Under the previous system I would not have been margin called and if I had I would not have been subject to an additional 50% loss. The changes to these rules were not well defined.
I referred to your OP, where you mention many things but NOT the rules-being-secretly-changed issue. This was raised later on by tonyk. Your original rant was about exchanges not being upgraded in time and witnesses taking price feeds mainly from Poloniex. And I replied that I thought it was quite ridiculous to blame BM for that. Especially when you say:
This whole centralized system of governance where Dan arbitrarily decides the rules needs to stop.
So you need to make up your mind: do you want BM to take care of everything (including the reliability of price feeds and relationships with external exchanges) or do you want BM's role to be reduced? If the latter, the community itself needs to take on those responsibilities (as Thom rightly says) and stop relying in every aspect on BM.
No, the bitasset market should not be operational at the moment
And who was to decide that? BM? So you want him to be the ultimate decision maker or not?
If you think the bitasset market was not reliable after the 2.0 launch you should have closed your short positions immediately when you realized that. What makes you think BM was in a better position to make those judgements on behalf of everyone else while you could not make a similar decision yourself regrading your own money. All I'm saying is just take more responsibility for your own actions, clout.
Not everyone has the time to be central role in the governance model. People raised concerns about having the bitasset market operational while exchanges had not upgraded and Dan said no that's not a problem so witness went along with it.
"Witnesses went along with it" - so why is your rant directed at BM, and not the witnesses?
Witnesses just do what dan says other wise they get voted out. Dan shouldn't be in charge of business decisions. He's smart but not business savvy and definitely doesn't understand the difference between theory and practice.
That's not BM fault that almost nobody else cares to vote, is it? He has said multiple times in the Mumble session that he wants to have less and less influnce on BTS but it us (the community) who need to fill in the void to make it happen.
How is my rant off target when I mentioned those as my two biggest concerns.
No, clout, you're making this up. Your main concern was that the price feeds were wrong, not that the GUI is unfinished or the migration process is clumsy.
Given Dan and company's inability take care of the little things when they matter most (like coordinating the upgrade of exchanges) their total lack of business acumen I just don't know anymore where bitshares will be in the long term.
Again, you're bitching about "Dan being unable to take care of the little things". But is BM really supposed to take care of the "little things"? Isn't it our (i.e. the community's) responsibility? And if we fail we should blame nobody but ourselves. BitShares is a community project, not BM's private company.
Furthermore the reason for the short squeeze was a lack of coordination between the dev team and exchanges, particularly those exchanges that provide liquidity for the bitasset market.
Again, you expected BM to coordinate. But why didn't the community check if the exchanges were informed and ready? You want BM to be responsible for everything and the same time you want him to step down.
The funny thing is that the problem is not BM clinging to power. The problem is our inability to take on the responsibilities that BM is clearly not very good at. He wants to give them to us. But for some reasons (unknown to me) we are not willing to take them.