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

[Chris Beams]

@ManfredKarrer and I met via voice on this proposal recently, and agreed that we should revert to the prior status quo of accepting correct asset listing PRs without any fee.

Here's the rationale:

1. On review, it's too contentious and risky to demand an arbitrary BTC-denominated fee. I advocated for this personally, but I admit I was too hasty. There were a good number of complaints about this here, and a few scattered around Twitter, and even amongst the closer team of contributors there was not unanimous agreement about it. Perhaps most importantly, it's just an unnecessary risk to take funds from asset projects that may later be deemed securities or fall under whatever other legal woes. It creates custody issues on our side (who has control of these funds, multisig arrangements, etc.) It's all more centralization and liability in the end.

2. We'll likely have a much more elegant way to deal with this in the future, in which asset listers must burn a specified amount of BSQ, which eliminates the custody issues above, and yet still benefits contributors and stakeholders in a properly decentralized fashion.

3. Simply putting asset listings "on hold" indefinitely or until the solution in (2) above is online is not an acceptable approach either. It'll create (and already has) an endless stream of people asking when asset listings will come back online, or otherwise complaining about the hiatus, generating work for us all the same, but of an even less productive nature.

Thus we come full circle, back to the status quo before this proposal was first floated. We will merge all already-ACKed PRs before the next Bisq release, and we'll work through the current backlog of asset listing PRs as promptly as we can. (@blabno, it'll be most appreciated if you pick back up this effort as you have time).

I'll leave this proposal re-opened for a while to field any additional questions or clarifications or objections.

Thanks, everyone for the effort and feedback you put into this proposal. It's a bit frustrating to have spilled so much ink and spent so much effort on it just to have it all be a no-op, but in the end I'm very glad we worked through this and decided on non-action rather than taking an action we very well may have regretted.

-- 
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-425184121
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bisq.network/pipermail/bisq-github/attachments/20180927/007f9b6d/attachment.html>