edit:

 Finally got everything working ! Total BTS shows about 18,000. Not bad for just mining proshares back in the day for a little while. I just looked up the price of BTS back during the 2017/18 bullrun..jesus christ I want to vomit lol. I can't believe I didn't look into this harder back during the bullrun when I was searching all my old usb drives for coins that I use to mine. I sold every other coin at the time but now I remember why I never messed with the protoshares wallet b/c there was so many steps to getting these into BTS so I just skipped it.

Is BTS still a legit project or would it be wise to just sell what I have now? I mean if this project is still ongoing and has a future, there is no point of me selling now, I may as well just hold them another 5 years or so.

There was no consensus within Cn-vote, but we started voting.

I have finished step 4..however on step 5, it says to create a account on the bitshares 2.0... I downloaded it but when I am going to create an account, I keep getting this error " failed to create an account, faucet cannot create the account you are trying to obtain. Anyone have some links or tutorials that are still good?

Quote from: biophil on July 25, 2019, 05:40:41 pm

The main message of this paper will be that the specific choice of MCR and MSSR can have some strong and surprising effects on the risky behavior of BitAsset shorts (collateral holders), and that a small change in MCR can have a massive effect on the likelihood of a short position becoming undercollateralized. For example, I have one set of simulations that shows that changing the MCR from 1.6 to 1.5 can make undercollateralization 134 times more likely. Now, I'll point out that this doesn't mean I'm going to panic and immediately write a BSIP to argue for MCRs of 1.6; instead, it motivates me to look deeper into this phenomenon and start to understand how we can protect against it without harming liquidity and pegging. As many will be quick to point out, there is certainly a tradeoff involved here: reducing MCR from 1.6 to 1.5 may make the BitAsset less risky, but it will also make people more willing to provide collateral for it, which should improve price pegging. Understanding how to balance these tradeoffs wisely is a major focus of this project.

voted, very interested in how the simulation is done and what further conclusion is reached.

I downvoted early today bitspark as committee when reading the past days his reckless opinion.
We had just an argument that he would let the GS on USD happen and that he thinks we shouldn't defend the bad debt holders as it's their own fault.

I got mad because the GS Protection was voted in to give borrowers a safer feeling of taking debt and also because i don't want to lose a part of the community again.

The debt holders concern about global settlement and BitAsset Holders concern about under collateralized, there is solution available for both parties but need some changes on BSIP18 - Revive BitAsset through buying Settlement Pool.

Propose Solution:
1. Rather than force close all margin positions and move to settlement pool, the new solution is force close MCR <1 Margin Positions only and move to settlement pool, this will solve debt holders concern about global settlement.
2. Same as BSIP18, everyone can Use BTS to bid for those debts in settlement pool but we need to give them incentive to do so because investors will prefer to create new margin position rather than use MCR 1.6 to revive those debt.
3. Asset Owner set a new parameter call Minimum ReCollateral Ratio (MRR) eg. MRR 1.1
4. With MRR 1.1, investors can use 0.1 BTS to obtain 1 BTS Debt, this is a huge incentive for investors to keep BitAsset fully collateralized, this will solve BitAsset Holders concern about under collateralized.

Time for more marketing proposals