limit orders would be so dreamy.
The listing fee is harmful to the market liquidity and activity. Iāve already tried to push removing it a year ago. Mentioned botting problem is nonsense. It is the same as removing market makers from a market.
2 Likes
Idea 1:
Remove the fees and add some backend signer to make sure the listing was done using the UI
Idea 2:
5 free listing per day per wallet.
Then itās 0.1 Matic per listing.
=> I guess they can have multiple wallets but theyāll have the cost of transferring ERC1155s?
Idea 3:
Each time you relist the same item without selling it, the same day/week, the baazaar takes a higher fee at sale.
PS: I didnāt say they were great ideas, but maybe it can give birth to a better idea in your brain.
Glad to see some action in this thread! Itās actually something weād like to move on soon.
This isnāt really an option as, similar to the current GBM, we are not using a backend to track if someone is āonlineā, and thus itās easy to just call the backend API to get the signature.
This adds a lot of extra accounting on the smart contract side, which will add gas. I donāt think itās a great solution.
Same as above. Lots more onchain accounting.
Iām planning to make a sigprop soon with the following options:
- Convert 0.1 GHST into 0.1 MATIC. Everything else stays the same.
- Option 1 + Fee is only charged for delisting, not initial listing.
- Remove the fee completely.
There will be a stipulation that this issue will be revisited in 90 days and weāll work on a dashboard to help analyze the before/after effects of whichever options passes.
The fee itself will go into a new wallet owned by the DAO that could potentially be using for paying for gasless txns of certain areas of the dapp.
If no one has any major objections, Iām planning to make this Sigprop this week!
4 Likes
I think listing fee is neccessary, as protection againts bots.
I havent heard idea ālets replace GHST listing feeā for Alchemica.
Its not just about alchemica sinks, we need more ānicheā use for each alchemica type.
What if we use 2 KEK as listing FEE? We can always change the FEE if alchemica go down in price / up in priceā¦If needed we could propose some automatic mechanis each Month / Year Quater to revisit fee based on GHST to KEK ratio.
1 Like
Interesting idea but the main motivation behind removing the fee or changing it to MATIC was so newcomers who want to list an item donāt have to go searching for an ERC20 token they donāt already own. Polygon users already have MATIC so if we keep the fee it would make sense to use MATIC token for it, not another ERC20 token.
2 Likes
I understand the need for more Alchemica sinks. But are we blurring the line between Aavegotchi the protocol and Gotchiverse the game? I think Alchemica needs to stay in the Gotchiverse as a in-game tokens. Unless of course weāre talking about creating a separate Baazaar type experience in the Gotchiverse for which Alchemica would make perfect sense. But that seems like a different conversation.
1 Like
I understand,
what if we give option in āsettingsāā¦ you could choose between GHST, MATIC (default) or KEK, what would you like to be your bazzar FEE payment.
I dont know how difficult it is to implement / codeā¦ so might not be worth it.
Here:
My views is very pragmatic on this. I am looking for alchemica utility where i can.
Moar alchemica utility / sinks ā Moar value to gotchiverse lands ā Moar Land auctions ā Income for Pixelcraft.
1 Like
Oh my poor tax accountant 
With Aavegotchi currently having 6 x ERC-20 tokens, Iād love to do less on-chain, not more. Iām sure we can find a ton of use for Alchemica within the Gotchiverse game moving forward.
Simply put, currently for tax reporting (as far as I can tell); Alchemica tokens are deposited into a Pool (Gotchiverse), and withdrawn later as Rewards. All the hundreds (thousands?) of off-chain (non-taxable events) that take place in the game environment is nobodyās business. But Iām probably on a tax rant because Iām trying to work out my many thousands of Aavegotchi transactions from 2022 
But taxes aside, Iām just a fan of KISS. coderdan already admitted weāve reached maximum complexity in 2022. I think preventing the in-game economy from seeping out into the Protocol just makes sense. For both newbies and for the unfortunate annual pain we need to go through with taxes.
1 Like