[bisq-network/proposals] Simplify trade fee model (#64)

Harry MacFinned notifications at github.com
Fri Jan 4 18:35:17 UTC 2019


I agree with the proposal, but, as some others, I profit also to say (repeat) that makers are (from several aspects) at the root of the trades and this should translate concretely, eg in the fees.
Makers and takers do not at all the same job, so applying the same treatment (eg fees) to both is very probably suboptimal.
It's makers who make volume possible at first, not takers.
In a way or another if Bisq makes makers' job easier, this would only be beneficial.

PS: I'm not a maker.

-- 
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/64#issuecomment-451529212
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bisq.network/pipermail/bisq-github/attachments/20190104/82c02ada/attachment.html>


More information about the bisq-github mailing list