Just because they have a nice graphic with many little arrows pointing everywhere doesn't mean it's going to work better than what we have.

If we still think they only have a nice graphic, we will see, just like the MAKER DAI.

a) using the DEX price for the feed is dangerous because such feedback loops tend to oscillate, and

I have said we can give the feed price(DEX price) a range of risk which will be controlled by CEX price(e.g. 1.05*CEX, CEX), dangerous didn't exit.

Using or not using the DEX price for the feed both have feedback loops, every asset with collatera will have feedback loops without doubt.

b) there is no such thing as a "correct" feed price when external markets are skewed due to political boundaries, so it is pointless to argue about it.

We just ask a "fair“ feed price，if i can't use the feed price to buy 1 bts from the CEX easily，i don't think it‘s a ”fair“ feed price.

Political exsits everywhere,  i don't think argue aout feed price is pointless, it‘s very important.

存在“准备金”，也就是一定程度上由系统兜底。

行不行，走着瞧呗。

仔细看看别人的白皮书再说吧，一个抵押稳定币，也是参考BTS及MAKER的各种优缺陷改进来的。。

MAKER已经做到了50亿市值，当然，我们也可以说他们是背靠大树好招风。

再者现在bts被清算了不是系统兜底？有措施处理黑掉的锚定资产的办法吗？

假如一个锚定资产大户拥有80%的锚定资产持有量，当这个锚定资产黑掉的时候，这个大户把账户密码私钥脑密钥全部丢了，系统怎么来平这个坏账？是不是永远平不了这个坏账？最后谁来兜这个底？！！这个问题很早就提出过，似乎没有人关心吧，不过没关系，可以看看人家是怎么处理的。

“知道这个有问题，但是不想想办法去解决” 这个似乎就是BTS锚定资产的现状吧。。。

Using the DEX price for the feed creates a feedback loop, which is inherently dangerous.

It will not be a feedback loop，if the witness only give the price from CEX, and system give the DEX price, then the feed price will
calculate by the system by the CEX price and DEX price.

and give a range of risk which will be controlled by CEX price.


and what i want to asked is if you want to change the mechanism of the feed price?

or think it's perfect？

or i think it has some problems but we didn't want do something，so be it？


USDE had finished what we discussed and wanted, so if we stand still and argument all the time and do nothing？

They have MSSR=102%，they have charge fee from the margin call，they have insurance fund，they can settle the bitasset when GS.

LOOK!!!

https://test.pizza.live/

0.4292 cny can buy 1 bts？

请加上解锁按钮！！！

Using the DEX price for the feed creates a feedback loop, which is inherently dangerous.

The real source of the problem is that the markets are skewed, and arbitrage is difficult because of political boundaries. The consequence is that there is no single "correct" price. We've had that discussion before.

IMO under these circumstances it is OK to increase the settlement offset, and perhaps also accept a higher premium by increasing MSSR. The resulting spread could cover the market differences and protect both sides.

increasing MSSR is not a good idea.

I have a idea below maybe solve some problems.

Feed price= (CEX price+DEX price)/2,  maybe clear, set two weight parameters X, Y, and one parameter Z like MSSR, these can be adjusted by committee:

if CEX price<= (X*CEX price+Y*DEX price)/2<= CEX price*Z,

then feed price=(X*CEX price+Y*DEX price)/2

if  (X*CEX price+Y*DEX price)/2 >CEX price*Z,

then feed price=CEX price*Z

if  (X*CEX price+Y*DEX price)/2<CEX price
then feed price=CEX price

I am not sure I can follow. Obviously, people don't see arbitrage opportunity when they see it.

What is a "fair price" depends on perspective. For witnesses, the "fair price" is probably to consider markets with high volume to obtain a pricing of BTS against BTC then against CNY
The more markets there are between BTS and CNY, the more spread will be part of the "fair price".
Ideally, we get bitCNY listed on more exchanges and we get BTS listed against fiat CNY. Then witnesses can add those as source for their price feed and arbitrage will close the gab.

Blaming witnesses for inaccurate feeds is the wrong approach.

This is the design deficiency of feed price not the witness fault，the CEX price should be a reference and risk control price, real price should be the DEX price.