BitShares Forum
Main => Stakeholder Proposals => Topic started by: bitcrab on April 17, 2020, 04:02:00 am
-
bitEUR now suffer great suppression in supply and liquidity by force settlement.
To apply BAIP2(https://github.com/bitshares/baips/blob/master/baip-0002.md (https://github.com/bitshares/baips/blob/master/baip-0002.md)) on bitEUR will lessen the suppression in supply and liquidity and will activate the ecology of bitEUR.
Two poll workers have been created:
1.14.257 Poll-BAIP2-Reform on bitEUR feed price mechanism
1.14.258 Poll-BAIP2-Do Not Reform on bitEUR feed price mechanism
BAIP2 is approved to apply on bitEUR if worker 1.14.257 get higher voting power than 1.14.258 and also 1.14.236 BAIP-Threshold.
Please vote according to your opinion.
-
Is there any chance to push this for BitUSD as well ? There is some focus from different large world entities on stablecoins (due to covid-19 epidemic) and some members around here even know which entities I'm talking about. Their focus is in on-chain collateral stablecoins because they are only truly decentralized and restoring to BitUSD real value through BAIP2 would be very important.
Please consider question/suggestion slowly and reach me if you need any more specific info.
Chee®s
-
Is there any chance to push this for BitUSD as well ? There is some focus from different large world entities on stablecoins (due to covid-19 epidemic) and some members around here even know which entities I'm talking about. Their focus is in on-chain collateral stablecoins because they are only truly decentralized and restoring to BitUSD real value through BAIP2 would be very important.
Please consider question/suggestion slowly and reach me if you need any more specific info.
Chee®s
actually BAIP2 and also BSIP76 are already applied on bitUSD and bitCNY.
-
How is BAIP2 going to reduce force settlement on biteur ?
Would love to understand your thinking.
Voted against.
bitEUR now suffer great suppression in supply and liquidity by force settlement.
You wanna know why biteur is suffering in liquidity ?
Because thanks to your actions foreigners are not willing anymore to hold bitassets.Everyone selling bitassets quickly against BTS just to get rid of biteur.You can't buy any significant amount of BTS with your biteur as that asset is being seen in foreigners groups as under control of a small chinese group.
Should BAIP2 be implemented you got already the announcement that it will be taken away from the last working foreign gateways which will for sure fix your problem /irony off
Ask any foreigner if he is willing to buy any bitassets which is owned by committee with current situation in committee.
-
BAIP2 can be helpful during short price drops.
But to fight the abuse of Force Settlement, a good tool is to Delay its execution.
That's why I am asking you to start this tool and increase Settlement Delay from 24h to 42h
more in this thread:
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=32256.msg341755#msg341755
-
BAIP2 can be helpful during short price drops.
But to fight the abuse of Force Settlement, a good tool is to Delay its execution.
That's why I am asking you to start this tool and increase Settlement Delay from 24h to 42h
delay won't work because there are no bts on the market.Noone willing to sell BTS against biteur.
So the only possibility to accuire more BTS via debt is force settlement.
Delay won't change anything on a non liquid market
Short price drops are also not a problem in biteur.
CR's there are over 4.5
-
BAIP2 can be helpful during short price drops.
But to fight the abuse of Force Settlement, a good tool is to Delay its execution.
That's why I am asking you to start this tool and increase Settlement Delay from 24h to 42h
delay won't work because there are no bts on the market.Noone willing to sell BTS against biteur.
So the only possibility to accuire more BTS via debt is force settlement.
Delay won't change anything on a non liquid market
Short price drops are also not a problem in biteur.
CR's there are over 4.5
I'm not saying that this is the only possible way.
I claim that this is an important ingredient in the fight against abuse of this functionality. We still have settlement offset available, but this should be as small as possible.
That is why I think that if we increase the Delay to 42h and additionally raise the Settlement Offset, e.g. to 2% 3% (max), it can bring favorable results.
Delay introduces an additional risk element to consider if you want to use this feature. Within 2 days a lot can happen with the price, which is why more people may want to buy BTS from the market at the current market price or slightly higher → and here arbirage occurs, which is why the price increases on CEX
in less than a month we have halving, and with the increasing price of BTC
BAIP2 is irrelevant for situations where Force Settlement is abused
besides, we have 4 popular MPA tokens
let the different settings show us what works best
-
BAIP2 can be helpful during short price drops.
But to fight the abuse of Force Settlement, a good tool is to Delay its execution.
That's why I am asking you to start this tool and increase Settlement Delay from 24h to 42h
delay won't work because there are no bts on the market.Noone willing to sell BTS against biteur.
So the only possibility to accuire more BTS via debt is force settlement.
Delay won't change anything on a non liquid market
Short price drops are also not a problem in biteur.
CR's there are over 4.5
I'm not saying that this is the only possible way.
I claim that this is an important ingredient in the fight against abuse of this functionality. We still have settlement offset available, but this should be as small as possible.
That is why I think that if we increase the Delay to 42h and additionally raise the Settlement Offset, e.g. to 2% 3% (max), it can bring favorable results.
Delay introduces an additional risk element to consider if you want to use this feature. Within 2 days a lot can happen with the price, which is why more people may want to buy BTS from the market at the current market price or slightly higher → and here arbirage occurs, which is why the price increases on CEX
in less than a month we have halving, and with the increasing price of BTC
BAIP2 is irrelevant for situations where Force Settlement is abused
besides, we have 4 popular MPA tokens
let the different settings show us what works best
Delay is increasing risk that's correct but in biteur there is no other option to gain BTS other than force settlement.You can't buy BTS from market as there are no sellers.Increasing offset will only make that price on market will increase to new settlement price or above making biteur more unpegg.
-
BAIP2 can be helpful during short price drops.
But to fight the abuse of Force Settlement, a good tool is to Delay its execution.
That's why I am asking you to start this tool and increase Settlement Delay from 24h to 42h
delay won't work because there are no bts on the market.Noone willing to sell BTS against biteur.
So the only possibility to accuire more BTS via debt is force settlement.
Delay won't change anything on a non liquid market
Short price drops are also not a problem in biteur.
CR's there are over 4.5
I'm not saying that this is the only possible way.
I claim that this is an important ingredient in the fight against abuse of this functionality. We still have settlement offset available, but this should be as small as possible.
That is why I think that if we increase the Delay to 42h and additionally raise the Settlement Offset, e.g. to 2% 3% (max), it can bring favorable results.
Delay introduces an additional risk element to consider if you want to use this feature. Within 2 days a lot can happen with the price, which is why more people may want to buy BTS from the market at the current market price or slightly higher → and here arbirage occurs, which is why the price increases on CEX
in less than a month we have halving, and with the increasing price of BTC
BAIP2 is irrelevant for situations where Force Settlement is abused
besides, we have 4 popular MPA tokens
let the different settings show us what works best
Delay is increasing risk that's correct but in biteur there is no other option to gain BTS other than force settlement.You can't buy BTS from market as there are no sellers.Increasing offset will only make that price on market will increase to new settlement price or above making biteur more unpegg.
ok, but this :
If (current price > two-day moving average price) {
feed price = current price;
}
Else{
feed price = two-day moving average price;
}
brings nothing new to the case
But increasing Delays, reduces the number of risk takers - that's certain.
And when it comes to Offset, you definitely know that the credit is taken at Feed Price, and the Force Settlement is at the price:
Feed Price + Force Settlement and this discourages, of course not everyone.
The third tool we have is a larger fee for Force Settle, but it should not be flat, it should be relative if it is to be fair. Otherwise it favors the rich.
-
ok, but this :
If (current price > two-day moving average price) {
feed price = current price;
}
Else{
feed price = two-day moving average price;
}
brings nothing new to the case
Correct that's why i voted against it and because we gave the promise after BSIP76 to not touch biteur and bitruble
-
To apply BAIP2(https://github.com/bitshares/baips/blob/master/baip-0002.md (https://github.com/bitshares/baips/blob/master/baip-0002.md)) on bitEUR will lessen the suppression in supply and liquidity and will activate the ecology of bitEUR.
You wanna now also destroy bitEUR after bitCNY and bitUSD, with your communist shit ?
-
BAIP 2 was proven a failure due to BSIP76 twice intervening. SCAM
-
@bitcrab: please don't try to play with the parameters of bitEUR. Leave it to the westerns. Thanks.
-
I propose to rename bitassets to crabshitcoins, then report OP to SEC for yet another attempt at market manipulation.
https://github.com/bitshares/bsips/pull/249
Re-add BSIP-83: Decouple BitAssets from Platform Governance Process #249
Open pmconrad wants to merge 1 commit into bitshares:master from pmconrad:bsip83
https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2020-89
Press Release
SEC Awards Over $27 Million to Whistleblower
Amounts Awarded to Whistleblowers by SEC Now Exceed $400 Million
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
2020-89
Washington D.C., April 16, 2020 —
The Securities and Exchange Commission today announced an award of more than $27 million to a whistleblower who alerted the agency to misconduct occurring, in part, overseas. After providing the tip to the Commission, the whistleblower provided critical investigative leads that advanced the investigation and saved significant Commission resources.
“This award marks several milestones for the program,” said Jane Norberg, Chief of the SEC’s Office of the Whistleblower. “This is the largest whistleblower award announced by the Commission this year, and the sixth largest award overall since the inception of the program. This award also brings the total amount awarded to whistleblowers by the SEC over the $400 million mark.”
The SEC has awarded approximately $425 million to 79 individuals since issuing its first award in 2012. All payments are made out of an investor protection fund established by Congress that is financed entirely through monetary sanctions paid to the SEC by securities law violators. No money has been taken or withheld from harmed investors to pay whistleblower awards. Whistleblowers may be eligible for an award when they voluntarily provide the SEC with original, timely, and credible information that leads to a successful enforcement action. Whistleblower awards can range from 10 percent to 30 percent of the money collected when the monetary sanctions exceed $1 million.
As set forth in the Dodd-Frank Act, the SEC protects the confidentiality of whistleblowers and does not disclose information that could reveal a whistleblower’s identity.
For more information about the whistleblower program and how to report a tip, visit www.sec.gov/whistleblower.
-
Fooish and stupid!!!
If you didn't have the ability to resolve the problem of bitcny and bitusd now, you shouldn't touch any bitasset again!!!
If the price of bts drop again, which price didn't you want to lock the biteur? which bitasset do you want to reform the BAIP2 again?
BAIP2 is a failed mechanism which has been proved by the market, how you and you small team can't realize the truth until now？！
bitEUR now suffer great suppression in supply and liquidity by force settlement.
Set force settlement offst to 5%， then you will get what you want：the supply and liquidity！
Oh，i forgot，you and your small team love force settlement so mush, so you want to use BAIP2 to shit every bitasset one by one!
So much stablecoins in the world, please use your brain to see and learn！
-
If you didn't have the ability to resolve the problem of bitcny
You seem to miss the point that bitcny has no problem, it is working perfectly in bitcrab's world:
Issue bitcny to yourself at significant discount... NEVER get margin called on bad debt because the biggest debt holder makes all the rules on debt issuance. Then just sell it to unsophisticated ignorant "investors" at 1:1 CNY on various scam chinese sites... and lock in his power with leveraged collateral voting on recycled debt and use of exchange cold storage.
bitEUR just isn't a fully functional scam.... yet!
-
The time we locked the feed price is too long, the first thing what we should do is remove the BSIP76 from bitusd!
-
The time we locked the feed price is too long, the first thing what we should do is remove the BSIP76 from bitusd!
Support!
-
I couldn't find the poll in the UI.
How should I look for it?
-
The time we locked the feed price is too long, the first thing what we should do is remove the BSIP76 from bitusd!
surely this is another choice at this moment.
How many users support this and how many are against this?
-
@bitcrab: please don't try to play with the parameters of bitEUR. Leave it to the westerns. Thanks.
Where are the Westerns? what have they done with bitEUR? how much bitEUR have they supplied? have they tried to connected bitEUR with EURO? do they really care the business development of bitEUR?
-
You care now because somebody invested 5.000.000 collateral who sucked of other peoples debt kicking out many debt holders from biteur and is now the lowest CR on biteur and who has a clear relationship with you.
Taking other peoples debt and kicking them out of debt is not bringing any supply.
You want more supply for biteur.No problem sell your BTS and you will see how quickly it will get eaten.
But instead you take over the debt positions for pure self benefit and nothing more bringing nothing to biteur.
The only think you do is reducing the amount of debt holders getting biteur debt more centralized.
That's all you can do
-
@bitcrab: please don't try to play with the parameters of bitEUR. Leave it to the westerns. Thanks.
Where are the Westerns? what have they done with bitEUR? how much bitEUR have they supplied? have they tried to connected bitEUR with EURO? do they really care the business development of bitEUR?
For both BitUSD and BitEUR to be related to USD and EUR in last 5 years this blockchain was missing proper corporate structure and internal legal department for it (e.g. people hired by holders and paid through worker for 10 years to do just that - legal for blockchain and its needs according to laws and regulations).
Having in mind that within very own beginning bytemaster had wrong concept and knowledge on legal, he launched BitShares 2.0 as DAO but structured as DAC - which in real world is actually quite big legal overstep.
DAO (Decentralized Autonomous Organization/s) would be structured as non-profit organization and BTS token claimed as Utility. In non-profit organization there would be no shares and % of ownership would be not tradeable/transferable within holders or in any stock sense. Hence the whole idea behind Stichting BBF, that expensive legal opinion letter and no-action letter from SEC. But if anyone knew that we were...
DAC (Decentralized Autonomous Company/ies) who is structured as bunch of for-profit companies operating and sharing responsibilities on the blockchain (how operation as well as legal and financial ones) and hence the type of a company, holders would be actually able to trade the stocks within the company and own them (shares).
BBF coming to all of these conclusions after taking over responsibility on blockchain is finally re-inventing whitepaper and DAC as Decentralized Autonomous Cooperation, where nobody would be having obligations of legal agreements between each other unless they are written in paper and signed by real identities - which worked for fair part of the blockchain while left other half in dark due to inability to satisfy requirements.
Then last year, Ryan R. Fox as US Citizen had smart attempt to translate DAC into new meaning Decentralized Autonomous Community, where there would be no requirements for legal but was also cutting blockchain even shorter to enable itself for any business agreements.
So, point is - no, Westerners who actively participated blockchain activities were too busy fixing a lot of structure, terminology and legal issues just to maintain it in space. Unfortunately to this day there was no legal clearing for making it possible to happen (listings of BitEUR or BitUSD).
Now, since my legal structuring on my own hand will help these missing processes and abilities to show and use stablecoins in the future, I request/ask on behalf of West that bitUSD as representation of western token and fiat stablecoin (where China/Asia has complete zero legal ability to do anything with it publicly or outside China) for 2nd chance that we westerners do it correct way.
If positions of Chinese holders are issue here, they would just need to spend some time on closing them and moving to bitCNY and it would be very acceptable process - since we don't want to damage anyone but just to restore health to certain parts of blockchain that are becoming very important in real world (future cashless society and importance of stablecoins).
Chee®s
-
@bitcrab: please don't try to play with the parameters of bitEUR. Leave it to the westerns. Thanks.
Where are the Westerns? what have they done with bitEUR? how much bitEUR have they supplied? have they tried to connected bitEUR with EURO? do they really care the business development of bitEUR?
For both BitUSD and BitEUR to be related to USD and EUR in last 5 years this blockchain was missing proper corporate structure and internal legal department for it (e.g. people hired by holders and paid through worker for 10 years to do just that - legal for blockchain and its needs according to laws and regulations).
Having in mind that within very own beginning bytemaster had wrong concept and knowledge on legal, he launched BitShares 2.0 as DAO but structured as DAC - which in real world is actually quite big legal overstep.
DAO (Decentralized Autonomous Organization/s) would be structured as non-profit organization and BTS token claimed as Utility. In non-profit organization there would be no shares and % of ownership would be not tradeable/transferable within holders or in any stock sense. Hence the whole idea behind Stichting BBF, that expensive legal opinion letter and no-action letter from SEC. But if anyone knew that we were...
DAC (Decentralized Autonomous Company/ies) who is structured as bunch of for-profit companies operating and sharing responsibilities on the blockchain (how operation as well as legal and financial ones) and hence the type of a company, holders would be actually able to trade the stocks within the company and own them (shares).
BBF coming to all of these conclusions after taking over responsibility on blockchain is finally re-inventing whitepaper and DAC as Decentralized Autonomous Cooperation, where nobody would be having obligations of legal agreements between each other unless they are written in paper and signed by real identities - which worked for fair part of the blockchain while left other half in dark due to inability to satisfy requirements.
Then last year, Ryan R. Fox as US Citizen had smart attempt to translate DAC into new meaning Decentralized Autonomous Community, where there would be no requirements for legal but was also cutting blockchain even shorter to enable itself for any business agreements.
So, point is - no, Westerners who actively participated blockchain activities were too busy fixing a lot of structure, terminology and legal issues just to maintain it in space. Unfortunately to this day there was no legal clearing for making it possible to happen (listings of BitEUR or BitUSD).
Now, since my legal structuring on my own hand will help these missing processes and abilities to show and use stablecoins in the future, I request/ask on behalf of West that bitUSD as representation of western token and fiat stablecoin (where China/Asia has complete zero legal ability to do anything with it publicly or outside China) for 2nd chance that we westerners do it correct way.
If positions of Chinese holders are issue here, they would just need to spend some time on closing them and moving to bitCNY and it would be very acceptable process - since we don't want to damage anyone but just to restore health to certain parts of blockchain that are becoming very important in real world (future cashless society and importance of stablecoins).
Chee®s
On behalf of WEST ?Strong words because majority is against it even in west.
Can't see any support from west other than BEOS/BBF/CN-Vote(Bitcrab)
-
Now, since my legal structuring on my own hand will help these missing processes and abilities to show and use stablecoins in the future, I request/ask on behalf of West that bitUSD as representation of western token and fiat stablecoin (where China/Asia has complete zero legal ability to do anything with it publicly or outside China) for 2nd chance that we westerners do it correct way.
If positions of Chinese holders are issue here, they would just need to spend some time on closing them and moving to bitCNY and it would be very acceptable process - since we don't want to damage anyone but just to restore health to certain parts of blockchain that are becoming very important in real world (future cashless society and importance of stablecoins).
I agree to remove BSIP76 from bitUSD and keep BAIP2, would like to try to lobby China community on this, although it is not easy.
we need to find a roadmap to do this to minimize the hurting to the debt position holders.
-
If positions of Chinese holders are issue here, they would just need to spend some time on closing them and moving to bitCNY and it would be very acceptable process - since we don't want to damage anyone but just to restore health to certain parts of blockchain that are becoming very important in real world (future cashless society and importance of stablecoins).
They aren't able to close their positions unless
* majority of bitUSD holders force settle their holdings, and/or
* you found enough money in western to enter positions to replace current borrowers (like what's happening with bitEUR), and/or
* globally settle it (which technically can be done by the committee or witnesses).
-
My reading is that the request by DL is that we transition to non-faked price feeds on bitUSD.
I support this - Abit has flagged up the primary challenge. It could be done via a phased transition to real price feed over a period of X weeks?
That would give time for big debt holders to shift their positions over and also maybe create some volatility / speculation opportunities in the market if people expect some improvement in price during the period.
-
My reading is that the request by DL is that we transition to non-faked price feeds on bitUSD.
I support this - Abit has flagged up the primary challenge. It could be done via a phased transition to real price feed over a period of X weeks?
That would give time for big debt holders to shift their positions over and also maybe create some volatility / speculation opportunities in the market if people expect some improvement in price during the period.
That's not logic and unrealstic.
Once chinese would start moving back to bitcny it would mean price of BTS on bitusd would get crashed.
Who is going to sell his USD debt for 0.017 usd/bts when majority bought it arround 0.03 bitusd
@bitcrab why don't you open your company in cambodia or mongolia ...... ?
Any worse country you want to have bitshares legal for western users ?
Chinese even know where Slovenia is ?Or their history of rule of law ?
-
@bitcrab why don't you open your company in cambodia or mongolia ...... ?
Any worse country you want to have bitshares legal for western users ?
Chinese even know where Slovenia is ?Or their history of rule of law ?
stupid and arrogant guy, I really do not understand why @alt set you as proxy.
-
@bitcrab why don't you open your company in cambodia or mongolia ...... ?
Any worse country you want to have bitshares legal for western users ?
Chinese even know where Slovenia is ?Or their history of rule of law ?
stupid and arrogant guy, I really do not understand why @alt set you as proxy.
How did you called me before losing ten of millions of BTS from OMO or your faked feed price BSIP ? A dog ?Telling later it was a failed experiment and its better to make these failure than do nothing ?
Maybe because i don't support crap ,inside deals and have a sense of ethic for all groups on bitshares.
Why did you open your company in Singapore which is a global financial hub ,crypto friendly and regulated country and vote at the same time to have legal representative for westerns in Slovenia which is the opposite?
Is this not a legit question on your voting and support behavior?
Why don't you once in your life ask western members what they want when you decide to vote on matters which mainly effects them or at least apply the same standards you used for your own company and chinese community.
Remember your feed bsip which should be only applied to bitcny based on consenus and was later added to bitusd by you with no consent making western mad ?
Seems you want to dictate them your point of view instead letting them go the route the western commuity wants to go.
-
If positions of Chinese holders are issue here, they would just need to spend some time on closing them and moving to bitCNY and it would be very acceptable process - since we don't want to damage anyone but just to restore health to certain parts of blockchain that are becoming very important in real world (future cashless society and importance of stablecoins).
They aren't able to close their positions unless
* majority of bitUSD holders force settle their holdings, and/or
* you found enough money in western to enter positions to replace current borrowers (like what's happening with bitEUR), and/or
* globally settle it (which technically can be done by the committee or witnesses).
If we have BSIP77, this problem can be easily soloved，increase the ICR and lower the MCR.
So what did we do in this mini maintenance？
en, set the force settlement offset to -5%?
-
If positions of Chinese holders are issue here, they would just need to spend some time on closing them and moving to bitCNY and it would be very acceptable process - since we don't want to damage anyone but just to restore health to certain parts of blockchain that are becoming very important in real world (future cashless society and importance of stablecoins).
They aren't able to close their positions unless
* majority of bitUSD holders force settle their holdings, and/or
* you found enough money in western to enter positions to replace current borrowers (like what's happening with bitEUR), and/or
* globally settle it (which technically can be done by the committee or witnesses).
If we have BSIP77, this problem can be easily soloved，increase the ICR and lower the MCR.
So what did we do in this mini maintenance？
en, set the force settlement offset to -5%?
Agree on BSIP77
Also posted before that committee funds could be used via force settlement to push up CR so nobody gets harmed when lowering threshold
-
BSIP77 looks sensible.
I actually wouldnt mind hearing more details of a bail out / debt reduction proposal to see how that would work and how much it would cost.
Either way hopefully we can get some consensus that bitUSD should trial an alternative way.
-
My reading is that the request by DL is that we transition to non-faked price feeds on bitUSD.
I support this - Abit has flagged up the primary challenge. It could be done via a phased transition to real price feed over a period of X weeks?
That would give time for big debt holders to shift their positions over and also maybe create some volatility / speculation opportunities in the market if people expect some improvement in price during the period.
Correct - I'm definitely not insane and definitely its not language barrier problem, thanks.
Yeah, idea is
step 1) that Chinese have X amount of weeks to move/close their positions to CNY under the current fixed feeds.
step 2) we restore original feeds and settings on bitUSD and recreate normal positions/markets
P.S. Yes Thule, on behalf of the West. Haven't seen you done much about it in any sensible way. Keep in mind Thule that not you are now just being publicly ignorant and stupid, but you also represent a vote of a Chinese, not West.
Chee®s
-
BSIP77 looks sensible.
I actually wouldnt mind hearing more details of a bail out / debt reduction proposal to see how that would work and how much it would cost.
Either way hopefully we can get some consensus that bitUSD should trial an alternative way.
Rough idea：
Step 1: Lower the MCR;
Step 2: Increase the ICR;
Step 3: Lower the Fixed feed price slowly；
Step 4：Wait the ratio of debt higher than ICR;
Step 5: Repeat step 3.
Step 6: When the feed price close to Global settlement Price, we will use BSIP58;
Step 7：Recover the MCR and ICR, feed price.
-
My reading is that the request by DL is that we transition to non-faked price feeds on bitUSD.
I support this - Abit has flagged up the primary challenge. It could be done via a phased transition to real price feed over a period of X weeks?
That would give time for big debt holders to shift their positions over and also maybe create some volatility / speculation opportunities in the market if people expect some improvement in price during the period.
Correct - I'm definitely not insane and definitely its not language barrier problem, thanks.
Yeah, idea is
step 1) that Chinese have X amount of weeks to move/close their positions to CNY under the current fixed feeds.
step 2) we restore original feeds and settings on bitUSD and recreate normal positions/markets
Chee®s
actually it's not so simple.
if it is decided to remove BSIP76 from bitUSD, everyone will expect that bitUSD will peg again and will cancel the BTS buying order by bitUSD, then the debt position owners will be not able to close their positions.
-
Why did you open your company in Singapore which is a global financial hub ,crypto friendly and regulated country and vote at the same time to have legal representative for westerns in Slovenia which is the opposite?
Is this not a legit question on your voting and support behavior?
Why don't you once in your life ask western members what they want when you decide to vote on matters which mainly effects them or at least apply the same standards you used for your own company and chinese community.
Remember your feed bsip which should be only applied to bitcny based on consenus and was later added to bitusd by you with no consent making western mad ?
Seems you want to dictate them your point of view instead letting them go the route the western community wants to go.
I voted ZAVOD as I have discussed a lot with DL, I feel the proposal is feasible, and it cost less.
After BSIP76 has been applied to bitCNY and make sure feed price above 0.22CNY, China community find it also necessary to apply it in bitUSD, to resist shorting attack/death spiral, setting USD threshold as 0.0345USD as at that moment the great amount of accumulated margin call orders is at price 0.0345USD, setting threshold as this will make release the margin call orders.
In my mind, the fact is not that bitCNY belong to China community, bitUSD belong to US community, bitEUR belong to Europe community, they all belong to the whole world, bitCNY has the biggest supply, then bitUSD, then bitEUR, bitUSD status also has big impact on BTS ecosystem/BTS price, that's why China community want to make some change on bitUSD but care less on bitEUR.
-
My reading is that the request by DL is that we transition to non-faked price feeds on bitUSD.
I support this - Abit has flagged up the primary challenge. It could be done via a phased transition to real price feed over a period of X weeks?
That would give time for big debt holders to shift their positions over and also maybe create some volatility / speculation opportunities in the market if people expect some improvement in price during the period.
Correct - I'm definitely not insane and definitely its not language barrier problem, thanks.
Yeah, idea is
step 1) that Chinese have X amount of weeks to move/close their positions to CNY under the current fixed feeds.
step 2) we restore original feeds and settings on bitUSD and recreate normal positions/markets
Chee®s
actually it's not so simple.
if it is decided to remove BSIP76 from bitUSD, everyone will expect that bitUSD will peg again and will cancel the BTS buying order by bitUSD, then the debt position owners will be not able to close their positions.
Yeah order book doesn't seem to fill all the needs and positions currently opened, but still we can start the process and organize if we really wanted to.
-
Why did you open your company in Singapore which is a global financial hub ,crypto friendly and regulated country and vote at the same time to have legal representative for westerns in Slovenia which is the opposite?
Is this not a legit question on your voting and support behavior?
Why don't you once in your life ask western members what they want when you decide to vote on matters which mainly effects them or at least apply the same standards you used for your own company and chinese community.
Remember your feed bsip which should be only applied to bitcny based on consenus and was later added to bitusd by you with no consent making western mad ?
Seems you want to dictate them your point of view instead letting them go the route the western community wants to go.
I voted ZAVOD as I have discussed a lot with DL, I feel the proposal is feasible, and it cost less.
After BSIP76 has been applied to bitCNY and make sure feed price above 0.22CNY, China community find it also necessary to apply it in bitUSD, to resist shorting attack/death spiral, setting USD threshold as 0.0345USD as at that moment the great amount of accumulated margin call orders is at price 0.0345USD, setting threshold as this will make release the margin call orders.
In my mind, the fact is not that bitCNY belong to China community, bitUSD belong to US community, bitEUR belong to Europe community, they all belong to the whole world, bitCNY has the biggest supply, then bitUSD, then bitEUR, bitUSD status also has big impact on BTS ecosystem/BTS price, that's why China community want to make some change on bitUSD but care less on bitEUR.
You are 100% correct, and thanks for support - unfortunately we are far from agreement on general consensus as you see.
Now this is the tricky part: Stablecoin as represents peg/equivalent to its fiat brother (in terms of legal definitions around globe) and is backed by collateral (in our case BTS on-chain); -> To maintain legal around currency with no owner (apart from current committee members), we have to:
a) restore the PEG before me and Stefan make sure CMC is getting back listed
or
b) Exclude both bitCNY and bitUSD from CMC.
Even CMC Phase 2 demands legal paperwork and has plenty of requirement where with current parameters of those 2 stablecoins we are eligible as fraudcoin. Not saying we are fraud/scam - but reason to prevent "short-attack" from currency that doesn't even report currently its volume is a bit off.
Please reconsider future and reputation of entire blockchain. We still don't have:
1) basic development and legal (apart from what Move does in it's own limits)
2) new dapps/service to offer
3) new committee-account issued replacements for bitUSD and bitCNY
but we do have:
1) empty dex
2) empty gateways (no businesses around)
3) broken smartcoins that nobody new will use
We need some agreement and solution fast, now it's been 9 months and its not "temporary" anymore.
Chee®s
-
You care now because somebody invested 5.000.000 collateral who sucked of other peoples debt kicking out many debt holders from biteur and is now the lowest CR on biteur and who has a clear relationship with you.
Taking other peoples debt and kicking them out of debt is not bringing any supply.
You want more supply for biteur.No problem sell your BTS and you will see how quickly it will get eaten.
But instead you take over the debt positions for pure self benefit and nothing more bringing nothing to biteur.
The only think you do is reducing the amount of debt holders getting biteur debt more centralized.
That's all you can do
aaaa-bb is my account.
I sell GDEX.EOS, GDEX.USDT, and also BTS for bitEUR.
however this is trading, not charity, every trader trades to make benefits.
what have you done?
I am not interested in doing force settlement with bitEUR, it's easy to understand that the bigger your debt position is, the more difficult for you to avoid being force settled.
-
Now this is the tricky part: Stablecoin as represents peg/equivalent to its fiat brother (in terms of legal definitions around globe) and is backed by collateral (in our case BTS on-chain); -> To maintain legal around currency with no owner (apart from current committee members), we have to:
a) restore the PEG before me and Stefan make sure CMC is getting back listed
or
b) Exclude both bitCNY and bitUSD from CMC.
Even CMC Phase 2 demands legal paperwork and has plenty of requirement where with current parameters of those 2 stablecoins we are eligible as fraudcoin. Not saying we are fraud/scam - but reason to prevent "short-attack" from currency that doesn't even report currently its volume is a bit off.
Please reconsider future and reputation of entire blockchain. We still don't have:
1) basic development and legal (apart from what Move does in it's own limits)
2) new dapps/service to offer
3) new committee-account issued replacements for bitUSD and bitCNY
but we do have:
1) empty dex
2) empty gateways (no businesses around)
3) broken smartcoins that nobody new will use
We need some agreement and solution fast, now it's been 9 months and its not "temporary" anymore.
Chee®s
BSIP76 and BAIP2 are experiments to resist shorting attack/death spiral, and it works.
I agree to remove BSIP76 while some conditions is met, the first step will be that lowering USD price threshold to as equal as CNY threshold (about 0.0307USD?)
the best chance to do this step is while BTS price go above 0.0345USD.
maybe it will be good to firstly see what will happen after the launch of BTS4.0.
and a voting is needed to approve this change.
I don't think we just need to follow the requests from CMC to restore the peg of bitCNY and bitUSD, more factors need to be considered to reach community consensus.
we can take bitEUR as the main stablecoin in BTS community currently.
-
We need some agreement and solution fast, now it's been 9 months and its not "temporary" anymore.
We had the choice several weeks ago, but no one care about it, just want to charge the market fees and force settlement fees which were meaningless.
Now the people want to solve the problem of bitusd, that's good, so, tell me, which tools we have or will have?
We spend about 6000bts everyday in MM, what we got still is empty, if we need to spend so much money in MM continually?
Fixed the problem, yes, that's we should begin to do in the last year, now,we did nothing in such long time, so i don't believe the bts community have the ability to solve these problem, especially bitcrab and cn-vote, they have a
ridiculous logic and thought, they can't fixed any problem, just will make or wait the thing become more worse.
Most of the committees and the wittness didn't care about everything of BTS, even didn't have one word in one year, we are DPOS, NOT POW!
Now, just like someone said: let's beg the price of BTS go above 0.0345USD!
and no one should touch biteur, especially bitcrab, if someone really want a stablecoin of bts, he can use HONEST.bitasset!
GOD will bless us.
-
You care now because somebody invested 5.000.000 collateral who sucked of other peoples debt kicking out many debt holders from biteur and is now the lowest CR on biteur and who has a clear relationship with you.
Taking other peoples debt and kicking them out of debt is not bringing any supply.
You want more supply for biteur.No problem sell your BTS and you will see how quickly it will get eaten.
But instead you take over the debt positions for pure self benefit and nothing more bringing nothing to biteur.
The only think you do is reducing the amount of debt holders getting biteur debt more centralized.
That's all you can do
aaaa-bb is my account.
I sell GDEX.EOS, GDEX.USDT, and also BTS for bitEUR.
however this is trading, not charity, every trader trades to make benefits.
what have you done?
I am not interested in doing force settlement with bitEUR, it's easy to understand that the bigger your debt position is, the more difficult for you to avoid being force settled.
I'll give you reply to that. We all forgotten Thul3 was not b-dex when he arrived but thul369 (https://wallet.bitshares.org/#/account/thul369) and his activity is this:
BitUSD Debt Position with very nasty CR according to fixed price feeds (which he is so against right ?)
Selling BTS for OBITS
Trading BTS against OPEN.ETH which is dead market
and yeah, holding OPEN.BTC that doesn't work. Can we pass and just start ignoring him completely ? Maybe Alt will realize sooner or later he just had wrong pick.
Chee®s
-
We need some agreement and solution fast, now it's been 9 months and its not "temporary" anymore.
We had the choice several weeks ago, but no one care about it, just want to charge the market fees and force settlement fees which were meaningless.
Now the people want to solve the problem of bitusd, that's good, so, tell me, which tools we have or will have?
We spend about 6000bts everyday in MM, what we got still is empty, if we need to spend so much money in MM continually?
Fixed the problem, yes, that's we should begin to do in the last year, now,we did nothing in such long time, so i don't believe the bts community have the ability to solve these problem, especially bitcrab and cn-vote, they have a
ridiculous logic and thought, they can't fixed any problem, just will make or wait the thing become more worse.
Most of the committees and the wittness didn't care about everything of BTS, even didn't have one word in one year, we are DPOS, NOT POW!
Now, just like someone said: let's beg the price of BTS go above 0.0345USD!
and no one should touch biteur, especially bitcrab, if someone really want a stablecoin of bts, he can use HONEST.bitasset!
GOD will bless us.
Well, we would be using HONEST.assets if they would be having multisig with committee-account and if someone non-anonymous take over owner authority from litepresence. That way only has sense, because we can't even list them on CMC without these 2 requirements done. Trading internally for <200 active users is not really meaningful in this point, without enabling smartcoin and that trading available to masses. Making those 2 happen = "Mission Impossible: BitShares".
For the same reasoning, BitUSD has already perfect structure and ownership which presents him as native asset of the blockchain, where any other created MPA afterwards isn't.
Nevermind, solution then is that actually after BTC Halving we remove BSIP76 once BTS goes over 5c. Hopefully it will happen and will pray for it.
Chee®s
-
I guess you discredited your ability to preview market with this statement already
step 1) that Chinese have X amount of weeks to move/close their positions to CNY under the current fixed feeds.
I won't put your quotes from tg which are even more funny.
P.S. Yes Thule, on behalf of the West.
You trying to discredit me all the time on TG..Nothing new that BEOS,you and some chinese who do inside deals are trying everything now to discredit me.It's also funny it's always you running away when western community starts questioning your actions together with BEOS when trying to discredit me.So how come you claim you ask in the name of Western when you are always running away from them ?
But remember even i lose voting power it won't change anything.I raised my voice before and will continue to do it even with 1 bts voting power.
Many chinese members from CN-Vote are already starting questioning the voting decissions for your worker.
I can understand you guys don't like me to talk to them asking for a reason to support your worker or BEOS where they have no clear answer and ask in cn-votes group chat for reasoning.It must be a big pain.
Here a nice conversation with the creator of CN-Vote
bitProfessor, [17.04.20 11:16]
I don't know the current situation of CN-vote
bitProfessor, [17.04.20 11:18]
But I'm not surprised that CN-vote and beos destroyed bithares one day
bitProfessor, [17.04.20 11:19]
What did they do?
Thule the Moaning father, [17.04.20 11:19]
making inside deals with beos
bitProfessor, [17.04.20 11:19]
Ha
I voted ZAVOD as I have discussed a lot with DL, I feel the proposal is feasible, and it cost less.
So you voted for a legal represantative mainly for foreigners based on a talk with one guy .......
Did you checked the country where the represantative will be located ?It's local rules ?Legal Security ?Corruption ?enforcment power ?
Am asking because it seems you don't know Slovenia and that's why i asked ironicly the question why didn't you open your crypto company in mongolia.
You are 100% correct, and thanks for support - unfortunately we are far from agreement on general consensus as you see.
Now this is the tricky part: Stablecoin as represents peg/equivalent to its fiat brother (in terms of legal definitions around globe) and is backed by collateral (in our case BTS on-chain); -> To maintain legal around currency with no owner (apart from current committee members), we have to:
Why don't you post your statements public but only in closed chats ?
Did foreign community agreed on your centralization dictatur crap ?You run away as always ?
Come on at least post your position very clear what it means for bitshares having you as legal.
Tell openly how you plan to centralize everything ,call people who don't like kyc idiots,how you want to enforce staff on business etc ?Why do you talk about it only behind closed doors ?
How many people have you already threatened to sue or kick out of bitshares as Brand owner ?(also for their voting behavior only) .
What did you requested to social media accounts holders ?To get your approvement if they are allowed to use social media accounts about bitshares ?
You going to dictate who is allowed to promote bitshares and who not ?
Based on what ?
You clearly are mentally not able to hold such a positon with your permanent threats and abuse.
I'll give you reply to that. We all forgotten Thul3 was not b-dex when he arrived but thul369 and his activity is this:
BitUSD Debt Position with very nasty CR according to fixed price feeds (which he is so against right ?)
Selling BTS for OBITS
Trading BTS against OPEN.ETH which is dead market
and yeah, holding OPEN.BTC that doesn't work. Can we pass and just start ignoring him completely ? Maybe Alt will realize sooner or later he just had wrong pick.
You are just discrediting yourself more and more.
First of all i stated it already multiple times even years ago that i hold majority of my funds on huobi.Now more than ever because i'm a trader and you can't trade bts very activly on dex with current price feed threshold.
I stated also before that i won't put myself major coins to dex because i don't trust gateways and that's why i support ibc like majority of foreigners which you claim to represent.
To your accusation of being a bad trader even i recommend people to read your comments about trading i bought OPEN.ETH and OPEN.BTC yesterday.
It's a clear bet that these gateways will open soon as OPEN.USDT have been opened yesterday.
Of course you have no clue about it.
So buying OPEN.ETH for 1/3 of regular price is a small bet i did.
Maybe mention the amount i was willing to risk which was arround 60-70k bts for open.eth and open.btc together.
About Obits price falled from average 1 BTS to 0.1 BTS.
A clear buying opportunity if you think VPLedger will have some kind of success.
So please tell me were with your limited ability to understand trading where did i made a big mistake which would discredit me which you try permantly till today with no luck.
P.S How come the represant of western community has no support on his legal worker from foreigners?
Maybe start first collecting support from the people you claim to represant.Shouldn't be so difficult if you are implementing their demands like you claim.
And to answer your poor claim that i represent the vote of chinese.
This is incorrect.I represent with the vote my own opinion and don't belong to any group.
I always vote what i think is best for bitshares no matter if chinese,foreigners,dev's,beos or any other group.
Maybe start acting what is best for bitshares community by listening to them and filter what would be business wise a good feature or not and not following blindly instructions to safe your own benefit and position on bitshares.
You see i have no problem to get kicked out of committee or lose voting power.It won't change my actions.
That's the big diffrence between me and you.(In many peoples opinion)You always adopt the opinion from where you get most support for your own benefit or to increase your position on bitshares.
Here a chat with a high ranked chinese committee member
But on the other hand, he owns the domain and we can see it a license fee, or leasing fee or whatever alike
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
me: hey ......... any idea what chinese are thinking about legal representant ?
me:What is your opinion on that ?
Some don't know or don't care. Some know so lobbied for that worker in the past
me: digital is going to try to get the legal to his move institute
One question, if DL asks for more, will you support him?
me:
my concern a bit is
trademark
domain
core worker
legal
All at one place
So he will be the new dictator
So even many chinese are aware of that major problem.
And i recommend digging now what DL said in closed groups what he plans to do with his legal mandate should it get approved.
-
I guess you discredited your ability to preview market with this statement already
step 1) that Chinese have X amount of weeks to move/close their positions to CNY under the current fixed feeds.
I won't put your quotes from tg which are even more funny.
P.S. Yes Thule, on behalf of the West.
You trying to discredit me all the time on TG..Nothing new that BEOS,you and some chinese who do inside deals are trying everything now to discredit me.It's also funny it's always you running away when western community starts questioning your actions together with BEOS when trying to discredit me.So how come you claim you ask in the name of Western when you are always running away from them ?
But remember even i lose voting power it won't change anything.I raised my voice before and will continue to do it even with 1 bts voting power.
Many chinese members from CN-Vote are already starting questioning the voting decissions for your worker.
I can understand you guys don't like me to talk to them asking for a reason to support your worker or BEOS where they have no clear answer and ask in cn-votes group chat for reasoning.It must be a big pain.
Here a nice conversation with the creator of CN-Cote
bitProfessor, [17.04.20 11:16]
I don't know the current situation of CN-vote
bitProfessor, [17.04.20 11:18]
But I'm not surprised that CN-vote and beos destroyed bithares one day
bitProfessor, [17.04.20 11:19]
What did they do?
Thule the Moaning father, [17.04.20 11:19]
making inside deals with beos
bitProfessor, [17.04.20 11:19]
Ha
I voted ZAVOD as I have discussed a lot with DL, I feel the proposal is feasible, and it cost less.
So you voted for a legal represantative mainly for foreigners based on a talk with one guy .......
Did you checked the country where the represantative will be located ?It's local rules ?Legal Security ?Corruption ?enforcment power ?
Am asking because it seems you don't know Slovenia and that's why i asked ironicly the question why didn't you open your crypto company in mongolia.
You are 100% correct, and thanks for support - unfortunately we are far from agreement on general consensus as you see.
Now this is the tricky part: Stablecoin as represents peg/equivalent to its fiat brother (in terms of legal definitions around globe) and is backed by collateral (in our case BTS on-chain); -> To maintain legal around currency with no owner (apart from current committee members), we have to:
Why don't you post your statements public but only in closed chats ?
Did foreign community agreed on your centralization dictatur crap ?You run away as always ?
Come on at least post your position very clear what it means for bitshares having you as legal.
Tell openly how you plan to centralize everything ,call people who don't like kyc idiots,how you want to enforce staff on business etc ?Why do you talk about it only behind closed doors ?
How many people have you already threatened to sue or kick out of bitshares as Brand owner ?(also for their voting behavior only) .
What did you requested to social media accounts holders ?To get your approvement if they are allowed to use social media accounts about bitshares ?
You going to dictate who is allowed to promote bitshares and who not ?
Based on what ?
You clearly are mentally not able to hold such a positon with your permanent threats and abuse.
I'll give you reply to that. We all forgotten Thul3 was not b-dex when he arrived but thul369 and his activity is this:
BitUSD Debt Position with very nasty CR according to fixed price feeds (which he is so against right ?)
Selling BTS for OBITS
Trading BTS against OPEN.ETH which is dead market
and yeah, holding OPEN.BTC that doesn't work. Can we pass and just start ignoring him completely ? Maybe Alt will realize sooner or later he just had wrong pick.
You are just discrediting yourself more and more.
First of all i stated it already multiple times even years ago that i hold majority of my funds on huobi.Now more than ever because i'm a trader and you can't trade bts very activly on dex with current price feed threshold.
I stated also before that i won't put myself major coins to dex because i don't trust gateways and that's why i support ibc like majority of foreigners which you claim to represent.
To your accusation of being a bad trader even i recommend people to read your comments about trading i bought OPEN.ETH and OPEN.BTC yesterday.
It's a clear bet that these gateways will open soon as OPEN.USDT have been opened yesterday.
Of course you have no clue about it.
So buying OPEN.ETH for 1/3 of regular price is a small bet i did.
Maybe mention the amount i was willing to risk which was arround 60-70k bts for open.eth and open.btc together.
About Obits price falled from average 1 BTS to 0.1 BTS.
A clear buying opportunity if you think VPLedger will have some kind of success.
So please tell me were with your limited ability to understand trading where did i made a big mistake which would discredit me which you try permantly till today with no luck.
Great, and hope now you feel better once you shared it with us. Now anything topic related or helpful ?
Chee®s
-
topic related ?
Yes biteur lost over 50% of it's debt holders the last couple of days getting very unattractive with just 14 debt holders in total.
Once BTS price hits cny threshold i bet majority of current biteur debt will try to switch to bitCNY.
-
For the same reasoning, BitUSD has already perfect structure and ownership which presents him as native asset of the blockchain, where any other created MPA afterwards isn't.
Nevermind, solution then is that actually after BTC Halving we remove BSIP76 once BTS goes over 5c. Hopefully it will happen and will pray for it.
The structure of bitasset is not perfect, but let's don't talk it too much, the one who understand it will know the means of the picture which i gave.
As no one can forecast the market, wait for something is too dangerous especially we build a levee(BSIP76) to stop the water so long time.
The main problem of bitusd is too many debtors come from CN-vote, they have too many debts in bitusd, now you want them to go away, i don't think this will get the enough vote.
Want to remove the levee, must lower the water first, now the water control the levee, what we can do first?
Too many erroneous mindsets in BTS community, that make us hard move forward,
Ok, let's focus the topic:
If the feed price need a delay or protection? the answer is yes, every futures contract have the protection in feed price, but none of them delay 48 hours, i had gave a article about that, one hour is the limit, the feed price should follow the real price(ok, there still have a big problem for the real price) in most of the time, and must recover normal in one hours in some extreme cases.
BSIP2 and BSIP76 failed on these.
I'm tired to explain the feed price, the margin call, the force settlement, the defect in BSIP74 and BSIP62, the meaningless of bsip87, the use of BSIP77, the lending, everyone didn't want be babysat.
The contact time of BTS is only few years for me, maybe they know more much than me, let the time tell.
Ok, back to the point:
Want to remove the levee, must lower the water first, now the water control the levee, what we can do first?
-
we have 4 popular MPA tokens
let the different settings show us what works best
not bad.
maybe we can just let bitEUR be what it was.
lower USD threshold to as equal as CNY threshold(close to 0.0307USD) while BTS price is stably above 0.0345USD.
-
lower USD threshold
Remove the threshold, provide real price feeds. 2 instances of months long bailouts to the detriment of BTS, bad debtors need to face reality.