BitShares Forum
Main => Stakeholder Proposals => Topic started by: dexy on April 05, 2019, 05:40:01 pm
-
bitRUB was not used for a long time due to blackswan. Its params are slightly different from bitRUBLE (see an attached picture).
Could you please set the same parameters for bitRUB as for bitRUBLE (force_settlement_offset = 1.0% and min_force_settlement_vol = 0.5%)?
(https://i.postimg.cc/g0RwBWsz/bitrub.png)
-
technically I am fine to do so. but
bitRUB now has only 500 supply, bitRUBLE is the RUB pegged assets which is mainly dominated.
shouldn't we just forget bitRUB and focus on bitRUBLE? do we need also to push bitRUB?
-
To consider: The official ISO symbol if the russian ruble is RUB.
-
To consider: The official ISO symbol if the russian ruble is RUB.
OK, maybe community would like to switch from bitRUBLE to bitRUB?
Anyway, it's good to set bitRUB parameters as same as that of bitRUBLE.
-
Originally, bitRUB was supposed to be the on-chain counterpart for RUB. bitRUB was globally settled soon after the chain started. Since there was no way to revive it back then, someone created bitRUBLE as a replacement.
Now that bitRUB has been revived we have two bitassets for bitRUBLE, which is unfortunate of course. It's up to the users which asset they use, and up to the feed producers which asset(s) they feed.
-
I don't see any reason for manipulation with RUB if everybody use RUBLE already
-
And I see the reasons! Not everyone uses the "bitRUBLE"! For new users, it will be pleasant to buy bitRUB, it is obvious!
-
Originally, bitRUB was supposed to be the on-chain counterpart for RUB. bitRUB was globally settled soon after the chain started. Since there was no way to revive it back then, someone created bitRUBLE as a replacement.
Now that bitRUB has been revived we have two bitassets for bitRUBLE, which is unfortunate of course. It's up to the users which asset they use, and up to the feed producers which asset(s) they feed.
Really BitRUBLE should not have been created.
Anyway now there are two I agree that the parameters should be the same. People can then decide which to use. Really it should be BitRUB to follow the same nomenclature as elsewhere but either way, important they have the same parameters.
-
I don't see any reason for manipulation with RUB if everybody use RUBLE already
Why Committee set different parameters on new variant ?
-
bitRUB now has only 500 supply, bitRUBLE is the RUB pegged assets which is mainly dominated.
shouldn't we just forget bitRUB and focus on bitRUBLE? do we need also to push bitRUB?
Would you print bitCNY if they had an force_settlement_offset = 0% and min_force_settlement_vol = 20%?
I conducted a survey in the russian-speaking community in Telegram, here are the results:
(https://i.postimg.cc/ZYPxhPDW/survey.png)
translation:
What symbol is more suitable for the currency "Russian Ruble" in BitShares?
90% RUB (was originally and conforms to the international standard ISO 4217)
10% RUBLE (was created after blackswan of RUB because of the lack of an asset revive mechanism)
84 votes
-
bitRUB now has only 500 supply, bitRUBLE is the RUB pegged assets which is mainly dominated.
shouldn't we just forget bitRUB and focus on bitRUBLE? do we need also to push bitRUB?
Would you print bitCNY if they had an force_settlement_offset = 0% and min_force_settlement_vol = 20%?
I conducted a survey in the russian-speaking community in Telegram, here are the results:
(https://i.postimg.cc/ZYPxhPDW/survey.png)
translation:
What symbol is more suitable for the currency "Russian Ruble" in BitShares?
90% RUB (was originally and conforms to the international standard ISO 4217)
10% RUBLE (was created after blackswan of RUB because of the lack of an asset revive mechanism)
84 votes
understand, then just let them equal.
-
understand, then just let them equal.
Who from the committee can do this?
-
understand, then just let them equal.
Who from the committee can do this?
It was proposed few days ago already, but Committee failed to vote on it on time. I believe Clockwork is setting up new proposal.