BitShares Forum
Main => Stakeholder Proposals => Topic started by: bitcrab on June 06, 2020, 04:44:59 pm
-
According to the voting rule, BAIP6 is now approved. https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=32382.msg342564;topicseen#msg342564 (https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=32382.msg342564;topicseen#msg342564)
BAIP6 will be implemented based on what is described in the document: https://github.com/bitshares/baips/blob/master/baip-0006.md (https://github.com/bitshares/baips/blob/master/baip-0006.md)
As the first step, the four BitAssets bitCNY, bitUSD, bitEUR, and bitRUBLE will be set unified market parameters as market fee = 0.1% and reward percent = 20%.
Subsequently, Committee will find developers to develop the necessary scripts used in BAIP6. when the scripts is finished and tested well, the Ordering Mining will begin.
-
BAIP6 has not been approved since your worker clearly didn't matched as a BAIP but a regular worker.
Gateway assets have nothing to do with Bitassets and BAIP.Also a MM contest for bitassets is according to BAIP's defenition which is voted in by consensus not a BAIP
Any committee supporting these manipulations will lose my and many other peoples support.
You want to get it approved?
Do it the right way without your endless manipulations and i will execute it myself.
BAIP Types
There are two kinds of BAIPs:
-An Informational BAIP describes a BitAssets design issue, or provides general guidelines or information to the BitShares community, but does not propose a new feature, consensus change or any other modification. Informational BAIPs do not necessarily represent a BitShares community consensus or recommendation, so users and implementors are free to ignore Informational BAIPs or follow their advice. Examples would be best-practises or recommendations.
-A Consensus Upgrade BAIP describes any change that affects some or all BitAssets implementations, such as a parameters or price feed formula, logic and source or addition that affects the applications using BitAssets.
https://github.com/bitshares/baips/blob/master/baip-0001.md
nice quote from abit
当然，如果一个业务肯定做不好，要砍掉。
-
BAIP6 has not been approved since your worker clearly didn't matched as a BAIP but a regular worker.
Gateway assets have nothing to do with Bitassets and BAIP.Also a MM contest for bitassets is according to BAIP's defenition which is voted in by consensus not a BAIP
Any committee supporting these manipulations will lose my and many other peoples support.
You want to get it approved?
Do it the right way without your endless manipulations and i will execute it myself.
This is not a regular worker, it is not relevant to reserve pool.
This proposal is expanded/updated from the MM contest, will be operated by Committee, Yes, some parts of it are irrelevant to bitAssets, but as a whole it is still closely linked to bitAssets ecosystem, There is no problem to adopt BAIP as the infrastructure for documentation and voting.
-
BAIP6 has not been approved since your worker clearly didn't matched as a BAIP but a regular worker.
Gateway assets have nothing to do with Bitassets and BAIP.Also a MM contest for bitassets is according to BAIP's defenition which is voted in by consensus not a BAIP
Any committee supporting these manipulations will lose my and many other peoples support.
You want to get it approved?
Do it the right way without your endless manipulations and i will execute it myself.
This is not a regular worker, it is not relevant to reserve pool.
This proposal is expanded/updated from the MM contest, will be operated by Committee, Yes, some parts of it are irrelevant to bitAssets, but as a whole it is still closely linked to bitAssets ecosystem, There is no problem to adopt BAIP as the infrastructure for documentation and voting.
It's not.
Here once again the defenition of BAIP for you
BAIP Types
There are two kinds of BAIPs:
-An Informational BAIP describes a BitAssets design issue, or provides general guidelines or information to the BitShares community, but does not propose a new feature, consensus change or any other modification. Informational BAIPs do not necessarily represent a BitShares community consensus or recommendation, so users and implementors are free to ignore Informational BAIPs or follow their advice. Examples would be best-practises or recommendations.
-A Consensus Upgrade BAIP describes any change that affects some or all BitAssets implementations, such as a parameters or price feed formula, logic and source or addition that affects the applications using BitAssets.
Also BAIP has no authority touching committee funds.
You are just trying to bypass a regular voting knowing it would have no chance to pass targeting committee funds.
Why did you kicked me 2 days ago out of committee in wechat ?Because i reduced the voting power of the 4 committee members who passed proposals without the consent of the other 7 committee members ?
Trading volume from GDEX last 24h is arround 60k BTS in total.
You need money to pay for trading activity at GDEX ?
If its so lucrative why don't you pay from your own pocket ?
Because the payment is bigger than the benefit ?
You would collect 100% of fees and not just 80%.
Your daily volume represents how well you know bitshares community.
A result of your never ending ignorance towards them.
So explain to us now please how are we going to benefit from features now like sharing fee etc with that volume ?
You just wasted again 4 months applying core to irrelevant work as we both know who created the prelude core worker in a closed group pushing his own agenda.
-
(https://i.imgur.com/6Q8ixqg.jpg)
Do you even have an option to not listen to community anymore or is it only about your personal benefit ?
-
Why did you kicked me 2 days ago out of committee in wechat ?Because i reduced the voting power of the 4 committee members who passed proposals without the consent of the other 7 committee members ?
just because you are not a committee member anymore.
You just wasted again 4 months applying core to irrelevant work as we both know who created the prelude core worker in a closed group pushing his own agenda.
I don't care how you say that, both the bsips and the workers get approved from the community.Yes it is delayed, as always happened in core worker.
-
Using BAIP incorrectly instead of BSIP? Another glaring warning sign. Doom ahead.
-
In my view, if Bitshares is a DAC, Committee will be the Board.
BTS holders vote the Committee members, Committee do some decision making and execution things.
Surely we also need to find consensus by voting from BTS holders for some key issues.
I agree that we need to reach consensus via a poll voting for the Ordering Mining/MM Contest.
I don't think this should be handled as a worker proposal, as it is not to apply funds directly from the reserve pool.
BSIP? BSIP is always for protocol improvement/feature update, not match.
BAIP is not totally match, but is much suitable than BSIP, no big problem to use it to get the community's opinion on this issue.
otherwise, maybe we build another new repository for this, something named BOIP?
-
Based on holders consensus committee funds should be burned to reserve pool.
Also committee lost trust of majority from members because of their past action and manipulation inside the committee.
Do you even read how people currently name committee ?
-
As the first step, the four BitAssets bitCNY, bitUSD, bitEUR, and bitRUBLE will be set unified market parameters as market fee = 0.1% and reward percent = 20%.
After communication with community, now the reward percent is finally determined as 40%, A proposal is already created to set unified market parameters as market fee = 0.1% and reward percent = 20% for the 4 bitAssets and is waiting for Committee to approve.
-
please correct your statement from community to a group because i haven't seen a single line of discussion of that topic in telegram.
-
Using BAIP incorrectly instead of BSIP? Another glaring warning sign. Doom ahead.
I have never liked the term BAIP. BSIP's are what we voted on. I never voted to vote on BAIP's. We don't need to separate proposals just for mpa's. MPA's are part of Bitshares, so the incessant misdirection and confusion needs to stop. I cannot vote for this one, or anything called a BAIP.
-
Even you vote the BSIP-Threshold， this thershold still is a very easy cheating vote, we have a very clear guideline for these worker already, if the worker didn't get enough pay from the reserver pool, it shouldn't be actived，and we can supervise and control the worker very easily.
Now they set a BSIP/BAIP threshold don't know where they come from, and didn't get any approve from the holders of BTS，then a small group of people can control it very easily to spend the money of community.
Every Threshold shouldn't exist，if a worker can't get enough pay from the reserver pool，it means this worker is not accepted by the most of the holders of BTS.
I think we should remove the BSIP/BAIP-threshold from the vote system, the threshold is very easy controlled by a small group of people, and didn't get the approve through the vote ever，just they said “hey，i make a threshold for something，you must follow the threshold！“？！
In other words, every threshold should get the fully day pay from the reserver pool every day, then we can think it is actived, but now what we have done?!!!!
If you think the BSIP/BAIP-Threshold is right？！ committees？！
So i suggest:
1. Every worker fund should come from the reserver pool(donation exception);
2. A BSIP worker should get continuous seven days pay from the reserver pool, then the worker can be considered approved.
If there have a YES/NO BSIP worker proposal, which got more votes and keep the higher vote than another in continuous seven days, and it shoud get continuous pay from the reserver pool in the competition process of keeping the higher vote than another in continuous seven days, then the worker can be considered approved.
This day pay must be fully worker pay.
3. This voting threshold mechanism should be voted by the holders of BTS，and get continuous 30 days pay from the reserver pool, then we can consider the voting threshold mechanism approved.
https://github.com/bitshares/bsips/issues/267
When the senate truly charges the powers to Roman general, then the Republic of Rome collapsed.
-
please correct your statement from community to a group because i haven't seen a single line of discussion of that topic in telegram.
I think BTS didn't have the community anymore, the holders of BTS had made this choice for themself, they chose to destroy themself and the chain, time will show the fact.
(https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/34892308/84582494-66321980-ae1f-11ea-9cff-61380f8c3649.png)
-
please correct your statement from community to a group because i haven't seen a single line of discussion of that topic in telegram.
I think BTS didn't have the community anymore, the holders of BTS had made this choice for themself, they chose to destroy themself and the chain, time will show the fact.
I mean community, not telegram.
In my view, if Bitshares is a DAC, then Committee is just like the Board, no Board need to get approvement from Shareholders in everything.
Every shareholder is authorized to unvote any Committee member.
-
please correct your statement from community to a group because i haven't seen a single line of discussion of that topic in telegram.
I think BTS didn't have the community anymore, the holders of BTS had made this choice for themself, they chose to destroy themself and the chain, time will show the fact.
I mean community, not telegram.
In my view, if Bitshares is a DAC, then Committee is just like the Board, no Board need to get approvement from Shareholders in everything.
Every shareholder is authorized to unvote any Committee member.
Oh, Sith Lord! This is our pleasure to serve you!
--------------------
"Committee" just is adviser，remember it, not "council" 、 "commission" and "Board", didn't have the power to do anything.
"Committee" only needs to follow the decision of the holders of BTS and give the advice to the holders of BTS.
Remember the bottom line，the holders of BTS have all the power，only they can make decision，not the "Committee".
What you say just want the "Committee" to become a dictatorial machine/Nazi agent which were controled by a small group of people！
理事会仅仅是参谋与顾问而已，而不是权力机构，没有权力去做任何事。
理事会仅仅需要遵循BTS持有者的决定与给出合适的建议，关键时刻可以引导方向，给出专业性的意见，而不是越俎代庖！
记住底线，BTS的持有者拥有所有权力，只有他们才能做决定，而不是理事会。
你所说的已经在想把“理事会”变成一个被一小撮人控制的独裁与纳粹机构，独裁与纳粹机构难道就不是人民选出的？！
你们正在慢慢丧失区块链最基本的底线！！！
-
理事会仅仅是参谋与顾问而已，而不是权力机构，没有权力去做任何事。
理事会仅仅需要遵循BTS持有者的决定与给出合适的建议，关键时刻可以引导方向，给出专业性的意见，而不是越俎代庖！
记住底线，BTS的持有者拥有所有权力，只有他们才能做决定，而不是理事会。
你所说的已经在想把“理事会”变成一个被一小撮人控制的独裁与纳粹机构，独裁与纳粹机构难道就不是人民选出的？！
你们正在慢慢丧失区块链最基本的底线！！！
谁告诉你的？
你说几句话，就可以把别人定义为纳粹？
理事会如何选出来，有哪些权力，都清晰地定义在链上，觉得现在的理事不行，撤票就是了。
票也投了，就轻微地改个参数而已，还整天出来叫，搞得好像干啥都得跟他汇报似的。
你开心就好。
-
理事会仅仅是参谋与顾问而已，而不是权力机构，没有权力去做任何事。
理事会仅仅需要遵循BTS持有者的决定与给出合适的建议，关键时刻可以引导方向，给出专业性的意见，而不是越俎代庖！
记住底线，BTS的持有者拥有所有权力，只有他们才能做决定，而不是理事会。
你所说的已经在想把“理事会”变成一个被一小撮人控制的独裁与纳粹机构，独裁与纳粹机构难道就不是人民选出的？！
你们正在慢慢丧失区块链最基本的底线！！！
谁告诉你的？
你说几句话，就可以把别人定义为纳粹？
理事会如何选出来，有哪些权力，都清晰地定义在链上，觉得现在的理事不行，撤票就是了。
票也投了，就轻微地改个参数而已，还整天出来叫，搞得好像干啥都得跟他汇报似的。
你开心就好。
这些话你应该去问可爱的abit.
你有底线吗？不，你没有！
票也投了，就轻微地改个参数而已
好轻描淡写，权力的滋味就是香甜。
投票程序合规吗？都拉出来捋捋！
区块链上的改动不需要向bts持有人汇报吗？你要打自己脸吗？
纳粹是怎么定义的，自己去看，口称人民权利，却行集权之实。
有哪些权力，都清晰地定义在链上
有权力，没责任，妙啊！
来把链上的东西贴出来！
-
创建了理事会控制的账号committee-burn,以备将来销毁之用。
BTS回购规则设想：
回购买单均设为30日过期，30日内不成交则自动撤单。
1.喂价锁定状态的bitAssets如当前的bitCNY，bitUSD：
只以不高于锁定强清价挂买单回购。
2.喂价解锁状态的bitAssets以及主流币：
挂单价不高于当天的30日均线价格。
挂单价不高于三日内最低价。
此规则仅为建议，具体实施由理事会决定。
created a committee controlled account committee-burn, for future use.
suggestion on BTS buy back rules:
the buy back orders will be set 30 days as expire time, will be automatically cancelled if it is not filled in 30 days.
1.for bitAssets which is in fixed price feed status:
buying price will be no higher than the fixed force settlement price.
2.for bitAssets which in market price feed status and other cryptos:
buying price will be no higher than the EMA30 price at that day.
buying price will be no higher than the lowest price in 3 days.
This is just a suggestion.
-
创建了理事会控制的账号committee-burn,以备将来销毁之用。
BTS回购规则设想：
回购买单均设为30日过期，30日内不成交则自动撤单。
1.喂价锁定状态的bitAssets如当前的bitCNY，bitUSD：
只以不高于锁定强清价挂买单回购。
2.喂价解锁状态的bitAssets以及主流币：
挂单价不高于当天的30日均线价格。
挂单价不高于三日内最低价。
此规则仅为建议，具体实施由理事会决定。
created a committee controlled account committee-burn, for future use.
suggestion on BTS buy back rules:
the buy back orders will be set 30 days as expire time, will be automatically cancelled if it is not filled in 30 days.
1.for bitAssets which is in fixed price feed status:
buying price will be no higher than the fixed force settlement price.
2.for bitAssets which in market price feed status and other cryptos:
buying price will be no higher than the EMA30 price at that day.
buying price will be no higher than the lowest price in 3 days.
This is just a suggestion.
Just the holders of BTS have the right to make decison，not the committee！
If the committee have the right to make decison，then we build a Nazi agent for the holders of BTS.
"Committee" only needs to follow the decision of the holders of BTS and give the advice to the holders of BTS.
We build the WPS system, everything can be solved through WPS system，didn‘t need the Committee replacing the holders of BTS to make decison.
-
Your suggestions are still irrelevant
1.14.200 "BTS repurchase destruction proposal" has passed normal worker and is dominante.
Any touching of committee funds without holders consensus will be seen as theft.
BAIP can't give permission to touch any funds.
-
hongcaibao111
spring-team
bitbts2020
anbi
Ugly and Disgusting, cheat the vote and threshold, it's the shame of community！！！
Make a private meeting；
Remove the proxy;
Lower the BAIP threshold;
Make BAIP actived;
Reset the the proxy back;
So smart, nobody will find out, that's perfect operation!
开个碰头小会；
从CN-VOTE移除代理；
降低投票阈值；
支持BAIP激活；
重新设置回代理CN-VOTE.
真是聪明的操作，票数变动常人难以察觉也无法追钟，可以说是天衣无缝，犀利犀利，佩服佩服！
最开始我以为只有一人做了这样的操作，没想到居然这么多人，魔鬼般的操作，还有两位理事参与其中，这对bts社区来说，真的是可喜可贺。
(https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/34892308/85965233-9fa58000-b9ee-11ea-8987-17e3792f4992.png)
(https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/34892308/85965239-a3390700-b9ee-11ea-81a9-abae545462c2.png)
(https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/34892308/85965234-a03e1680-b9ee-11ea-9a12-aaafe9466691.png)
(https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/34892308/85965385-1d698b80-b9ef-11ea-8bee-044555443c3b.png)
-
If BTS community and bts holders think this cheating vote and threshold is reasonable and can be acceptable,
then this is the shame for bts holders and committee.
You want BTS to become like this? everything is cheating? as you wish.
-
Progress:
1.committee-trade has been updated for coming tasks.
2. bts.ai finished the development and test of the necessary scripts:
https://github.com/viaNull/bts-mmcontest-v2 (https://github.com/viaNull/bts-mmcontest-v2)
https://github.com/viaNull/bitshares-core/tree/bts-mmcontest-v2 (https://github.com/viaNull/bitshares-core/tree/bts-mmcontest-v2)
expense settlement for the development will be done in 1 week with bts.ai.
3.the Ordering Mining will start at 12rd, July, 2020, UTC 00:00:00:https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=32509.0 (https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=32509.0)
-
There is no progress since the mm contest is no BAIP by defention and never has been approved based on consensus which should be uphold and protected by committee.
First step would be a normal worker getting approved since a MM contest has completly nothing to do with a BAIP
BAIPS defention can be read here https://github.com/bitshares/baips/blob/master/baip-0001.md which makes it very clear you worker never passed community consensus.
-
Surely we also need to find consensus by voting from BTS holders for some key issues.
Would greatly appreciate your votes on our (very reasonably priced) Marketing Proposal:
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=32477.0
We nearly TRIPLED our users in just a few months, and I'm sure we can do the same for Bitshares.
Please see our SMSS proposal above, thank you :)
-ken
-
please correct your statement from community to a group because i haven't seen a single line of discussion of that topic in telegram.
I think BTS didn't have the community anymore, the holders of BTS had made this choice for themself, they chose to destroy themself and the chain, time will show the fact.
I mean community, not telegram.
In my view, if Bitshares is a DAC, then Committee is just like the Board, no Board need to get approvement from Shareholders in everything.
Every shareholder is authorized to unvote any Committee member.
you are the janitors of the blockchain and you do as shareholders tell you. simple as that.
-
please correct your statement from community to a group because i haven't seen a single line of discussion of that topic in telegram.
I think BTS didn't have the community anymore, the holders of BTS had made this choice for themself, they chose to destroy themself and the chain, time will show the fact.
I mean community, not telegram.
In my view, if Bitshares is a DAC, then Committee is just like the Board, no Board need to get approvement from Shareholders in everything.
Every shareholder is authorized to unvote any Committee member.
the BOARD? really? you are not the board dude, come down from heaven to earth
You and only you responsible for this fall from top-100, you and only you be blamed for all you have done to this community to save your position.
Is market didn't show to everyone that you were wrong with pricefeed manipulation bsips? When manipulation started we were rank top-25
now we already out of top-100, clear sing only blind couldn't see it