I am against that. Because who is to decide who gets excluded and who doesn't? That's just another way to manipulate the votes.

if the lock will count from the time of the last outgoing transfer, say 30 days. Then the algorithm will decide, not a human. After another 30 (60 days of lock) the voting power could increase slightly and, for example, to reach its maximum value after 90 days.

However, this does not protect against selling the entire account, as was the case with STEEM..
So it should be combined (with logical AND) with something like an updated list of well-known scam accounts and here comes the human factor but if you manage it with 2/3 + 1 votes of the committe account, it could work.

I suggest a new coin for voting, the coin will be airdropped to active accounts through a form of whitelisting, this removes BTS core token's responsibility as a coin for voting. Whitelisting will ensure only active accounts can receive the coins, it also removes the possibility of proxy voting as the airdrop will happen to single accounts....

there are many who are able to sell their own mother and there is a monster who wants to buy her from these motherf#ckers. I've seen it somewhere before ;|

Hi guys.

I started to write a short message for a telegram, but the content increased so much that this forum post came out.

English is not my mother tongue, try to read my thoughts between lines ^^

What happens with a Force Settlement Delay of <=24h can be compared to "ignition advance angle"
in our engine this angle is zero or it is near zero
the engine is not running
for the engine to start, the following scenario must occur:

1) Force Settlement Delay must arouse *uncertainty as to whether it will be profitable or not and whether or not it would be better to buy from the market at a slightly higher price.

* Force Settlement is not a speculative tool, or at least it should not be. FS is a tool that sets the real price of an asset at the end of the day (or like a final judgment).

2) higher price on DEX, causes the appearance of DEX-CEX arbitration, even the manual one, because arbitration at DEXbot is still not ready [facepalm] - probably due to problems with financing or whatever ...
Only this step will start to push the price on CEX. Because outsiders will not buy BTS based on news. It is only when the DEX price starts to rise regularly and people from outside join it slowly - they will be attracted by the formation on the chart of small but stable growth - then they start reading about how.bitshares.works. - Who remembers new people on the telegram asking for beautiful organic growth? - I remember.

3) Loop in the form of a continuous hassle Force Settlement is like wheel slip in mud or on snow. This force should push us up, but it doesn't. To prevent this, we should change the delay periods in such a way that:

(-) 12h, 24h is for the time of market maturity, strong liquidity, bear market

(+) 34h, 42h, 48h, 55h at a time when the bull market wakes up, or when "the wheel is sliding".

In sum. The more bearish the market is, the lower the delay should be and vice versa. Today we should have at least 42h delay or more, in my opinion.

I also think that we should not touch such options as moving EMA, SMA for Settlement Offset, this should always be 1% as compensation, not fixed 3,5 or 8%

# auxiliary events are liquidity on DEX markets, e.g. to BTC, so that arbitration is possible at all. Besides, at this level of development we should have several dozen people using arbitration (DEX-CEX) with bots and several hundred people using bots on DEX. BitShares GUI and DEXBot should be like brother and sister to each other, and every single user should be aware that they can use their own bot on their own PC / Mac / Linux and even Android TV!

Please share your thoughts and comment

I hope that the next WP is in preparation and we will see the further development of DEXBot. We can't waste what has already been done, there are still many strategies to code

Quote from: fractalnode on December 05, 2019, 10:37:32 pm

         execute Instant Settle for this amount and send those BTS to reserve pool

in this way we create a permanent source of partial financing of bad debt, but I also like the idea of additional funding for the WPS fund

Settling at the fake feed price rewards bad debt. Speaking of it, when will you start feeding the true price again?

I think it would be good to use this approach when the price returns to normal.

There are several new solutions that will help us fight the negative effects of margin call wall, including:

- bsip73 - Match force-settlement orders best-price
- bsip62 - Close Margin Position

→ Instant Settle from funds collected from trading fees would also help.

Today another idea came to my mind, but I don't know if it is possible

→ Allow users to set non-default MCR and MSSR for their positon as long as they are greater then default values.

it's worth to keep in mind that People use MCR like Stop Loss

that's why I would happily set values other than most people, e.g. MCR 1.69 nobody would know who and when is in the margin call area, or MSSR 1.03 so that a possible margin call would definitely close at market price at first time before most other orders start being fulfilled.

Quote from: bitProfessor on June 14, 2019, 08:25:42 am

6, repurchase BTS and destroy it immediately.

Destroy by sending BTS back to the reserve pool. Everything else is destroying funds.

the money comes from the reserve pool for the needs of WP, which is why BTS is sold on the market.
It would be better if we pay employees in bitCNY (or bitUSD), and then that these employees exchange these bitCNY for BTC on external exchanges (CEX), so that bitCNY can be traded (circulated) there - if possible.
The more bitAssets on the markets outside DEX, the better.

in other words, IMO funds should not be burned (transferred to the reserve pool) in the form of previously purchased BTS, but should be stored for the same purpose as the reserve pool.

(...)
maybe we need to set a insurance fund of GS and use the TARGET COLLATERAL RATIO to handle the CR of 1.10, if the insurance fund of GS can't handle, then black swan protection, if the CR which 40% of the whole system debit is down to 1.10, then settle the bitasset.
(...)
thoughts?

IMO insurance fund is "unhealthy" and makes people more prone to risk because someone else will pay for their mistakes.
###

in the current market state, reducing the "MCR" from 1.75 to 1.6 is not so bad, but we must be able to react quickly to market situations. But first and foremost I think that controlling parameters through constantly new BSIP is not a good way. These parameters should be dealt with by Witnesses (MCR, MSSR) or by the Committe Mambers (Settlement offset). I do not agree with the opinion that they lack economic knowledge to do it. This game is quite simple and the rules of this game are well known to witnesses.

Witnesses can even increase the value of the MCR parameter because it is not fully known when the majority will be achieved. If only 1 or 2 changes this parameter, it announces changes and tells investors that maybe they should increase their CR, if not they will be margin called


Please, encourage witnesses you vote for to change parameters, that is their task and they should be more pro-active. At the moment only two of them have a different opinion.

I see no reason to set it arbitrarily in advance. This is the role of Witness, they should determine such things and, among other things, on this basis should be voted on. Unless it is impossible to get the median out of these parameters. In my opinion, these parameters should be determined dynamically even several times a day. It would introduce an interesting element of the game. @zhouxiaobao please add option "witness decide"