[bisq-network/proposals] Change fee model to a more simple one? (#31)

Manfred Karrer notifications at github.com
Sat Jul 21 13:30:35 UTC 2018


The current fee model seems to be hard to understand for many users.
See current fee model formula: https://bisq.network/faq/#6

We could omit the minFee and the market distance factor. This was intended to get a mechanism for protecting against too many far distance offers but in reality we don't have that problem now. We can change the fee model later once we would run into such problems. There is some flexibility built in and changing the fee model does not break the trade even if both users have different versions.
 
So I suggest to use only a fixed percentage based fee. E.g. 0.2% of the trade amount. That is easy to understand for everyone and the other alternative to have a flat fix-price fee would have the disadvantage that it is too expensive for those who want to do a small-value test trade and those would get a negative impression of Bisq.

I am not 100% sure if that is a good idea and it would require a bit more of thought to be sure that updating the fee model does not have compatibility issues, but as we did that already in the past it should not be a big issue. Worst case we need to wait a few version updates until the deployed model gets activated and old versions might get failed trades - a sign that its time to update then...

Please share your though about that if it would make sense to change the fee model. 

-- 
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/31
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bisq.network/pipermail/bisq-github/attachments/20180721/82dc9cbe/attachment.html>


More information about the bisq-github mailing list