[bisq-network/proposals] Fee model for Asset listing (#42)

[Manfred Karrer]

@sqrrm Paying before merge/release is problematic as we need a date when the trial/warmup period starts and we don't want to manage that manually in the code. So the fee tx would be a good candidate but then if the asset issuer is paying the fee and the warmup period starts and it takes another 1-2 months for release we get issues here... Making a PR and get an asset listed has already some costs, so I hope that is enough to keep assets out which never pay any fee and are inavtive by default. If it happens once in a while I think we can live with it.

-- 
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/42#issuecomment-436841656
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bisq.network/pipermail/bisq-github/attachments/20181107/1aef7f6e/attachment.html>