All (or most) of the people that disagree with this proposal seem to support Tonyk's fork. I say you implement your idea BM, assuming you have the votes to support it, and let the rest of the community that disagrees with it go off and support Tonyk's fork. Then, the original Bitshares chain can go on to teach them a lesson in the strength of a network effects, and the main Bitshares chain's community would be more on the same wavelength (for other things too such as MAS).
^This. BTS is currently and historically one of the world's top cryptocurrencies by market cap and by volume traded. Indeed, many people are aware of BTS and it is in demand. With the proper incentives, a growing number of those people will trade BTS on the DEX instead of on centralized exchanges.
As that happens, and along with other measures taken, the liquidity of BitUSD (and BitAssets in general) will grow, the peg will tighten, more people will hold and use it, even more people will trade on the DEX, and so on through the virtuous cycle. At some point the
dominant market for BTS will be on the DEX, which will be great for the peg. Keep in mind, it is NOT necessary for trading of BTS to be ONLY on the DEX. It would simply be
very helpful if the DEX was the dominant marketplace for BTS. And again, other measures will also help the peg.
So now let's think about tony's idea to create a new chain. How many false assumptions must tony make in order to convince himself and a small handful of others that this is actually a good idea? First, he assumes that it is necessary for the shares to trade exclusively on the DEX. Wrong. He assumes it is necessary to FORCE people to trade the shares on the DEX, rather than INCENTIVIZING them to do so. Wrong. He assumes that getting the shares to trade on the DEX will automatically create the perfect peg. Wrong. And finally, he assumes that more than 5 people are going to have the faintest desire to trade unknown shares of an unknown DAC on an unknown DEX. Wrong, wrong, and wrong.
I knew from the start that tony's idea to create doaShares (and his reasoning to do so) lacked logic. But thank you
@CoinHoarder for sparking me to think more more specifically about why his idea is so
idiotic misguided and may even be a pure attempt to sabotage Bitshares by dividing attention and resources.