Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

BSQ trading fee update for Cycle 24 #333

Closed
MwithM opened this issue May 7, 2021 · 10 comments
Closed

BSQ trading fee update for Cycle 24 #333

MwithM opened this issue May 7, 2021 · 10 comments
Assignees
Labels

Comments

@MwithM
Copy link

MwithM commented May 7, 2021

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)

  • USD/BTC price: 56.345
  • USD/BSQ price: 2.27
  • Current BSQ discount: 60%

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
Copy link
Author

MwithM commented May 7, 2021

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%.

@jmacxx
Copy link

jmacxx commented May 7, 2021

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

@MwithM
Copy link
Author

MwithM commented May 7, 2021

We had difficulties to accept a sudden increase for BSQ trading fee in the past, but it was previous to adjusting them monthly. #173 (comment)
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.

@jmacxx
Copy link

jmacxx commented May 7, 2021

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

@pazza83 pazza83 added a:proposal https://bisq.wiki/Proposals re:parameters labels May 8, 2021
@MwithM
Copy link
Author

MwithM commented May 10, 2021

Makertxid: f577b0477c111a39c163a2bae5fac1a9111d9420e57ea7e2de036ee6b94f047e
Taker txid: ff9dd36683d36b482a5ea0b0beb7e35fdd1feb992da2e04d731862f0ac9893ab

@MwithM
Copy link
Author

MwithM commented May 18, 2021

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

@MwithM
Copy link
Author

MwithM commented Jun 12, 2021

Cycle 25

Parameters (see issue)

  • USD/BTC price: 35.515
  • USD/BSQ price: 1,57
  • Current BSQ discount: 49%

imagen

imagen

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

@MwithM
Copy link
Author

MwithM commented Jun 12, 2021

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
Copy link
Author

MwithM commented Jul 20, 2021

Cycle 26

Parameters (see issue)

  • USD/BTC price: 29.900
  • USD/BSQ price: 1.22
  • Current BSQ discount: 53%

imagen

imagen

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

@chimp1984
Copy link

chimp1984 commented Feb 12, 2022

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.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants