[bisq-network/proposals] Listing fee policy - step 1 (general) (#35)

[Chris Beams]

@BTC2CoreDevs wrote:

> If you charged any significant listing fee, you'd almost stop getting new coin listing requests

That's the idea. Charging a nominal fee (1 BTC is nothing compared to what centralized exchanges charge) is fundamentally an anti-spam measure to keep low-value / unserious assets out. If we keep getting dozens of time-wasting asset listing requests after this, we would likely raise the fee.

The asset projects out there that are really serious will blow past a 1 BTC, 2 or 10 BTC fee if they think it's worth having a presence on Bisq. I'm interested in deterring those asset projects who are simply taking advantage of Bisq and Bisq dev time as cost-free resources. It's our job to arrange incentives correctly to avoid this sort of thing, and charging nothing for asset listing has clearly not been the correct arrangement. Thus time for a change.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/bisq-network/proposals/issues/35#issuecomment-414032529
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bisq.network/pipermail/bisq-github/attachments/20180817/13d1ba37/attachment-0001.html>