Author Topic: poll for the "1 BTS for transfer" proposal  (Read 44453 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline bitcrab

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1912
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: bitcrab
  • GitHub: bitcrab
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.

This. bitcrab is using exchange funds to get people with his 'agenda' voted into the committee and is now staging to do a hostile takeover.  Not to mention that the committee was mislead by him once already, I really hope that users wake up and remove bad actors like him for the stability of the network. This is not good.

regarding the force settlement issue, I have explained clearly in this post:
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,20397.msg263064.html#msg263064
regarding the exchnage voting issue, I also give many explanation in this thread:
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,20920.msg270837.html#msg270837

everyone here can judge by themselves, no need another to tell them one people is good or bad.
Email:bitcrab@qq.com

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.
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

Offline Akado

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2752
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: akado
a boss open a store and sell product A.
normally in the market the price of A is $1.
for marketing the boss raise the price to $20, and broadcast to everyone: "if you can introduce another guy to buy, each time he pay $20, you will get $16 as cashback."
and he also tell everyone:"if you prepay $20000, then you can get $16 cashback 9 months later each time you buy one A."
someone called this referral program.

So you're telling me that the transfer of 1 BTS is actually higher just because of the referral system? This doesn't even make any sense.

First, by the time BitShares gets to one dollar (if it does), of course sending BitShares won't cost you a 20$ fee. It will have been lowered by the committee way before in order to keep up. Fees should be pegged to USD. You're assuming it does stay the same. We're talking with completely different numbers, you can't just compare stuff this way, it's not logical

Second, most users don't and won't send 1 BTS for quite a while. We're not going for micropayments for a while and even if we did, there would be a solution that wouldn't jeopardize the entire system like this. Most users transfer or trade thousands or hundreds of BitShares at once.

This argument doesn't make sense at all. If your point was to prove that isn't a referral system, well, I don't know if it's the best concept, but it's working. If your point is to prove BTS transfer fees are high for the sake of the referral system, this doesn't make any sense because obviously the fee of sending 1 BTS if it ever reaches parity with the dollar won't ever be 20 BTS obviously.


Once again you don't provide proof that this would significantly increase our volume! That's what missing. Do it, provide it and convince me with facts and you will get my support.

This is just changing stuff for a whim, just "because" and jeopardizing the network and BitShare's image as a brand simply "because". Just to try it out. Because someone "thinks" it's the right think to do without basing decisions on actual facts and data. The irony is that BitShares 2.0 and the referral system isn't even old yet to provide that same data you need so it's virtually impossible to prove atm that the referral system is broken.

This only leaves you with other option. If you can't prove the referral system is bad because it isn't old enough, you need to come up with something that shows us how our volume is going to increase.

Given this I ask you the following questions:

- Why we don't need the referral system» since you're making it useless
- How will the volume increase?
- How many new users will join to trade?
- How will you manage unsatisfied lifetime members?
- How will you handle the lack of businesses joining BitShares? Remember, businesses are the ones who bring customers.
- How will you handle the bad image BitShares will have due to lack of focus and constant change of decisions?
- If the exchange doesn't become profitable due to lack of fees, how will you handle development?

More importantly
- How does this "supposed" increase in volume compensate for all the damage that it will cause?

I think you can't really answer that because so far you've only provided us with assumptions.
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

Offline wallace

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 215
    • View Profile
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.
give me money, I will do...

Offline dxdxdx5889702

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 11
    • View Profile
Chinese community members of BM serious dissatisfaction >:( >:( >:(

Offline Tuck Fheman

ftw ... pay users 10 BTS for every transfer = even m0ar users!
 :P
Lucksacks.com - The Largest Cryptocurrency Freeroll Poker Site in the World!

Offline BTSdac

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1219
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: K1
we should create produce that user like .
the low price of bts show user do not like this product with high fee , user like lower fee ,
they are so many stupid man ,
do you know why market cap of doge coin is 4 times of bts .
clear-headed  please .
« Last Edit: January 28, 2016, 03:20:56 pm by BTSdac »
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 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?

jakub

  • Guest
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.

Offline wallace

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 215
    • View Profile
of couse low fee could bring us more liquility than high fee.
you even doubt this?
I have no idea about this duscussion

Lower fees will bring more liquidity, but only to a point.  After that point, you gain nothing in liquidity and only reduce income by having lower fees.  You have NOT shown that you have the slightest clue where that point is.  So the only guarantee is that we will reduce income.  That is a fact.  Do you get it?  Probably not.

you need to think it bigger, pink

temporary no income doesn't mean no income. a lot of corporations attract plenty of users through free services at early stage.
give me money, I will do...

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

Lower fees will bring more liquidity, but only to a point.  After that point, you gain nothing in liquidity and only reduce income by having lower fees.  You have NOT shown that you have the slightest clue where that point is.  So the only guarantee is that we will reduce income.  That is a fact.  Do you get it?  Probably not.

Offline deer

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 65
    • View Profile
I don‘t get it.

Someone wants us to pay for 300K just to lower the fee while we can just vote down and cost nothing?
Yes, you're right. You don't get it.

Oh,now I get it! The baby who are good at crying  can get more milk.

Offline wallace

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 215
    • View Profile
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?
give me money, I will do...

Offline mindphlux

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 232
    • View Profile
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.

This. bitcrab is using exchange funds to get people with his 'agenda' voted into the committee and is now staging to do a hostile takeover.  Not to mention that the committee was mislead by him once already, I really hope that users wake up and remove bad actors like him for the stability of the network. This is not good.
Please consider voting for my witness mindphlux.witness and my committee user mindphlux. I will not vote for changes that affect witness pay.

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.