Agree with the proposal. But I just want to know is it possible to set The proposal fees to a percentage to the fund that are going to receive? E.g. If a proposal demands for 300 DASH and the fees will be 0.5% I.e. 1.5 DASH?
I guess it's possible but I would keep some minimal amount otherwise the fee wouldn't make sense - it wouldn't discourage people from spamming with thousands of tiny proposals. 1 DASH seems like a reasonable amount at current prices imo. So maybe "fee as a % but at least 1 DASH" would work but people include fee into proposal usually, so I'm not sure if that would help in any sense.
Would it be possible to implement a dynamic proposal fee that floats on say an average USD valuation pulled from across various exchanges, for example? It seems that just manually changing the proposal fee whenever the price goes up or down doesn't do much to alleviate the situation since it's a slow process and volatility can cause things can change quickly, necessitating yet another change and another proposal.
Then again, maybe there's some technical limitations or weaknesses involved with setting up a dynamic fee structure that I don't know about.
Tying fee to some outside value would require everyone to agree on that value in the first place i.e. you need some trusted party/source. Or an oracle. Which is interesting, since this rises another question - can proposal fee be determined by the masternode network as a vote result? Basically, it's like a spork activated by masternodes. This is not as automated as pulling rate would be (requires MNOs to manually vote) but it's also not that vulnerable. Seems like an interesting idea to think about
We could address this with sporks and MN spork voting.
For example, a mutually exclusive set:
SPORK_21_PROPOSAL_FEE_0_5_DASH": false (253 Y / 410 N / -157 NET)
SPORK_22_PROPOSAL_FEE_1_DASH": true (569 Y / 102 N / 467 NET)
SPORK_23_PROPOSAL_FEE_2_DASH": false (125 Y / 117 N / 8 NET)
SPORK_24_PROPOSAL_FEE_5_DASH": false (59 Y / 397 N / -338 NET)
And if the most voted spork is in the boundary (in this case, either 5 dash or 0,5 Dash) it is a signal for the dev team to create a new fee option.
Haha, I almost clicked "Post Reply" when I saw this new message from you!
Yes, having multi-month proposals like that for signaling could be a workaound while spork voting is not implemented.
This however still requires 1) implementing fee as a regular spork for us being able to change it on the fly 2) implementing some logic for not dropping old legit proposals with lower fee if we decide to rise it one day. This shouldn't be hard to implement though, however it would require another hardfork too, just like if we would remove devs from this decision completely like I suggested above. Anyway, good idea