[bisq-network/proposals] Distribute BTC fees to contributors of last DAO cycle (#305)

chimp1984 notifications at github.com
Wed Feb 3 18:20:19 CET 2021


> What about DAO contributors from last cycle that don't contribute in the current cycle or completely stop contributing? They would still earn BTC from fees.

It would only work once we have added the BTC address. How we apply it to past cycles is open but with BSQ it is also the case that part contributors benefit from a rising BSQ price. But to apply some decay function simliar we do with merits decaying over 2 years to 0, might be justified. To have it more aggressive so most will be distributed to recent contributions creates more incentives to contribute on Bisq, so might be not that bad as well. Also it only covers a part of the revenue.
As we still do not have clear numbers it is hard to estimate but from some calculations I did over the past days It seems to me that only 25% of the trade fees are paid in BSQ and 75% in BTC. But I need more time to be sure about those numbers.

> Maybe we should also have a look why traders prefer paying higher BTC fees
Yes I agree that we should find out why that is the case. My interpretation is that trade fees are not that high in BTC that users really care about it or are willing to do the extra work to get BSQ. So we can increase BTC fees to widen the discount and make it easier/more attractive to buy BSQ on the market.

One could argue that we do not need BSQ anymore if we distribute 100% BTC fee (e.g. remove option to use BSQ for fees), but then the value of BSQ would go down as there is no demand and with that the voting would become insecure and with that the compensation requests and by the the BTC distribution algorithm. So we depend on BSQ for that solution. We just can use it for a certain portion, but even if the portion is too high it will lower the security of the overall system, so we should be cautious to see this as an alternative for BSQ fee, but rather as a solution to avoid the burningman role, but still work hard to give BSQ fee the 70-80% share as it was intended. If my above numbers are correct we are far away from that.  

> If we do this small txs we would need to take into account the USD value of each tx at the certain time to have a correct USD amount to deduct from any newly issued CR

I have not considered it to be "exact" and be used for accounting that way. I think it should be enough if we see the % of what was paid in BTC fees and use that as guidance for the next cycle to reduce it from the USD requests. But how to do that exactly is up for discussion, but as it happens delayed after the request I think there will be no perfect solution and a one time contributor who had luck in a month of super high volume and not continue afterwards might benefit from it. But I think that is not a showstopper and BSQ/BTC volatility are other risks everyone in the space has to deal with. 

> Maybe one way could be that contributors burn BSQ upfront and get future BTC fees based on the USD value of the burnt BSQ at that point of time up to this Dollar amount. Similar as we do it with the security incident victims.

I think that would be more complicate technically and conceptually.

What I like in that is that it removes the need for the burningman at least for one part of his role. As the BM is a problematic and hard to solve problem the best solution for such circumstances is to get rid of it completely...

-- 
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/305#issuecomment-772678074
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bisq.network/pipermail/bisq-github/attachments/20210203/cdc64e56/attachment.htm>


More information about the bisq-github mailing list