" Finally, a question: has the Splinterlands team contemplated the impact that a third party developer may have if they were to build an alternative marketplace that did not use sm_rent tx; but instead did "delegations for x" instead?
Would this not defeat the purpose of this proposed "tx fee" on the markets, and just shift the load (and presumed AWS server costs) - elsewhere?"
For my understanding this would not really work great as in this case IMO the card owner can take back the cards every time and not only to the end of the rental contract (minimum 2 days, than every day).
So as renter you can't be sure to have the card for 2 days, the card owner can take them back 5 minutes after you rent them, isn't it ?
This would require trust between the two individuals.
I thought a little bit and I think it is possible.
Peakmonster even done it at the start in that way:
Peakmonster (for example) take the escrow from the renter of the card and keep it.
When the contract (or day) finish normally Peakmonsters pay (for example every day) the escrow to the cardowner (95%).
When the cardowner has undelegated the card peakmonster sent the escrow back to the renter and the cardowner get nothing.
Could be done with any service :)
Yes, it was just an example with Peakmonsters as I remember that they done it with an escrow when they start, they add this in addition to the rental price and shared it 50/50 when the contract run till the end, when he was cancelled (what could to this also happen when the renter had not enough token for the next day) that one who cancelled got nothing and the other got the complete escrow.
Yes but you spoke from a " third party developer", so I understand that you mean something like Peakmonsters.
Let's say if Peakmonsters would do it in that way how they could be sure that every owner will accept the time and not take back cards manuelly.
In addition it can also happen in error, you just select a wrong card and the renter lost his card for playing even if he has paid for it.