For the past months fees has just remain in between 11-2 sat/vbyte which I think is still at safe side for transactions, though maybe fee might be higher than that without me capturing it at the right time. Otherwise, this thread should only come up where there seems to be network congestion and exorbitant high charges then can bring into discussions.
I don't really mind having FeeBuddy's posts coming up three times a day in this thread that is on my watchlist,
even though sure maybe there could be ways that FeeBuddy's script would only trigger a posting if the fees were to be above a certain amount, yet I would not claim to know if that kind of filtering would be even possible.
I think there may be a way for that but I don't know how he could do that, but Chartbuddy of WO could help in something like this just as the way he does update the WO thread with price chats. And sure, I know this isn't related to that but something can be done if more technically users are interested in giving out such coded script to run automatically when fee are relatively higher than expected.
I am pretty sure that FeeBuddy is already modeled off of Chartbuddy, at least in regards to posting updates based on time guidelines.
Accordingly, absent some technical glitch, ChartBuddy posts every hour on the hour, no matter the BTC price.
I could make feebuddy posts only if the feed changes significantly. But is it necessary?what would be a significant fee change?
Until I see no one really complaining (not even moderators talked about it yet) , I am not sure if reducing fee buddy posting habits would do any good..
It seems that "we" went over this before and you were debating between twice a day versus three times a day, and I recall specifically stating a preference for three times per day.. yet surely fees have settled down quite a bit since that time, too.. but does not mean that fees are going to stay in a "settled" status.
You are correct that it might be difficult to figure out what would be enough of a significant change to trigger a FeeBuddy post (if that were to become the new criteria), which then if we receive a trigger post, an we don't have historical posts from FeeBuddy then we likely would end up going somewhere else to review the history, if we might be interested in the amount of change, the trigger or the history. One thing about posting 3 times per day, it is easier to identify if FeeBuddy goes down, otherwise if it is trigger-based, we might not realized that it is down until a lot of time passes and we don't see no FeeBuddy.
Accordingly, I am not attached either way, even though I am leaning towards just keep the posts coming because I do glance at them sometimes - not every time but some times there might be some thing that I see that raises my attention, and looking at it tends to only take a few seconds to see if anything stands out, and surely it is easy enough for folks to remove this thread from their feed if they find it too annoying to be popping up.. Mine just shows in my watchlist, so I can choose to not open it..
