https://github.com/bitshares/bsips/issues/186
Currently only LTMs can be referrers. This caused a problem that in order to earn money, you need to invest some money first, IMHO this drives away potential marketers E.G. small bloggers.
This BSIP proposes a protocol change to allow non-LTM accounts to refer new accounts. The referral income that a non-LTM referrer earned will be split to herself, her registrar and her referrer. If she upgrades to LTM, her future referral income will be kept by herself.
Risks:
This change will potentially turn the referral program into a MLM scheme, which could be illegal in some jurisdictions (I am not a layer, please correct me if I'm wrong), although every account has the option to upgrade to LTM to stop sharing new referral income to the registrar and referrer.
support...
Maybe one option to circumvent any MLM concerns is to tag and vest the referral income as a recurring payment towards acquiring LTM status?
You mean the blockchain automatically upgrade an account to LTM when she contributed enough to her registrar and referrer due to either self-paid fees or MLM referral income? I guess this is not in the interest of the registrars and referrers (they expect to earn more) thus will harm the whole eco-system.
Yes I'm sure they expect to earn more ..but they can't have it both ways... Your proposal is based on the assumption that Basic Members can help GROW the BTS ecosystem..
So the choice is to maintain the status quo and get nothing or modify the rules to allow Basic Members to earn referral income...
It is better to get some percentage of an expanding universe of payments versus getting 100% of a static or shrinking system..
The registrars and referrers will also benefit from an increased BTS price, market cap, liquidity, smartcoin production, trading volume, etc.,
I think under this proposal that the Basic Member should be limited to EARNING enough referral income to be upgraded to LTM status. This will at least guarantee that the registrar/referrer would be rewarded with referral income thru that time period..
OR alternatively restrict the upgrade to the Annual Membership which could be modified to allow for earning referral income to be split with the registrar/ referrer for 1 year..
and
If that Basic Member's financial status changes during the period and she can afford to purchase a LTM there is nothing stopping them from establishing a 2nd (or more) account(s)
Maybe their could be two types....LTM and LiteM ...to reflect a Basic Members upgrade via referral income..?
One thing.... there has to be clear rules that indicate an exemption from any price increase if the committee decides to raise the price of LTM during the "earning" period ..
and similarly accommodations have to be made if the LTM price is decreased because BTS is rising so that she does not overpay.