search

bisq-network / proposals

@bisq-network improvement proposals
https://bisq.wiki/Proposals
44 stars 16 forks source link

BSQ trading fee update for Cycle 24 #333

Closed MwithM closed 3 years ago

MwithM commented 3 years ago

This proposal keeps a record of the process to keep the BSQ trading fee at 50% discount to BTC trading fee. It will remain open until we need to update BSQ trading fees again.

Last update was on #325

Cycle 24

Parameters (see issue)

imagen

imagen

It's necessary to update BSQ trading fee on Cycle 24.

New BSQ trading fees

A change parameter request for BSQ trading fees will be submitted to DAO voting: New BSQ maker fee: 11.45 New BSQ taker fee: 80.13

The 15% cap to increase BSQ trading fees has been used.

MwithM commented 3 years ago

Should we remove the cap for increasing the BSQ trading fees? Upvote if you agree on removing the cap or downvote if you want to keep it like now. If enough upvotes on this comment are submitted, the change would be applied if an increase was required on Cycle 25. The BSQ discount would be updated always to the 50%.

ghost commented 3 years ago

Could you explain (or link to) the reasoning behind the introduction of the cap, and why it should be removed now?

MwithM commented 3 years ago

We had difficulties to accept a sudden increase for BSQ trading fee in the past, but it was previous to adjusting them monthly. https://github.com/bisq-network/proposals/issues/173#issuecomment-583493059 In #202, this method was discussed. I feared that contributors would reject drastic increases of BSQ trading fees. Maybe increasing the cap to 20 or 25% is more realistic (meaning that they won't be rejected), but since there has not been a monthly drop in BSQ price requiring such increases and that traders and that traders and contributors should have internalized that the BSQ discount is dynamic and adjusted monthly, I think that removing the cap is not so risky.

ghost commented 3 years ago

There is considerable value to leaving a procedure alone that is already working well and obviously not broken.

MwithM commented 3 years ago

Makertxid: f577b0477c111a39c163a2bae5fac1a9111d9420e57ea7e2de036ee6b94f047e Taker txid: ff9dd36683d36b482a5ea0b0beb7e35fdd1feb992da2e04d731862f0ac9893ab

MwithM commented 3 years ago

New trading fees accepted on Cycle 24, this issue remains open until an adjustment is needed. Wiki has been updated.

MwithM commented 3 years ago

Cycle 25

Parameters (see issue)

imagen

imagen

In this cycle there is no need to update the BSQ trading fees.

MwithM commented 3 years ago

I removed my own upvote to the proposal to remove the cap for increasing the BSQ trading fees, my view is now neutral. I find @jmacxx position of "don't touch what is working" appropriate.

MwithM commented 3 years ago

Cycle 26

Parameters (see issue)

imagen

imagen

In this cycle there is no need to update the BSQ trading fees.

chimp1984 commented 2 years ago

Should we remove the cap for increasing the BSQ trading fees? Upvote if you agree on removing the cap or downvote if you want to keep it like now. If enough upvotes on this comment are submitted, the change would be applied if an increase was required on Cycle 25. The BSQ discount would be updated always to the 50%.

I don't see any strong reason why we should limit ourself by that 15% cap. There are caps in the code which we have to respect and which would cause consensus issues if changes. Those are IMO the relevant. The others are IMO guidelines we set by "educated guesses" and should be adjusted if we figure out that those guesses have not worked that well.