees,  what do we have that can differentiate from our competitors?

This. Which makes it compltely illogical to change atm, imo. This is the most rational option so why come up with stuff that will destabilize the network? I just don't get it.

Atm the status of the network is A
Someone wants B because they don't agree with A
There is no evidence A is harmful
There is [no] evidence that changing the status of the network (ie, B) is harmful.

What's even there left to discuss?

There is no concrete evidence shown in either A or B.  I do not see changing to X tx fee will bring in so much Y revenue/profit/number of new users.  Neither do I see a business plan that says with the current referral program, I can expect to see so much Z revenue/profit/number of new users by certain time frame.   Neither A nor B have given any business plan and this is giving rise to the current great discussion.

But this idea weakens the purpose of buying LTM in the first place.
The smaller the difference between non-LTM and LTM, the harder it is to sell to anybody.

We do need to give the referrers some bullets to use when talking to their potential customers while ensuring that our other businesses eg trading biz can function properly.  This is a delicate balancing act we need to make.

Moreover, I think you can return 16k BTS to the user immediately after s/he upgrades, as you'll be sure to be compensated in 90 days by the vesting process.
This way you loan 16k to the customer but this loan is absolutely NOT safe.
It all makes sense if you have other ways to make profit on this customer.

Corrected.

The vesting period of 90days means a fluctuation of bts price.  From a business perspective, you need to keep accounting of the price fluctuation at the point of sales and the potential of losses if bts price dropped by end of the vesting period.  Some may not be interested to offer a non-profit faucet because of that.

[cube]

I would very much like to see fewer rash and hateful words here.
I'm extremely disappointed with certain members of this community based on the tone of their posts in this thread.
While others are standing out for their clear and genuine efforts at reaching some understanding.

I understand a certain degree of skepticism and mistrust here, but we mustn't let it get the best of us.  We can solve this issue, like so many before it.

I for one stand to benefit greatly from the referral program, yet I wish for a solution to the great fee debate which gives the Chinese members of our community the tools they need to succeed, and therefore the tools we need for all of us to succeed.  Others have already pointed out the obvious, and I will reiterate, we are a global blockchain, a global community.  We need to look after the interests of as many members of our community as we can manage.  We will be as strong as our diversity, and we haven't yet begun to exhaust options for devising a plan which can accommodate the many communities of which we are comprised.  Let's not let haste, or greed, for our little piece of the pie, distract us from the greater purpose here.

I'm generally in the don't change things until we've had a chance to see what's really happening as a result of current parameters camp, but we are faced with a situation in which a significant portion of our community is expressing a strong desire for another way of doing business, and we would do well to listen.  Try to understand where bitcrab is coming from, and respond accordingly... don't just react.  @merivercap and @abit, among others,  are really keeping it real on this front.  Respect.

We must have real dialogue between all interested parties, not just throwing stones. There must be a way to resolve this issue to the benefit of everyone involved.  May reason and goodwill prevail.

C'mon, we're only on page 19 of this thread.. I think we'll have it around page 34.  Someone start a prediction market for the fee debate already. 

The whole world is counting on us... no pressure. 
@bytemaster alluded to some thoughts on the matter in the last mumble... I'm curious when he will weigh in... page 20?

Page 20 is up and BM has not weighed in.  This is a positive development for bitshares.  BM is letting the self-governing merchanism of bitshares to function.  Let the community, and its proxies and committee to discuss and sort things out.

  for your much-needed sensible post.  There are numerous emotionally charged responses before your post - some resorting to name calling, personal attacks and using expletives.  It is regretable that part of the bitshares community has lost the better part of themselves.  I urge all parties to remain calm.  Please voice your concerns and offer ideas and counter proposals instead. 

I firmly believe that we the bitshares community is well capable of civil discussions even in the face of sensitive topics.

[puppies]

I have tried to remain respectful to bitcrab and others even when I disagree with them.  There have been some from both communities that have lowered themselves to making personal attacks.  I have stated that I find all of that distasteful, and we should work to remain civil.  Bitcrab has taken a large amount of abuse, and he has largely remained calm and professional.  I have more respect for bitcrab now than I did when he began this thread.

[alt]

there is a bit off topic

I guess most of you don't know bitcrab because of he handle his business so professional, never ask for a cent from community. so you even don't know his exist.
there is a world in China: a baby who cried louder can get more candies.

and I guess you also don't know, bitcrab is one of the guys who first translate bitshares whitepaper to Chinese,  almost all Chinese fans got to known BTS because of him.

Ironically, you call this guy  toxic to bitshares
you don't learn to respect our old friend, no new friend will come
you don't learn to respect share holders(how many times you have said, fork it  if you not satisfied), no money will support us

[clayop]

Where's bitcrab's plan then? What does he intend to do? How does he intend getting more users? What plan can he shows us that his business model can outcompete OpenLedger? That way people might consider him. Until then, they won't.

what bitcrab have done for BTS?
he is the fiat gateway for bitCNY
look at bitCNY and bitUSD market, it's bitcrab  who make bitCNY peg CNY more better.
he had develop a whole system,  exchange from bitCNY to fiatCNY automaticly.
and he never asked for 1 BTS from community.
before bitcrab, gulu is the gateway for fiatCNY, but his business is manual, bad user experience, and community have give a 100% delegate to  sponsor gulu.

also, bitcrab have ask btc38 to accept bitCNY, TCNY
he have ask yunbi to accept bitCNY also, but had been refused, because they don't want to spent more time for BTS, they have lose interesting for BTS.

and bitcrab have try to find a USD fiat gateway
and maybe many other things I don't know

No replies on this post :p
Cannot rebut?

[CoinHoarder]

Alright, school work done! I decided that I don't have the time or will to enact this evil plan. Also, someone can kill the "lucrative" part of it, so here goes nothing...

How to Monopolize the Referral Business:
Bob wants to monopolize the referral business because he likes making money. He sets up a business that works like the rakeback business in poker [1]. Anyone that signs up under him, he gives X% of the fees back to them that he earns. It costs him very little to set this up. It mostly just costs him the time it takes to program an automated solution. Bob makes it known that if anyone competes with him, he will burn the referral business to the ground by coming over the top of whatever percentage of rakeback they offer until 100%. There is then no incentive to compete with Bob using the same business model, because if you do he will come over the top of your offer- all the way to a 100% rakeback offering. Assuming everyone acts in their own self-interest, they would register for an account with Bob as their referrer because they will save a lot of BTS on the fees. Monopolizing the referral business would not work if someone was motivated enough to kill the referral business outright (see below.)

If this works lets let Bitcrab implement this so that his customerers/clients have lower fees/expenses and lets see how it goes.

I know this would work but it would be centralized. You could create a more decentralized version with account permissions and multiple parties, but that makes it a lot more complicated to implement. The person that offers the highest rakeback will be the referrer that people want to sign up with. China could setup one with a very high percentage (or 100%) which would effectively nullifying the referral program.

How to Kill Referral Businesses:
Charlie wants the referral business to die because he thinks the inflated fees are bad for the future of Bitshares. He sets up a business that works like the rakeback business in poker [1]. Anyone that signs up under him, he gives 100% of the fees back to them that he earns. It costs him very little to set this up. It mostly just costs him the time it takes to program an automated solution. Assuming everyone acts in their own self-interest, they would register for an account with Charlie as their referrer because they will save a lot of BTS on the fees. No one can compete with 100% rakeback, and all referral businesses that rely on the referral program for profit would die off.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rake_(poker)#Rakeback

I assume that I
Ok, what will happen if I spam/create 15.342.736.643 accounts with Charlie as referral?

Good point- that's something I hadn't thought of but I don't think it would make my plan not work. I suppose I would implement SMS verification, email verification, or social verification to make it very complicated and expensive (cell phone #s) to register many accounts with the intention of sabotage. Yet, to be realistic it should remain easy enough for people to sign up for accounts. So, all types of verification checks would probably not be used.

Edit: You could also charge whatever it cost in BTS to register an account. I think that people would gladly pay the (currently 19 BTS) registration fee considering they will save the much in fees in no time (6 BTS per transaction for instance.) This would effectively make it impossible to abuse (at least in this way.)

[chryspano]

Alright, school work done! I decided that I don't have the time or will to enact this evil plan. Also, someone can kill the "lucrative" part of it, so here goes nothing...

How to Monopolize the Referral Business:
Bob wants to monopolize the referral business because he likes making money. He sets up a business that works like the rakeback business in poker [1]. Anyone that signs up under him, he gives X% of the fees back to them that he earns. It costs him very little to set this up. It mostly just costs him the time it takes to program an automated solution. Bob makes it known that if anyone competes with him, he will burn the referral business to the ground by coming over the top of whatever percentage of rakeback they offer until 100%. There is then no incentive to compete with Bob using the same business model, because if you do he will come over the top of your offer- all the way to a 100% rakeback offering. Assuming everyone acts in their own self-interest, they would register for an account with Bob as their referrer because they will save a lot of BTS on the fees. Monopolizing the referral business would not work if someone was motivated enough to kill the referral business outright (see below.)

If this works lets let Bitcrab implement this so that his customerers/clients have lower fees/expenses and lets see how it goes.

How to Kill Referral Businesses:
Charlie wants the referral business to die because he thinks the inflated fees are bad for the future of Bitshares. He sets up a business that works like the rakeback business in poker [1]. Anyone that signs up under him, he gives 100% of the fees back to them that he earns. It costs him very little to set this up. It mostly just costs him the time it takes to program an automated solution. Assuming everyone acts in their own self-interest, they would register for an account with Charlie as their referrer because they will save a lot of BTS on the fees. No one can compete with 100% rakeback, and all referral businesses that rely on the referral program for profit would die off.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rake_(poker)#Rakeback

Ok, what will happen if I spam/create 15.342.736.643 accounts with Charlie as referral?

[Xeldal]

What ways are there for bitshares to incentivize users to pay a higher fee by choice?

Can the referral system be an option for some benefit, but not mandatory? what benefit?

I would pay a higher then necessary fee, if ...

I started a new thread for this here if anyone's interested.
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,21262.msg276150.html#msg276150

[CoinHoarder]

Oops, I posted this on the wrong thread. Following up on my previous posts ITT:

Alright, school work done! I decided that I don't have the time or will to enact this evil plan. Also, someone can kill the "lucrative" part of it, so here goes nothing...

How to Monopolize the Referral Business:
Bob wants to monopolize the referral business because he likes making money. He sets up a business that works like the rakeback business in poker [1]. Anyone that signs up under him, he gives X% of the fees back to them that he earns. It costs him very little to set this up. It mostly just costs him the time it takes to program an automated solution. Bob makes it known that if anyone competes with him, he will burn the referral business to the ground by coming over the top of whatever percentage of rakeback they offer until 100%. There is then no incentive to compete with Bob using the same business model, because if you do he will come over the top of your offer- all the way to a 100% rakeback offering. Assuming everyone acts in their own self-interest, they would register for an account with Bob as their referrer because they will save a lot of BTS on the fees. Monopolizing the referral business would not work if someone was motivated enough to kill the referral business outright (see below.)

How to Kill Referral Businesses:
Charlie wants the referral business to die because he thinks the inflated fees are bad for the future of Bitshares. He sets up a business that works like the rakeback business in poker [1]. Anyone that signs up under him, he gives 100% of the fees back to them that he earns. It costs him very little to set this up. It mostly just costs him the time it takes to program an automated solution. Assuming everyone acts in their own self-interest, they would register for an account with Charlie as their referrer because they will save a lot of BTS on the fees. No one can compete with 100% rakeback, and all referral businesses that rely on the referral program for profit would die off.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rake_(poker)#Rakeback

[alt]

I understand you now.
I guess the conflict is you need fast money and can't wait.
but I am afraid it's very hard to earn fast money from users
I suggest you have a long term plan, and seek venture capital, maybe you can get fast money from them.

another problem, why Europe bank have a high transfer fee?
I think it's not for a simply transfer service, maybe include some other cost,
like they need to take responsibility to avoid your wrong transfer,
they need to maintain the customers real identify, credit infomation, and offer these to customers
these are my guess, I just can't belive in a free market, a simply transfer service with high fee can win in the final.

I have no income, zero.
 
The mobile wallets will bring us referral income. This income is sorely needed to get the wallet past v1.0 and keep it bug free, constantly improving and ad-free. I have a family of four and my wife works 3 jobs, she is NOT happy that I have had no income for over a year. I have put my life blood, sweat and tears into this business and to have the only thing I have going yanked out from under me once again, well, I have to say this is it. Nuff said. Please enable micro-payments with near zero fees all the way up to large POS payments such as a Ferarri (charge a much higher fee of course) on a dynamic scale, but I would definitely cap it and use the Smartcoins as the % basis instead of the volatile BTS. @abit @jakub @xeroc @fav @BunkerChain Labs @chryspano and many others here know how important the network effect is, we need dynamic fees.
 
The Smartcoins POS for Odoo can bring us ALL an income. Dynamic fees are required here as well. Everything from 5 cent gumballs all the way up to houses and yachts and beyond.
 
Flat models don't scale, nature itself is dynamic, mimic nature and THRIVE.

[yvv]

You do understand that you are paying higher rent than you would if your company did not have this referral program right?  Just because they don't state this doesn't make it untrue.  The money has to come from somewhere.  I am shocked that you are not angry that you are being overcharged by your landlord, and kept in rent slavery that you can only get out of by referring new renters.

No. Exactly opposite happens. We have the lowest fees in neighborhood, because our landlord fills available apartments fast. They pay me $300, because I save them bunch of money. Unoccupied apartment cost them, since they have to pay mortgage for their property. Their motivation is clear and reasonable. This is how business people do their business. This is not how bitshares referral works. Bitshares referrers rob the network and new users. They bite 80% of fees from reserve pool, then dump it on the market for fiat, and then have a good time with blackjack and hookers.