<p>If I may, I would like to weigh in on only the portion of this debate that affects Blur Network and the other currently proposed PRs that are in Limbo, currently.</p>
<p>Specifically with reference to applying a retroactive 1BTC fee, in the manner <a class="user-mention" data-hovercard-user-id="301810" data-octo-click="hovercard-link-click" data-octo-dimensions="link_type:self" href="https://github.com/cbeams">@cbeams</a> has suggested:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Retroactively apply this policy to all current open asset listing PRs. i.e. add a comment to each PR letting the submitter know that if they get their fee paid before Aug X, their asset will make it into v0.7.2. And that if not, it can make the next release.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>This seems terribly biased in favor of certain assets -- namely, Conceal $CCX.  I would ask, in fairness, if a 1 BTC fee is to be applied retroactively... That those parties required to pay the fee, should include all assets who have submitted PRs since the last release 0.7.1.</p>
<p>The specification of "open PRs" is troublesome. Especially if one looks at the fact that the only non-paying party would include CCX.   How would this apply to BLUR, as an asset?  A simple unwillingness to merge the final PR, when 2/3 PRs have been merged for listing of BLUR (see: <a class="issue-link js-issue-link" data-error-text="Failed to load issue title" data-id="348927711" data-permission-text="Issue title is private" data-url="https://github.com/bisq-network/bisq-desktop/issues/1617" href="https://github.com/bisq-network/bisq-desktop/pull/1617">bisq-network/bisq-desktop/pull/1617</a> and <a class="issue-link js-issue-link" data-error-text="Failed to load issue title" data-id="348928977" data-permission-text="Issue title is private" data-url="https://github.com/bisq-network/bisq-core/issues/142" href="https://github.com/bisq-network/bisq-core/pull/142">bisq-network/bisq-core/pull/142</a>) seems a poor reason to be required to pay such a fee.</p>
<p><a class="user-mention" data-hovercard-user-id="1449498" data-octo-click="hovercard-link-click" data-octo-dimensions="link_type:self" href="https://github.com/ManfredKarrer">@ManfredKarrer</a> noted that conventions were followed, and the only PR remaining is <a class="issue-link js-issue-link" data-error-text="Failed to load issue title" data-id="337947371" data-permission-text="Issue title is private" data-url="https://github.com/bisq-network/bisq-assets/issues/58" href="https://github.com/bisq-network/bisq-assets/pull/58">bisq-network/bisq-assets/pull/58</a>.  Such practices will cause many projects, Blur included, to wonder why there is a single man acting as the gatekeeper on a Decentralized Exchange... that is now charging a 1 BTC fee in a way that so clearly favors a single party.</p>

<p style="font-size:small;-webkit-text-size-adjust:none;color:#666;">—<br />You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.<br />Reply to this email directly, <a href="https://github.com/bisq-network/proposals/issues/35#issuecomment-414084506">view it on GitHub</a>, or <a href="https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AkpZtioRXAWGDvQS23ziExvVccDVRf9kks5uSHlpgaJpZM4V81bG">mute the thread</a>.<img src="https://github.com/notifications/beacon/AkpZtu5dk34ELrgkMaVND9-ww8gb_SVFks5uSHlpgaJpZM4V81bG.gif" height="1" width="1" alt="" /></p>
<script type="application/json" data-scope="inboxmarkup">{"api_version":"1.0","publisher":{"api_key":"05dde50f1d1a384dd78767c55493e4bb","name":"GitHub"},"entity":{"external_key":"github/bisq-network/proposals","title":"bisq-network/proposals","subtitle":"GitHub repository","main_image_url":"https://assets-cdn.github.com/images/email/message_cards/header.png","avatar_image_url":"https://assets-cdn.github.com/images/email/message_cards/avatar.png","action":{"name":"Open in GitHub","url":"https://github.com/bisq-network/proposals"}},"updates":{"snippets":[{"icon":"PERSON","message":"@blur-network in #35: If I may, I would like to weigh in on only the portion of this debate that affects Blur Network and the other currently proposed PRs that are in Limbo, currently. \r\n\r\nSpecifically with reference to applying a retroactive 1BTC fee, in the manner @cbeams has suggested: \r\n\r\n\u003eRetroactively apply this policy to all current open asset listing PRs. i.e. add a comment to each PR letting the submitter know that if they get their fee paid before Aug X, their asset will make it into v0.7.2. And that if not, it can make the next release.\r\n\r\nThis seems terribly biased in favor of certain assets -- namely, Conceal $CCX.  I would ask, in fairness, if a 1 BTC fee is to be applied retroactively... That those parties required to pay the fee, should include all assets who have submitted PRs since the last release 0.7.1.  \r\n\r\nThe specification of \"open PRs\" is troublesome. Especially if one looks at the fact that the only non-paying party would include CCX.   How would this apply to BLUR, as an asset?  A simple unwillingness to merge the final PR, when 2/3 PRs have been merged for listing of BLUR (see: bisq-network/bisq-desktop/pull/1617 and bisq-network/bisq-core/pull/142) seems a poor reason to be required to pay such a fee. \r\n\r\n@ManfredKarrer noted that conventions were followed, and the only PR remaining is bisq-network/bisq-assets/pull/58.  Such practices will cause many projects, Blur included, to wonder why there is a single man acting as the gatekeeper on a Decentralized Exchange... that is now charging a 1 BTC fee in a way that so clearly favors a single party. "}],"action":{"name":"View Issue","url":"https://github.com/bisq-network/proposals/issues/35#issuecomment-414084506"}}}</script>
<script type="application/ld+json">[
{
"@context": "http://schema.org",
"@type": "EmailMessage",
"potentialAction": {
"@type": "ViewAction",
"target": "https://github.com/bisq-network/proposals/issues/35#issuecomment-414084506",
"url": "https://github.com/bisq-network/proposals/issues/35#issuecomment-414084506",
"name": "View Issue"
},
"description": "View this Issue on GitHub",
"publisher": {
"@type": "Organization",
"name": "GitHub",
"url": "https://github.com"
}
},
{
"@type": "MessageCard",
"@context": "http://schema.org/extensions",
"hideOriginalBody": "false",
"originator": "AF6C5A86-E920-430C-9C59-A73278B5EFEB",
"title": "Re: [bisq-network/proposals] Listing fee policy - step 1 (general) (#35)",
"sections": [
{
"text": "",
"activityTitle": "**The Blur Network**",
"activityImage": "https://assets-cdn.github.com/images/email/message_cards/avatar.png",
"activitySubtitle": "@blur-network",
"facts": [

]
}
],
"potentialAction": [
{
"name": "Add a comment",
"@type": "ActionCard",
"inputs": [
{
"isMultiLine": true,
"@type": "TextInput",
"id": "IssueComment",
"isRequired": false
}
],
"actions": [
{
"name": "Comment",
"@type": "HttpPOST",
"target": "https://api.github.com",
"body": "{\n\"commandName\": \"IssueComment\",\n\"repositoryFullName\": \"bisq-network/proposals\",\n\"issueId\": 35,\n\"IssueComment\": \"{{IssueComment.value}}\"\n}"
}
]
},
{
"name": "Close issue",
"@type": "HttpPOST",
"target": "https://api.github.com",
"body": "{\n\"commandName\": \"IssueClose\",\n\"repositoryFullName\": \"bisq-network/proposals\",\n\"issueId\": 35\n}"
},
{
"targets": [
{
"os": "default",
"uri": "https://github.com/bisq-network/proposals/issues/35#issuecomment-414084506"
}
],
"@type": "OpenUri",
"name": "View on GitHub"
},
{
"name": "Unsubscribe",
"@type": "HttpPOST",
"target": "https://api.github.com",
"body": "{\n\"commandName\": \"MuteNotification\",\n\"threadId\": 368268998\n}"
}
],
"themeColor": "26292E"
}
]</script>