[bisq-network/proposals] New concept for Asset handling (#68)

[Harry MacFinned]

I like also the spirit of this proposal,
however I wonder if it represents a lot of work or not to implement ?
I'm also worried about spam, we should be careful about not generating painful maintenance / cleaning-up work. But I believe that a fee, even small, should suffice to avoid that.

>From the UI point of view, I think that something has to be done in order to present to users only a shortlist of **pertinent** altcoins. Drowning pertinent altcoins in a list with 95% shitcoins is imo not a favor for serious altcoins which make serious efforts to generate trades (and fees) on Bisq.
Reinforcement could/should be favorized.
It's always a good strategy to focus on what already is working, even a bit, and help it work better.
And not lose time with a (incredibly) never-ending list of spam coins.
New coins have to 1st make their proof by themselves or at least exhibit a minimum synergy with Bisq (like Grin did recently).
When nobody in a coin community is able to discuss a bit about/with Bisq ... it's a very good indicator about the possible future synergy.


-- 
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/68#issuecomment-455133707
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bisq.network/pipermail/bisq-github/attachments/20190117/22f9c4f9/attachment.html>