|
Title: what about optional degressive fees? Post by: Borilla on November 24, 2017, 11:58:34 PM Just to try to propose something more sustainable after criticizing the dynamic of the fee system here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2446054.0
Optional degressive fees (as a function of block number or time): The person making a transaction choose few fee values, each with a different "life time". They are included in the transaction. When life time has passed its fee would be returned to the payer. So if he's in a hurry he would choose a high fee with a 1 block life time (or 10 minutes) , maybe an other fee with 2 blocks life time, and a 3rd fee with infinite life time. Maybe all options should have a total fee degressive in time, even if the payer doesn't care about time. I think it would requilibrate the incentives. Even if it's not the solution it could be easily implemented and be helpfull. Title: Re: what about optional degressive fees? Post by: aleksej996 on November 25, 2017, 12:14:38 PM It seems to me like you are proposing something like a reverse locktime. I guess it can be called unlock time.
This could be done via a soft fork as it is just adding an OP code for the transaction script. It would be a neat operation to have in Bitcoin scripts. Title: Re: what about optional degressive fees? Post by: Borilla on November 25, 2017, 06:40:39 PM It seems to me like you are proposing something like a reverse locktime. only on the fees! so the value of the fees decreases with time (it wasn't clear in my post?) Title: Re: what about optional degressive fees? Post by: aleksej996 on November 26, 2017, 06:32:07 PM It seems to me like you are proposing something like a reverse locktime. only on the fees! so the value of the fees decreases with time (it wasn't clear in my post?) Oh no, it was clear. I am just saying that it would make more sense to add the whole OP code as a soft fork then to do a hard fork to make it only for the fees. This way we wouldn't have to do a hard fork and would get a new feature. Title: Re: what about optional degressive fees? Post by: Borilla on November 27, 2017, 11:00:08 AM It seems to me like you are proposing something like a reverse locktime. only on the fees! so the value of the fees decreases with time (it wasn't clear in my post?) Oh no, it was clear. I am just saying that it would make more sense to add the whole OP code as a soft fork then to do a hard fork to make it only for the fees. This way we wouldn't have to do a hard fork and would get a new feature. We could leave the code with the maximum freedom/options for the users. No need for a hard fork. No? Title: Re: what about optional degressive fees? Post by: aleksej996 on November 27, 2017, 07:48:15 PM It seems to me like you are proposing something like a reverse locktime. only on the fees! so the value of the fees decreases with time (it wasn't clear in my post?) Oh no, it was clear. I am just saying that it would make more sense to add the whole OP code as a soft fork then to do a hard fork to make it only for the fees. This way we wouldn't have to do a hard fork and would get a new feature. We could leave the code with the maximum freedom/options for the users. No need for a hard fork. No? Yes, this would require a soft fork tho. Soft forks are different then hard forks as they allow people to use the old software that is compatible with the new, but is just lacking a certain feature. This would be one of those features. Title: Re: what about optional degressive fees? Post by: Spendulus on November 27, 2017, 09:21:46 PM It seems to me like you are proposing something like a reverse locktime. only on the fees! so the value of the fees decreases with time (it wasn't clear in my post?) Oh no, it was clear. I am just saying that it would make more sense to add the whole OP code as a soft fork then to do a hard fork to make it only for the fees. This way we wouldn't have to do a hard fork and would get a new feature. We could leave the code with the maximum freedom/options for the users. No need for a hard fork. No? Yes, this would require a soft fork tho. Soft forks are different then hard forks as they allow people to use the old software that is compatible with the new, but is just lacking a certain feature. This would be one of those features. Although a hard capitalist some vicious side of my nature calls for a negative fee for some of these miners.... ;) Title: Re: what about optional degressive fees? Post by: Borilla on November 27, 2017, 10:21:32 PM It seems to me like you are proposing something like a reverse locktime. only on the fees! so the value of the fees decreases with time (it wasn't clear in my post?) Oh no, it was clear. I am just saying that it would make more sense to add the whole OP code as a soft fork then to do a hard fork to make it only for the fees. This way we wouldn't have to do a hard fork and would get a new feature. We could leave the code with the maximum freedom/options for the users. No need for a hard fork. No? Yes, this would require a soft fork tho. Soft forks are different then hard forks as they allow people to use the old software that is compatible with the new, but is just lacking a certain feature. This would be one of those features. Although a hard capitalist some vicious side of my nature calls for a negative fee for some of these miners.... ;) you mean negative fees for exploited users paid by oppressor miners fees |