On other topics
- The rates in the orderbook are really low now. Maybe this is where the market will end up but I also suspect some people are offering really low rates because they believe in Joinmarket and want to provide early-on liquidity. This is counterproductive though because it discourages investors from joining. When a prospective investor sees that there is 140 BTC at 0.03% there is no reason for them to offer 100 BTC at a higher (normal?) rate.
Bear in mind that the advertised rates are per transaction. If you average one transaction per day at 0.03%, that's a monthly return closer to 1%. It's not yet clear what frequency individual investors can expect, but we've started working on a tool for detecting likely Joinmarket activity in the blockchain, and guessing the earned fees.
After 2 days without transactions the makers lower the fees, thats it. A good integration to some client could increase the bid
I agree; after the first few weeks, it was clear that this was the dynamic. A significant steady flow of 'users' (liquidity takers) is almost certainly going to require some kind of wallet integration, and that's a big project. Meanwhile, tech savvy people try it out by setting up yieldgenerator bots and are surprised when there isn't a constant flow of free money

And they reduce fees presumably out of impatience.
There are users, even today; but the number is small (and to be honest I may not have a realistic picture, since I am not constantly reducing my fees like it seems others are, so I am probably not seeing almost any of the activity. This is one of the curious things about thinking of JoinMarket as a "service" - it is difficult to see it happening (although with some effort you can get a good idea)).
What "should" the fees be? It has been discussed but I'm of the opinion it's impossible to come up with a model that isn't dominated by its assumptions, so it's probably not worth bothering with.