2. Scenario - BTS doubles...:
‘Simple Neutral Position’ 2BTS * $2 = $4;
‘System Enhanced Neutral Position’ – you sell your 1bitUSD and at the same price cover your short (i.e -1 bitUSD); 2 BTS collateral is released back to you; 2BTS * $2 =$4
3. Scenario - BTS crashes...:
‘Simple Neutral Position’: 2 BTS worth $0.33 for a total of $.66
‘System Enhanced Neutral Position’ ; your short was closed so you end with 0 BTS from the collateral; you have 1 bitUSD worth 3.03 PTS; you sell it and end up with 3 BTS; 3*$0.33~ $1
I'm not at all convinced of this "attack".
To me it seems like being short and long at the same time would be about equivalent to just holding BTS and being neither short or long.
I agree with your first "scenario" that both positions have the same outcome.
I don't agree with your second scenario.
first of all, if the shorts have been blown out it is not a fair assumption that bitUSD tracks the dollar anymore. Bytemaster has already stated that in a short squeeze if bitUSD runs out of collateral it can go below the dollar until BTS recovers or people just have to sell their bitUSD at a loss. So you don't get the $1 value for your bitUSD that you were counting on.
Second of all, you can lose money another way.
If BTS falls from $1 to $0.75 now you only have $1.50 of BTS backing the bitUSD and I think this is the actual point that you run into a margin call and it sells your collateral to cover your loss. It doesn't wait all the way up until BTS has dropped to $0.50 before you have to sell to cover.
So all that needs to happen is for BTS to drop 25% and then you are paying a penalty for forcing the sale of your collatoral.
You can always say that something is not my solution by changing just some little detail…
This is a ridiculous accusation. You are calling into question bytemaster's honor and ethics for no reason at all. He has always been very reasonable and a man of his word. If you don't believe bytemaster is a man of his word than I have no idea why you are investing in this project in the first place. There is no justification for you to accuse bytemaster of being so petty that he will cheat you out of 100PTS.
Then you turn around and expect the community to pay you upfront to reveal your "solution" and trust that it has value without even seeing it.
If we start paying everyone who claims to have some important piece of information but we can only find out by paying up front we will be out of money in no time and will have given a lot of money to people who obviously don't care about bitshares. You only have to look at the number of people who post ideas that they haven't thought through to see why this is a non-starter.