pull down to refresh
192 sats \ 4 replies \ @Undisciplined 22h \ on: Boring fees discussion again - Predyx oracle
The one thing I'd add here is that you don't want people selling just to avoid the 1% winning fee.
This would come up in cases where someone bought the soon-to-be-winning shares below about 55%. They're basically incentivized to sell their shares and then immediately rebuy at what will be a higher base.
It might just make more sense to base the sell fee on profits, too, and have it also be 1%.
I'm pondering on this - let me think more.
Another - complexity I see here is that people will also be selling at loss. How do we charge them fees then?
reply
Really, at some point, you have to lay out all of your costs and identify what they scale with.
The fixed transaction fee should cover network costs that are independent of scale, the percentage of total value fees should cover network costs that scale with value, and the percent of profit fees should cover the initial subsidies in these markets.
That's the first level of fees and it keeps Predyx from financially bleeding out. Then you also want to make sure everything's incentive compatible with eliciting honest beliefs from users.
reply
Yes - agreed. Right now with current fee structure - it will not even cover our losses, it will just minimize our losses.
However, it gives us a starting point to do more analysis to reach the optimum level. I would really like you to be involved with the fees decisions we make. I like your thinking - this is where we'll need your help.
reply
I'd love to be more involved. Feel free to reach out.
reply