bytemaster, It is all well and good, as long as the people willing to take the extra risk of going short for the extra profit (*1), as opposed to simply staying long BTS X, will equal the demand for bitUSD by people preferring bitUSD to USD. It might be the case, but if one envision huge interest in bitUSD this might not be true at all.
In other words relying on enough risk tolerant players to essentially ‘print’ all the bitUSD needed/required by everyone seeing the benefit of using bitUSD (instead of USD) is something I am not totally comfortable with…

*1 It is pretty straightforward but someone buying a BTSX at @ $100/BTSX will profit $100 if the price goes up to $200/BTSX and $200 if buys at the same price and shorts bitUSD (assuming 2x margin and USD~~bitUSD). Going short unfortunately proportionally increase the loses in case of unfavorable price movement.

What is actually very concerning is the fact that bytemaster said: 
“ We will likely introduce BitShares ME…  prior to implementing … BTS XT”
 (here: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=1890.msg45173#msg45173)

And what toast said:
 “I would guess Lotto and DNS would come before ME.”
 (here: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=3615.msg45527#msg45527)

If the system is a success (between other things meaning that BitUSD is actually correlated to USD), I personally think there will be people making the meat space USD directly tradable/exchangeable for BitUSD.

BUT

The BTS X do not target and or make possible this feature in itself!
i.e. Somebody else will have to make this USD BitUSD possible .And probably more than one person/entity will.

Going long (or longing as you call it) is not that hard of a concept – it simply means buying something. For now you can buy BitUSD only with BTXs.

I hope you still sleep well after learning this details 

HI, bytemaster
First, I am happy to see that you are seriously considering going back to 2x margin, no matter if it is because of the attack suggested by my or any of the other attacks.
Second, Thanks You for offering a tip for me suggesting the Unbalanced Forces Attack/BitUSD Monopoly Attack. I would prefer it in BTX (as opposed to PTS) and am ok waiting for the wallet release if you do not mind, as the next DAC is too far in the future for my liking plus all Bank/Exchanges will be based on BTX not PTS, as I understand.
In your post you showed some doubt for how exactly one will profit from BitUSD Monopoly Attack. While my idea was to point how easy it is to distort the market (just for the heck of it, no money gains in mind) and to show that somebody with 10% of BTX (and most likely with far less than that) can choose/control the price of all BitAssets (or at least choose to set their price at arbitrary upward point). In my mind this is dangerous enough. I think that the people will come with more and ‘better’ ways to use it for their advantage but if you insist here are my 3 ways on how one can profit from it:
1. Introducing market/solution that lacks the above deficiencies… (if losing all/most/some money invested in 10% of all BTX is worth it)
2.The inflated BitUSD can be sold/exchanged on an outside market for USD or other ‘meat space’ currency before the price support is withdrawn and the price of BItUSD potentially/likely goes down
3. One can come up with a ‘fund’ that offers an investment in asset/s (BitUSD and other BitAssets) that guaranty (7%, 10%, 14% return/year).
 And what is more troubling, he/she can actually secure such return for year after year, after year; by simply controlling the price (or at least the upward movement of the price) of said asset. And while mass withdrawal of money from such fund may expose the  scheme such fund is, so are pretty much every bank/fund (meaning none of them can sustain mass withdrawal of funds without outside help or going bankrupt)


On totally different note (without too much thought, this is just how I feel in general about it):
1.‘short squeeze’  is nothing to worry about - it is a natural market development and if they/ the shorts feel pressure they better have ‘easy way to add additional margin/cover and sale at the new price ’ if they do not want to be forced to liquidate.
2.Caps on price movement/per block is the way to remove/soften the blow to the system, in my opinion. Also the margin call buy orders (as market orders –i.e. no upper limit on the buy price), should be filled up first before other buy orders.
3. I have a suggestion that I will put in the next post….