Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Sending anything to null is the same as burning/destroying the item - by transfering asset ownership to null you destroy the owner permissions/keys & nobody else is in control of any of the MPA settings from that point onwards.you could transfer ownership of the MPA to null
So null is like noone's account? It looks like a regular bts user.
Did u make blocktivity?No, I source the statistics for the 'Blockchain Activity' Google Assistant agent from blocktivity.info with the admin's permission on Telegram.
The short term and quickest solution is already presented here, since it requires no blockchain update (change fees, collected fees used to create bitassets).
I would also agree to incentivize the creation of BitAssets, but I think in long-term it should be mostly user driven. Thus I could think of an additional feature when creating a margin position that allows dividends of some sort.
When the user creates a margin position, he can choose his collateral ratio. If the ratio is above some ratio, lets call it incentivize collateral ratio ICR, then additional features becomes visible:
User can lock his position for timespan X, where locking means:If position becomes locked, then the positions collateral in BTS receives Y% from the reserve pool (or some commitee account, eventually filled by fees?) every month the position is locked, where the Y% is only with reference to amount of BTS necessary to achieve ICR. Value Y% depends on the choice X of the user.
- the position can not be closed
- the positions borrowed amount of bitAssets amount can not be reduced, only increased
- the positions collateral can not be reduced below ICR, only increased
- position becomes unlocked if ratio is less then the unlock incentivize collateral ratio UICR (set by commitee)
For example: ICR is 3.
- User opens position to create 1000 bitUSD backed by 50000 BTS (assume 10 BTS/bitUSD price).
The collateral ratio of this position is then 5, which is higher than ICR, and user chooses to lock for one month.- Bitshares says now he will get 0.1% paid every month for all BTS required to achieve ICR.
To achieve ICR, he would need only 30000 BTS, so the incentive is 30000 * 0.1% = 30.- The positions collateral will be increased by 30 BTS taken from reserve pool every month. After the two months,
the position unlocks itself automatically (but is not closed) and the user has now 50060 BTS as collateral.
This approach would certainly need development on back- and frontend, but could be very interesting for hodlers.
Probably referring to e.g.
https://github.com/bitshares/bitshares-ui/issues/1529
https://github.com/bitshares/bitshares-ui/issues/1570
https://github.com/bitshares/bitshares-ui/issues/1634
The insult happened, could not find it now. It was more than simple discussion though.
You cant find it because worker manager/repository manager can delete, hide or even alter/edit comments.
Sadly, I must agree with Kim becuase unlike customminer I am not in the inner circle, so my bug ID and bugfix contributions to the repo are derided, my bounties reduced, and I have been openly called a dick by the project manager here for simple discussion.
My words, my time, on github issues has been fully erased. Really, really unlike any other open source repo on earth.
You just need to ask the community how they feel about the progress made thus far and you will quickly learn how disappointed people are. They are expecting UI/UX changes to be made that allow the wallet to be easier to use which will lead to greater adoption. Instead we get a bunch of resolved bugs, but very few design changes that offer a better user experience.
I know the reference wallet is supposed to present all features offered, but why not bring back a well designed "Easy" wallet version?
I've recently discovered that they lacked designers and developers which explains why certain things fell off the table, but the lack of transparency only made our negative perception that much worse. Let's see what Startail and his team can do during the coming months.I don't think it's fair to claim there's a lack of transparency - what do you specifically refer to? I find the operation of bitshares-ui repo maintenance by this worker proposal highly transparent & the workers easily contactable. If you go on the bitshares-ui github repo then you can see everything this worker is doing, check the issues, commits, branches, pull-requests and the project boards to see what's happening & if an issue you're interested in has no traction then voice such concerns in the issue.
