If you have several OWNERs in a multisig scheme that has a threshold of more than 1, then you need to use proposals and approvals to change them again.

then how about to keep the threshold as 1 but set the weight of the owners to such as 0.4,0.2 etc, also need proposals and approvals?

那就抵押BTS买小蚁股啊。

I have explained the whole process as quoted below.

the point is, ATM the system is not ready enough to welcome the force settlement feature, what the committee did is to delay the time for the force settlement going public and at the same time make the system ready.

the "SQP1500" event is really a big shame for Bitshares. it has very bad influence to Bitshares' reputation, it put a big doubt on how bitshares can do good change management and protect user's benefits from being hurt. every developer, committee member,  witness  should remember this event and try to prevent similar things from happening in the future.

in the past several days, committee did some change to the blockchain parameters, the route is disable force settlement ->upgrade price feed scripts->change max settle volume of from 20% to 2% ->enable force settlement. the former 2 are finished, the latter 2 will take affect in several hours.

actually it's not easy to do all this, many debates happened in the process, but finally the result is satisfactory, I am proud that the committee can finish this as a whole.

now let's review what happened and why they should happen.

force settlement is a new feature of bts2.0, it is announced in the documents several months ago,  however many users, including me, recognize what this feature bring only after the settle button appear in latest light wallet.

force settlement is a powerful tool, it can bring price floor to smartcoin, it can also be used by speculators to manipulate the market, so while introducing this feature, it is very important to config the environment carefully to try to prevent it from being abused, and protect the user's benefits.

but even 2 days ago, 2 things are not ready to welcome the force settlement.

1. for BitCNY, the settlement price provided by witness is always obvious lower than the actual price.
2.the max settle volume parameter is wrongly set to 20%, according to the design it should be set to 2%.

these 2 factors give speculators big chance to manipulate the market, and expose the shorters to big risks. when several days ago I tried my best to persuade committee members to disable the force settlement temporarily I am only aware of factor 1, not aware of factor 2.

committee finally agree to disable the force settlement temporarily with unwillingness from some members, and then the work to upgrade the feed price script began, I'd like to say thanks for all the members that participated the new script coding and test, yesterday  the new script work well.

and then the 20% max settle volume problem come to committee's vision, after some debate and response from BM, 2 proposals are created to change the 20% to 2% and enable the force settlement at almost the same time.

in the whole process I behaved rude and tough now and then, I apologize here if I had hurt someone's feeling,  but I don't regret to what I have done, In many cases the only thing I focus is to ensure what should be done really be done, nothing else.

many said all I did is for my own benefits, sure, if the system introduce risk features without well prepared environment and put all shorters to big risk, shouldn't I fight for them, including myself?

someone tell me that I over evaluate the risk, but, from a perspective of a financial system, the key point is to kill the possibility of easy market manipulation at design, this is relevant to many users' assets, not kids' game.

someone said I help shorters but hurt longers, surely shorters need more care, because in Bitshares only shorters face the risk of being margin called or force settled, and have big possibility to be exploited. there's no leverage tradings designed for longers and longers have no such risks to bear. I really helped shorters, but I haven't hurt longers, at most I removed their chance to exploit shorters.

I am glad to see a user wrote this after knowing what had happened:

Quote from: tbone on December 03, 2015, 05:27:25 am

I missed that post from bytemaster.  And cryptofresh doesn't seem to indicate who created the proposal.  It would have been nice for committee members to be explicit about this as their rationale for quickly voting the 20%-->2% change, otherwise it looks to stakeholders like you're not being deliberate enough, especially after the previous controversial proposal that was voted through.  Anyway, it looks like things are falling into place.  Thanks.

BitCNY和TCNY都是BTS2.0平台上的智能货币，它们在设计上的结构是相同的，都是通过抵押BTS创造出来的与CNY锚定的金融衍生品，但前者是公共产品，后者是私人产品。

在设计上，TCNY和BitCNY有以下几点不同：

1.BitCNY的发行人是committee-account,由BTS理事会掌管，理事会通过投票的方式在需要的时候对BitCNY的参数进行调整；TCNY的发行人是transwiser-mpaadmin（目前是bitcrab，不久后将转给transwiser-mpaadmin），由一个TCNY的理事会掌管，同样TCNY理事会在需要的时候也会通过投票的方式对TCNY的参数进行调整。

2.无论是BitCNY还是TCNY，持有者都可以发起强制清算（force settlement），清算延迟时间都是24小时，最大每日清算量都是供应量的2%，但TCNY执行强制清算时，清算发起者将向被清算的空头仓位持有者提供2%的价格补贴。而BitCNY这个补贴为0.

3.BitCNY的MSSR(轧空比率)参数为110%，TCNY为100.1%，这意味着，对于爆仓价（Your Call Price）同样为A的空头仓位来说，TCNY仓位当喂价跌到A的时候会爆仓，而BitCNY仓位当喂价跌到1.1A的时候就会爆仓。/*升级至1223后此项已无必要。

4.BitCNY喂价有效期为24小时。TCNY的喂价有效期为6小时。

以上几点设计上的改动，都是为了降低空头的风险，从而消除TCNY相对于法币CNY的溢价，使得承兑商有机会通过提供流动性实现TCNY与CNY的1:1锚定，增强其对商户的吸引力。

目前TCNY还未完全走上正轨，尚待完成的任务有：争取到至少7个喂价提供者；待permission页面bug修复生效后完成理事会权限设定；将TCNY加到钱包中的充值/提现页面，这些基本都是时间问题。

曾有朋友问我，如果你的TCNY将来运行的很好，然后BitCNY把你的参数抄去了怎么办？我觉得这个没什么好担心的，smartcoin是需要运营者的，运营者不但应该有机会获得收益，更重要的是需要对smartcoin的各项设计参数有一定程度的掌控，不然没有办法去把一个smartcoin运营好，而BitCNY最大的问题恰恰在于它是一个公共产品，它掌握在BTS理事会这样一个行动受到各种牵制，且并不以“把BitCNY运营好，价值最大化”为第一使命的机构手里，你无法指望它去搞出来一个最优化的BitCNY出来，我相信将来一定是私人的智能货币产品战胜公共产品。

另外需要说明一点的是，transwiser将继续对BitCNY提供承兑服务，但不再按1:1的价格出售BitCNY，价格将根据当时对市场和风险的判断确定，基本上都会有少许溢价，对于BitCNY流动性的保障也将适可而止。

There was a bug in that page that I've fixed but don't think it's live yet.

thanks svk, then will it be live in the next version light wallet?

Thanks abit!
just now for testing I adjusted minimum feeds to 3 and made the first TCNY:



hope more witnesses can feed price to TCNY. Thanks in advance!

A proposal is created to reduce call_order_update and account_update fee.http://cryptofresh.com/p/1.10.22

In the poll that ended 9 days ago, we saw overwhelming support for this fee reduce. https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,20265.0.html

The review time will begin at 16th, Dec, please check and express your finalized views before that if necessary.

thanks xeroc.
now no plan to build own set of feed producers, if possible it's good that witnesses be the producers.