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

[Manfred Karrer]

@bitcoinx2 
There is address validation required for any coin, so dynamically loading coins is not enough. Also it would require quite a bit of engineering effort - effort which is not worth  it if we see what 99% of the altcoins have added to Bisq (>90% have been never traded, so added value is basically zero).
We have a spam and free rider problem here. Listing a coin adds costs / effort / liabilities to Bisq but the costs are very low to the altcoin lister. We tried that path since 2 years now and result is not satisfying. Expectation was that we get some healthy trade volume and promotion from their side and that was basically not the case for the huge majority. There are exceptions but those would probably also not have nay problem to pay a moderate fee. 

I understand that there are valid projects like yours (I don't have time to check it out but I assume your intentions are aligned with Bisq's valued). But how should we figure out which 1 in 100 projects is like that without adding a lot of valuation effort (we don't want to get spammed with "why our coins is 100 times better then all the other 1000s altcoins")?  If you have any idea/suggestion please let us know. I really would like to support such coins.

-- 
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-417852675
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bisq.network/pipermail/bisq-github/attachments/20180901/5553dd7e/attachment.html>