I can only speek for myself here, but it is extremely frustrating that we have no means of communicating with @baozi how still is the proxy with the most support.
From my perspective(!) he has done VERY little to bring in any value to BTS recently. He has quit participating in the bitsharestalk community and hasn't replied to ANY of my approaches reaching him.
All he did was "claim" that paying workers at the current rates is not good for BTS not answering any of the major question raised:
* WHAT is his answer to bring value to BTS?
* WHO would work for BTS not getting paid?
* WHY would anyone work for BTS to make the whales (presumably mostly chinese) become rich?!

The people from the anti-dilution camp need to understand that their money/stake is NOT working on its own and does NOT grow the ecosystem by sitting around.
I am (personally) VERY disappointed by the progress publicly made by the chinese community (except for recent announcements of the Just-Dice fork) and of course bitcrab who is doing an amazing job!

It may be a lack of communications but I don't see much coming from our eastern friends besides that.

(The above represents my (and only my) opinion and me be a result of recent frustrations not related to BTS at all. I apologize if I offended anyone)

alt just migrated with family from China to Australia for several weeks so maybe recently he could not pay much attention on BTS.

let me review the realized changes of BTS with participation of China community:

1. a live and working committee is built, no need to say more, this is positive and  important to BTS.
2. the adjustment of fee, this is also positive and important, now users do not need to care more on fees while doing transfer or trading.
3.the anti-dilution campaign that raised the worker proposal threshold. this is always in argument.

for point 3, in my view, China people are easy to be emotional to be against dilution because of several factors:

1. more than 2 years ago, users raised 5600 BTC and other assets to fund the development of BTS, now they are just told that the funds are all spent out, but there is not a report to tell how these funds are spent out.

2.sometimes some China users feel "the developers create worker proposal to develop, and finally they bring a lot of bugs, and then they create a new worker proposal to fix the bugs ". I don't think what they feel is true, but...

3.the salary gap between China and US/EU.

better communication can help to avoid misunderstanding, at least  I feel we need a report on how the funds are spent, this can help people to understand the necessity of dilution.

and I feel in such a "post BM" times several things need to be clarified:
1. which core developers are still working for BTS, how much time they spent and what are they doing?
2. does the core developers have plan to complete or extend the BTS features? for example, any plan for "Bond Market" feature to be done? without BM any problem in organizing these jobs?

actually in current BTS platform there are many things can be done, we can see Ronny is extending OL UIA list without stop, this is very well, however we also need to think about the future of BTS and in which way BTS will go...

this is why I sometimes feel we need a "joint meeting" to discuss these things...

How do I see my DAO Tokens in Ethereum Wallet / Mist?

https://forum.daohub.org/t/how-do-i-see-my-dao-tokens-in-ethereum-wallet-mist/580

Congratulations!

Quote from: pc on May 11, 2016, 06:52:33 pm

The term "compensation" implies that there is some damage caused by the settlement, which is often the case in "real-world" finance, but not in BitShares.

If the shorter sells BitAssets with a 1% premium he achieves the same effect for himself as with a 1% settlement penalty, only with the premium existing holders are not hurt.

Very good point ... and part of the problem as this results in the premium we can see on the bitassets/BTS markets.

I think the question we need to answer to ourselves is this: Is a bitUSD worth $1 or not? Then we need to think about WHO is asking the question! A merchant who wants to exit bitUSD would say, YES because he can settled at the feed price (currently without penalty). A user however may say that he cannot enter bitUSD because it as a premium (at least in terms of BTS).
However, the latter argument is only true when people want to *enter* bitUSD, if they instead get paid in bitUSD already, then it's all a wash and we can say 1bitUSD=$1.

Thinking about it I actually prefer it that way, because it supports MERCHANTS and those that want to use it can accept a small premium because bitUSD is WAY WAY more flexible than real cash.
We need to support MERCHANTS and thus it (IMHO) makes sense to keep the 1:1 settlement

I don't know how many MERCHANTS are there accept bitUSD, seems a lot? anyway let's focus on bitCNY here.
AFAIK there are no MERCHANTS in China that accept bitCNY, I don't expect there will be some in the future. even btc38 accept bitCNY mainly because transwiser play the role of gateway.
you may ask then why we need the supply of bitCNY to grow up?
the answer is: DEX

let me tell one plan of transwiser: to introduce ANTSHARE to DEX for trading.
antshares is a famous blockchina project in China(see more in www.antshares.com), which focus on company register and share management, last year it get 2100 BTC in crowdfunding, now it is still under development, maybe will be launched in a couple of months.

ANTSHARE is already in  trading as pre-sales in DEX, after the launch of antshares,   more than 10M CNY worth ANTSHARE will be issued and traded in DEX, so we have a problem, to make which one the main trading pair?
maybe transwiser also need to issue TRANS.BTC and TRANS.CNY for this, but why not use bitCNY here in DEX?

now seems in DEX OPEN.BTC is most wildly used in trading, I know there's some difficult to overcome to make smartcoin wildly used in DEX trading,  however, if we cannot make smartcoin wildly used in DEX, how do you think we can make MERCHANTS accept it?

that's why I focus this problem mostly: how to encourage(or at least do not discourage) shorter to supply bitCNY, with less than 1M supply bitCNY is just a toy.
don't care too much on the MERCHANTS problem in China, in China MERCHANTS do not care whether it is 100% or 99% force settlement, they only care if there is a reliable gateway service.

赞同请出去，但实在没气力去推这事。反正至少我们不要投他票吧。

Quote from: bitcrab on May 11, 2016, 09:44:57 am

In common financial logic the collateral should not be force settled without any compensation if the collateral price does not fall below the margin call price.

Reference, please.

The term "compensation" implies that there is some damage caused by the settlement, which is often the case in "real-world" finance, but not in BitShares.

If the shorter sells BitAssets with a 1% premium he achieves the same effect for himself as with a 1% settlement penalty, only with the premium existing holders are not hurt.

here the finance principle are same for human society, no different.

existing holders have enough time to execute settlement with 0 offset before the change applies, they can also use the transwiser bitCNY withdraw service. they have ways to avoid the so called "1% loss" after the change.

A BSIP is created based on the discussion in last several weeks regarding modifying bitCNY parameters: https://github.com/bitshares/bsips/blob/master/bsip-0016.md

Here is the discussion thread: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,22355.0.html
There is also a discussion thread in Chinese:https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,22401.0.html

Please input if you have any thoughts, if there's no persuading objections, committee will create the committee proposal in next Monday.

+5%国内的众筹，鼓励使用bitcny。计价方便。
peerplays众筹已经选择使用bitusd了。

积极意义:使用100bitusd，至少会锁仓双倍价值的bts。

供应量不足是阻碍这些smartcoin被广泛使用的一大瓶颈。
修改bitCNY强清参数后，情况也许会有所缓解，但能鼓励出多少bitCNY, 也不好说。且改且观察吧。