In a proportional pool the fee isn't the only factor. Size is also important. Larger pools result in lower reward variance and this creates a dynamic which makes it difficult for small pools to grow. Small pool remain unattractive because of high volatility thus can't grow to reduce volatilty and remains small pool.

So even if tomorrow you forked p2pool and launched p2pool-free unless you had sufficient hashing power it would be difficult to attract miners. It creates a pradox of needing hashing power to gain hashing power. Without sufficient hashing power many would opt for 0.5% fee over 0% fee and more volatility.

To grow the pool large enough to create a self sustaining growth cycle would likely require some outside capital. Capital could be used to provide bonuses or to outright rent hashing power from large miners.

The quandary is that by adopting a 0% fee the investment will never be recovered directly. The investment indirectly be worthwhile because one potential outcome would be a large 0%-fee decentralized pool that has self sustaining growth (be being larger and more attractive than competitors).

In a proportional pool the fee isn't the only factor that influences adoption. Size is also important. Larger pools result in lower reward variance and this creates a dynamic which makes it difficult for small pools to grow. Small pool remain unattractive because of high volatility thus can't grow to reduce volatilty and remains small pool.

So even if tomorrow you forked p2pool and launched p2pool-free unless you had sufficient hashing power it would be difficult to attract miners. It creates a pradox of needing sufficient hashing power to gain more hashing power. The desire of low variance is a strong one; three largest pools have mandatory fees yet they have attracted the majority of network hashing power.

To grow the pool large enough to create a self sustaining growth cycle would likely require some outside capital. Capital could be used to provide bonuses or to rent hashing power outright from large miners. The quandary is that by adopting a 0% fee the investment will never be recovered directly. The investment may worthwhile indirectly because one potential outcome would be a large decentralized 0%-fee pool that has self sustaining growth.

Other than the fee amount in a proportional pool the size of the pool is an important factor. Larger pools = lower variance and this creates a dynamic which makes it difficult for small pools to grow. Small pool = unattractive volatility can't grow to reduce volatilty and remains small pool.

So even if tomorrow you forked p2pool and launched p2pool-free unless you had sufficient hashing power it would be difficult to attract miners. Many would consider the 0.5% gain worth the reduced volatility of the larger pool.

To grow the pool large enough to create a self sustaining growth cycle likely would require you to invest some capital. You could either pay a bonus to attract miners (bouns over volatility) or you could hire some larger miners for a flat fee to boost the initial size of the pool.

Now granted you will never recover this investment because you made the pool free however if you were able to grow your p2pool-free larger than p2pool-classic it is unlikely they would be able to retain miners. So maybe in the long run your personal benefit of having a no fee large decentralized pool would make the investment worthwhile.

In a proportional pool the fee isn't the only factor. Size is also important. Larger pools result in lower reward variance and this creates a dynamic which makes it difficult for small pools to grow. Small pool remain unattractive because of high volatility thus can't grow to reduce volatilty and remains small pool.

So even if tomorrow you forked p2pool and launched p2pool-free unless you had sufficient hashing power it would be difficult to attract miners. It creates a pradox of needing hashing power to gain hashing power. Without sufficient hashing power many would opt for 0.5% fee over 0% fee and more volatility.

To grow the pool large enough to create a self sustaining growth cycle would likely require some outside capital. Capital could be used to provide bonuses or to outright rent hashing power from large miners.

The quandary is that by adopting a 0% fee the investment will never be recovered directly. The investment indirectly be worthwhile because one potential outcome would be a large 0%-fee decentralized pool that has self sustaining growth (be being larger and more attractive than competitors).