I agree with the price of the proposal getting more expensive if it is made for a longer period. But a flat rate increase of 1 HBD per day seems lazy.
This would result in it affecting more modest proposals (in the 10-80 HBD per day range) far more than for larger requests. That's backwards. A proposal to let's say run an API like @anyx's proposal is exactly the type of proposal we would want to make a long-term proposal. For at least two good reasons. First, when the proposal sum is low, the cost of time needed to get support for one's continuously renewed proposal is far greater. Second, these are the proposals we should want to be more stable and reliable, and not require frequent updates.
On the other hand, proposals for high funding (let's say 250HBD+), are those we should want to do more short term proposals to have accountability and document progress. To those, the flat rate of 1HBD is very little compared to it's percentage reduction on more modest proposals.
Which leads me to suggest that it would be better if the added cost of creating a proposal is a given percent of either the total amount asked for, or the daily payment. This would also help offset what could be a likely outcome of your other proposed change: Where people are encouraged to start unreasonably high with their asks since they can always just lower it later anyway.
A better example would be for the added cost to be 1% of the daily payment requested. Thus, a 25HBD/d proposal would add 0.25 HBD per day beyond 60. While a 500 HBD proposal would add 5.
That seems both more reasonable, as well as more likely to result in preferred behaviour.
I'd personally feel this is a better system if a little more complex. (oh no a bit of math D:)
I agree, IMHO there is no sense in adding any more complex stuff like calculating the fee of a proposal. Higher fees will only discourage creating proposals.
Why should be a lesser amount or more expensive proposals better for HIVE?
Even if hundreds of proposals would be created on a daily basis - the good ones with community support will come to the surface. Front-ends can also be improved and make voting for proposals more convenient and easy.
I would suggest that we should care about more important stuff like governance. The current delay for voting on witness is just a patch not a real solution for what we have experienced before...
Yeah added complexity is always a cost. I'll concede that point. But I think it depends on the perspective. Let's put it like this:
If presented this way, and if the UI displays it elegantly as one enters the numbers in the proposal. Then I don't think it will turn people off that much.
Also, how many do we want to make 6-12 month proposals asking for 300-1000per day who don't already know the system well?
Frankly, I'd support strongly the fee for submitting a proposal to the community for approval or denial should be simply a percentage of the funds sought. Perhaps a very small anti-spam fee would be appropriate to prevent trolling.
But someone asking for 10 HBD a day can ask for 11 HBD instead. Problem solved.
That was only a small part of the problem.
And I don't think it solves it.