Quote from: Bhuz on December 07, 2015, 04:21:44 pm

Quote from: fuzzy on December 07, 2015, 04:18:27 pm

Here is a nice little link that started me realizing something might be wrong: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,20470.0.html

I am alerted and to be honest since I and apparently most the entire community were left out of these private discussions, it is pretty difficult to know the truth just from forum posts.  Committee members should be striving to be BETTER leaders than Bytemaster, so why so secretive in their meetings?

Again, what secretive in meetings are you talking about?

Please, read the link yourself provided. Read it. I am afraid You really missunderstood what xeroc is saying in that post.

I have (though I'm pretty sure you haven't check the link and are talking about the other link I could have provided).

What does it means "Here is a nice little link that started me realizing something might be wrong" ?!
To me, it seems that you are saying that in the post you linked, there are some information about the committee work that apparently make you to be worry and alarmed.

Well, that post by xeroc is nothing like that. Xeroc is not speaking about committee past works.
He is trying to explaing to the community that the committee could use the fees from MPAs to create other MPAs like GOLD.USD, a market pegget asset for gold backed by USD.

What's wrong with that?

Or maybe you are referring only to fav reply? The community already partecipated a lot in the discussions for past committee proposals, so there is nothing new about Fav pov.
And still, Fav has his personal view. That does not mean that all the community think like Fav, or that Fav has the right answer.
Fav is a big proxy of the community, and we always appreciated his input and we did listen to him, as well as we listen to the community expressing their view here on the forum.

I am not attacking you fuzzy, not at all. I want to be clear on this.
I think you can really help the committee to improve. We just started this, and a lot of things can be managed way better for sure.

I am just tired to spend days and days of my private time trying to help the community and putting all my effort in doing this job for the best interest of Bitshares only to see really really bad post.
Posts in which the committee was gratuitously insulted and/or accused to be shady and/or acting for personal agendas. This is very sad to me.

Just wanting to update the community that the committee members that I reached out to the committee members currently in place approximately 1 week ago telling them of the substantial backing by the community for open town halls to keep the process of finalizing decisions open and transparent to shareholders. 

As you can see in this poll the community wants it.  Yet noone has reached out to me yet.  Unfortunately, however, I have heard of a private channel where they discuss the decisions without input from the community.  This is VERY DANGEROUS. 

BitShares has been kept alive because of BM's total conviction to trying to be as transparent as possible.  TRUST is priceless.  If outsiders begin seeing a secretive group of committee members who do not prescribe to a similar level of integrity...what are they going to think the future of bitshares will be? 

Just so everyone knows...the committee members have been made aware of my willingness to volunteer to bring these meetings together and Not a Single One has contacted me.

I think you just had bad luck on the timing fuzzy!

Basically just when you tried to reach us out, the bytemaster's voting thing happened.
All the committee was voted out and replaced by the inits.
Now seems that bytemaster added in his slate some "old" committee too, but I think that there is not a lot of confidence and certainty about who will effectively be in the committee since bitshares came back to a sort of one-man-decides. I preferred to see the community and proxies voting for the committee members and not the committee placed on by bm votes.

Anyway, I did not contact you back just because I am not longer a committee member.

About the private channel thing: I don't really know how/why some people seem to put a lot of energy in throwing sh*t on the committee.
There is a chat on telegram, as well as there is another one for the witnesses.
This does not mean we decide/decided anything without listening the community. Actually is the opposite since every proposals we did, started from input we gathered from community discussions on the forum.
Plus, in that chat there are not only committee members, but rather community members that could express a valid and important pov from the community itself.

The only Dangerous things are false facts spread as if they were holy truths.

I actually interpreted the situation in the opposite way. By changing the rules, people exploited JonnyBitcoin because he was the only one that was correctly following the rules. When some didn't like that he was following the well publicized rules to which everyone agreed, they changed the rules to favor themselves. It sounds like those that changed the rules exploited the system.

Absolutely not.

The committee's posts are pretty clear about what the situation and the reasons for temp disabling the function were.

Your interpretation does not really make sense. People exploited JohnnyBitcoin, really!? How so? Did JohnnyBitcoin lose anything?

Please do not turn around facts.

You are free to not believe in what the committee have done, for whatever strange reason you could have. But twist facts like this is really unbelievable.

Released 0.3.2 as an interim release to fix the CNY feed publishing. Price is now taken from pure BTS/CNY markets on Btc38, Bter and Yunbi, weighed by volume. There are (a lot!) more fixes in master, but those will have to wait for the next release of the BitShares backend.

Bter do not trade bts 2.0
Please do not include Bter until it will honor bts 2.0

witness bhuz

I have been an active witness since the very start of Muse! Producing blocks and securing the network!
Votes are always appreciated!

get_witness bhuz
{
  "id": "1.6.15",
  "witness_account": "1.2.239",
  "last_aslot": 1499981,
  "signing_key": "MUSE8Ypqy73gP2stq1NhsQcmYH4m1itoJib7T6hH3hn4xzbHXgvQZu",
  "pay_vb": "1.13.24",
  "vote_id": "1:25",
  "total_votes": "1890070059716",
  "url": "",
  "total_missed": 42,
  "last_confirmed_block_num": 1177855
}


Quote from: mindphlux on December 02, 2015, 09:55:09 pm

Update: after theoretical has confirmed that GRAPHENE_DEFAULT_FORCE_SETTLEMENT_MAX_VOLUME is indeed set to 20%, the committee has worked with the devs to create another update asset proposal to change the value to 2%.

We set the expiredate to the same as the other proposal, so both parameter changes will go live in roughly 14 hours from now.

You can review the proposal here: http://cryptofresh.com/p/1.10.21
Thx to @roadscape for quickly adding this new view!
Thx to @theoretical for reacting so quickly and creating the asset proposal!

Looks like the committee rushed changing the daily settlement limit for CNY from 20% to 2% just because "devs intended to set it to 2%, but made a mistake so it was set to 20%"? How do you know that 2% is not another mistake? BM has ever said that he doesn't know the best parameters.
Obviously high limit profits some people but hurt some other people, and vise versa.
We need more discussion before make decisions.

The devs made the proposal to change the code as designed.

We did not rush anything, and we did not really "make" a decision. The code was supposed to have it set to 2% and now it is so.

Discussion about the "right" settlement volume is openly advanceable by anyone!

New proposal to re-enable the force settlement function after fixing the pricefeed script as previously stated in the OP: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,20391.0.html

I disagree.

the whole problem was from a 3rd party price feed, instead of fixing this problem by shutting down the feed, you just change one of the core principles. that's literally the worst thing to do in my opinion.

It's not the committees job to minimize risk for bad businesses or trading decisions nor is it up to you to decide who's allowed to profit and who is not.

Settlement requires a valid feed, if you shutdown the feed you will not be able to use the settlement at all!

We are not talking of bad businesses or trading decisions!

Plus the pricefeed is a vital function for bitasset, and it is not" really" a 3rd party thing.