Proposed payment method addition process and estimated timelines #206
Comments
|
The point with promoting a method and to verify afterwards its success are very important points and I think lack of promotion was one of the reasons some did not get more traction. Also I think the experience with CBM was/is a bit an extreme case. I don't remember other payment methods which caused that much of discussions and different opinions. F2F had similar situation but was less contentious. So just wanted to mention that so that you not assume that each new method will cause so much discussion effort. ;-) |
|
Hi @chimp1984 Many thanks for your comments. Yes, I am going to look into getting some graphics made for socials and also adding info about it on the Wiki. Was musing about the possibility of having 0% maker fees for first 3 months or so with new payment methods. That way it would get offers up for them on the client that traders would see and increase awareness. Plus Bisq would still get the more lucrative taker fees. Not sure if maker fees can be set per payment method in the client or not? Haha, I don't mind. Rather have the contentious ones to start with :) |
I fear that would cause too much extra technical effect as the trade protocol expects a maker fee tx.
Not yet, but that would be less of an effort. |
|
Noted, likewise, other platforms are charging 1% maker fees for CBM trades. Could be a way to increase revenue for Bisq for payment methods with more mediation complexities. |
|
I think it is good to have a timeline for new payment methods for expectation management. The main point as mentioned above is to have someone that does the bootstrapping for a new payment method putting out offers to be taken. Additionally I think we should advertise (twitter,...) interesting new payment methods already before they get implemented to gain interest in the community. Also to make sure the implementation part of the payment method is done in time it would be great to have a dedicated |
|
Thanks, going to have a think of ways to effectively promote a new payment method when added to allow it to become established. A dedicated payment method dev would be great. I could also try and batch up new payment methods to be added to reduce dev time. |
|
This looks good. As for recent promotion efforts, we ran a Twitter campaign on US Postal Money Orders that did fairly well. Volume went up notably afterward and some of the initial spike seemed to stick. We also created graphics for USD and EUR to advise on pros and cons of the major payment methods. Maybe similar graphics could be created that are focused on specific new payment methods. As mentioned above, seeding the market with offers would be important. This was the impetus for the USPMO campaign -- someone did that, which made promotion feasible. |
|
Thanks that is useful I will look to create some graphics for socials for the new payment methods to be added. Would be good if they could also link to a campaign. I agree no point advertising that they can buy in XXX if there are no XXX for them to take. If there any way to incentivize people to place maker offers with a new payment method? |
|
Bounties have been tried to bootstrap new markets, but could be tried for new payment methods in less-active markets. If market is already active, it might be sufficient to just market the new method well and find 1-2 people to create offers. Would be nice to think of other ways...but privacy limitations make it difficult to reward user activity, so need to be clever. Maybe reaching out to traders already using the payment method on other platforms is one way. |
|
That is great, thanks for all the info. |
|
@m52go Have bounties led to real sustained success? E.g. Did we ever manage to bootstrap a new market mainly based on bounties? |
|
I don't personally like bounties. In my limited experience people do what's required of the bounty and then seem to stop working. Could be bad bounty structure but probably more like what you said -- money is wrong motivator. I just suggested them as something tried before, but would much prefer to find/use other ways. |
|
bisq-network/bisq#1101 (comment) - my two cents not worth copying as its more for the other convo but has my ideas on it. also 1% fee is fair i dont mind paying that on my other websites. |
|
you will not need to do anything to promote cash in mail, they are enough big trades with lots of customers on other websites which will move over soon as they can, they are my competition and every new site that allows CIM they as on there within a week. chances are they will move customers over as no one likes the idea of centralised escrows. |
Thanks for the feedback. That is good to know. |
|
Was just pondering ways to incentivize market makers. Instead of offering bounties for making offers, what if we offered refunds for maker fees as an incentive for special events like liquidity days and new market pushes (and possibly new payment methods)? Not all the time, just occasionally for special events. I know maker fees on Bisq are relatively low, but LocalMonero and LocalBitcoins are free. You only pay after completing a deal. With Bisq, not only do you have to pay upfront, but there's the added complexity and hassle of keeping program running for offers to stay live. If nothing else maybe it could be an attractive marketing point for traders to try Bisq. Would of course need to set appropriate terms so it's not abused, but overall the incentives seem to make more sense for both sides (traders encouraged to make enough offers to make market look attractive; growth team encouraged to do enough marketing to avoid paying refunds). In worst case, even a refund request for 0.5 BTC worth of offers would result in a maximum of 0.0005 BTC cost to the DAO, far less than past bounties. Any thoughts? |
|
I fear the administrative overhead and miner fees are too high. I also think we should try to focus on other incentives than money as that has never really worked in the past. |
|
I'd also like to pay maker fee after completing a deal.. |
|
I agree about money as bad motivator for general contributors. The fees in question are almost negligible and trader would need to spend upfront anyway...there's no profit in it. My intention was more to explore ways to reduce friction that active traders don't get elsewhere as temporary incentives. |
That's not possible. Fee needs to be paid when offer is made, per the current trade protocol. |
With the new trade protocol idea (1 tx protocol) we are more flexible with changes regarding fees, but now its not easy/possible to remove maker fee. |
I do not think a refund of maker fees would be much incentive for me personally. They are generally small and it seems like to claim them would be more work than it is worth. Also conscious that someone would have to check and process them. Not sure what would be a good alternative. Maybe a reduction in maker fees for new payment methods, promotions etc. But this would likely take too much of the devs resources. Generally, I think I would place more offers on Bisq if I could place multiple offers at once. Trying to place x10 0.01 BTC offers takes much longer than I would like. |
The API should be ready soon for production. That will make it much easier to automate trades with scripts. |
|
That is great. I want to get them all for low miner fees. It is a bit of a lottery at the moment. Not places a trades since the new release yet so hoping that might might a difference. Could the API be set up to place X amount of maker trades, on the XXX / BTC market, for X BTC, for X% over market rate, using X payment method, if miner fees are <X? This would save hours!! |
|
Yes thats will be an interesting use-case. Write a script which waits until miner fee is below a certain amount for placing offers. |
|
As a start maybe we can develop and implement publicity campaigns for payment methods like we do for markets. For example this upcoming liquidity drive is currently planned around CAD, but maybe we can also target TransferWise and Amazon at the same time. Perhaps just 1-2 market makers recruited through existing Bisq channels (Keybase, GitHub, Telegram, etc) along with a solid lineup of videos and articles placed in the right channels (market-specific media) could be effective without any financial incentives. |
|
Yes, I think that would be great. I am going to open up an issue about ideas for marketing new payment methods.
I like the idea of recruiting market makers. I agree that market making should be profitable on it's own and therefore not require financial incentives. |
|
Yes. Efforts towards highlighting the opportunity etc, new markets etc.
Also those looking for no KYC bitcoin, how does Bisq rank on searches?
Worth some paid articles in various crypto news outlets?
…________________________________
From: pazza <notifications@github.com>
Sent: Monday, November 30, 2020 9:20:00 AM
To: bisq-network/growth <growth@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Subject: Re: [bisq-network/growth] Proposed payment method addition process and estimated timelines (#206)
Yes, I think that would be great. I am going to open up an issue about ideas for marketing new payment methods.
* Amazon eGift Cards has 2 live offers
* TransferWise has 16 live offers
* PayID has no live offers yet
I like the idea of recruiting market makers. I agree that market making should be profitable on it's own and therefore not require financial incentives.
—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<#206 (comment)>, or unsubscribe<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AMMLWYVYMNI2SCHOYZPMMHTSSLJKBANCNFSM4TZKEWZQ>.
|
|
Yes , these sound good. Not sure about paid articles, unless there would be something that would be a really good fit. There is a BSQ Bounty out for SEO Analysis #200 |
|
I will use the following template when recommending payment methods to be added. This is to ensure mediators, arbitrators, developers and users are clear about how the payment method will fit within Bisq. Proposed National Currency Payment Method TemplateDate proposal being made: Name of payment method: Required fields (eg)
Maximum trade duration: Signing required: Yes/No Regions accepted Currencies accepted Bisq Limits: eg 0.25 BTC Payment method limits: eg $1000 USD per payment Any relevant information for mediators / arbitrators: Any relevant information for devs: Any relevant information for users: Screenshot of expected GUI:**
Information required for Bisq software strings:
|
Proposed payment method addition process and estimated timelines
Part of the Payment Method Maintainer role is to develop a process for payment methods to be added.
I have documented my proposal below for discussion / comments.
As the role requires input from a numerous Bisq Teams I keen to ensure quick progress though all stages, therefore, I have also proposed estimated timescales. I am keen to speed up what appears occasionally to have been a prolonged process.
In order to achieve the proposed timelines for multiple concurrent payment methods. I am keen to avoid discussions that require significant changes to existing trade protocols. While such discussions and proposals are useful to the development of Bisq I feel these discussions fall outside the role of Payment Method Maintainer and are best discussed as separate issues. Payments that have little to no change in existing trade protocols needed can be added quickly and will keep resources required to a minimum.
The below proposal has just been created from my current understanding of the role and is therefore, a work in progress, I welcome any feedback.
0-60 days
User requests payment method on Bisq channel; GitHub, Twitter, Reddit, Telegram, KeyBase, Bisq Community etc
User directed to create issue on Bisq-Network>Growth>Issues using the 'Issue: New payment method' template, or in some instances Payment Method Maintainer will create it on their behalf.
Issue discussed by all interested stakeholders with regards to if payment methods meets the ‘requirements of a payment method’ to be added to Bisq.
Payment Method Maintainer recommends one of the following:
61-90 days
If Payment Method Maintainer recommends against adding the payment method then user can submit proposal to the DAO for a vote.
If Payment Method Maintainer recommends payment method to be added to Bisq they will@bisq-network/mediators and @bisq-network/arbitrators informing them of the intention to add the new payment method along with the proposed requirements; limits, aging, signing requirement, required fields, etc.
If @bisq-network/mediators or @bisq-network/arbitrators have concerns these can be discussed.
91-150 days
If Payment Method Maintainer recommends against a payment method to be added, or if the DAO vote against adding a payment method, the payment method will not be considered for addition for at least 12 months. This will be documented on the payment methods roadmap.
If Payment Method Maintainer recommends a payment method to be added, or if the DAO vote for adding a payment method, the payment method will be prioritized for addition and added to the roadmap. The Payment Method Maintainer will then:
0-150 days from payment method being added
Once new payment method added Payment Method Maintainer will liaise with @bisq-network/growth to promote the new payment method on various channels; website, wiki, twitter, reddit, telegram, Bisq community etc.
Once the new payment method is launched Payment Method Maintainer will assist with the onboarding and snagging required during its first 6 months with a view to maximize it’s adoption, or, in adverse situations it’s retirement.
Payment Method Maintainer will then report on status, KPIs, metrics of any new payment methods added.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: