The urgent crises is that we have many committee members gone wild, who do not understand the system they are representing. 
The other urgent crises is that we continue voting for these committee members who consistently demonstrate they don't have a clue how things work.

Settlement is not a loophole, and is nothing new.  Its been available since the begining.  it was thoroughly discussed and understood long prior to BTS2 and is a critical function. 

Any available arbitrage opportunity is due to improper pricing of bitCNY by its users/gateways etc.  If transwiser is taking a loss they need to adjust their pricing.  We do not need to change the entire design of bitshares markets to fit 1 gateways uninformed business model.

There is no need to disable the settlement.  If it doesn't already, forced settlement should take all available bids below the feed before pulling from the least collateralized shorts.

how can you be so fucking stupid?!

I have heard the word "force settlement" at the BTS2.0 announcement, however there is no detailed doc to describe how it works, my 200k cny short position comes from 1.0.  when 2.0 firstly come, I think it a big improvement that the monthly settlement is removed, but finally I find things are even worse.

actually when the feature is in development, alt has objected it in discussion, but no one care.

considering also the increasing SQR from 1100 to 1500 issue, many shorters are robbed at a moment, why BTS team alwasy be so cruel to shorters, do you decide to drive the shorters away?

do not make money is not a problem, being margin called because of insufficient collateral is not a problem, but if any time another one can force you to sell your BTS to him in a "fair price", that is a big problem,  not only that no matter how you  refined the price feed script the feed price will always diverge from the market price now and then and provide chance to speculators,  but also this kind of settlement will make it no sense for the shorters to short.

I completely believe that BitCNY does not need such a force settlement feature, so if possible i'd like to suggest to make the force settlement an asset-specific feature, and disable it for BitCNY. and then you can do what you like to BitUSD.

We had a great discussion about this in the Telegram Chat group and came to the conclusion that

a) it's not robbery
b) the features has been available way longer already
c) language barrier makes it difficult for eastern members to comprehend the settlement idea
d) chinese exchanges without trading fees should be considered as well when providing a CNY price feed

this is not conclusion, it is just some peole's idea.

in the new versionn 151125, a "SETTLE" button appear under the balance tab, as stated in the help, "Holders of any bitAsset can request a settlement at a fair price at any time. The settlement closes the borrow/short positions with lowest collateral ratio and sells the collateral for the settlement."

alt told me some more detail, "if anyone request settlement with asset A, one day later he can buy BTS from the asset shorter with the lowest collateral ratio with the latest settlement price. "

I am surprised to hear this, as a big BitCNY shorter, it seems this feature put me in danger.

Why we need this feature?

yes, maybe it can really raise the collateral ratio as a whole, because each shorter will run away from the lowest collateral ratio space. but does this really do good to the whole ecosystem, MPA supply will be lowered and more BTS will be unlocked for exchange.

shorters are always in danger, they always face the danger of margin call, this feature provide each user an opportunity to rob them.

and is this kind of rule reasonable? when one put his assets into collateral, anyone  can buy these collateral with a so called "fair price", not because the collateral ratio meet the maintenance ratio, but because the collateral ratio is the lowest!

and currently the settlement fed by witness is often not the fair price. say the feed price for BitCNY/BTS is 0.0205, but are there anyone can sell me BTS at 0.0205 CNY? if yes, please let me know.

as a shorter I have been hurt by the unexpected rule change at 16th,OCT, now I worry whether I will be hurt once more.

please stop robbing the shorter.

希望修改规则加入按交易百分比收交易手续费时，能进一步细分maker,taker的交易手续费百分比做成参数。并能支持负数（当然也可以都是正数，只需要maker%+taker%>=0就可以，我觉得maker%=-0.05%,taker%=0.1%的设置比较好，可以平衡各方利益），这样就可以鼓励maker挂单增加流动性。

这个不是committee通过proposal投票就能解决的问题，这个需要worker proposal，在issue#445 https://github.com/cryptonomex/graphene/issues/445#issuecomment-159948611已经向BM提议这样改，但还没有得到回复。

@cube:

This is not only to help myself, but also and especially to encourage other shorters.

I definitely cannot supply enough BitCNY,  we need more shorters to join the game.

What do we have committee proposals for again?
Votes in the forum are worthless for two reasons:
* every account as a vote
* every account has equal votes
That does NOT represent how the BitShares DAC is run ..

Instead of argumenting about individual fees .. I'd rather see someone do the task of a "Controller" and evaluate different pricing models with projections of how many customers may come in

This post is just to collect feedback from community, to ensure that there is no factors we haven't considered before creating a proposal.
I think to change the fees individuals is also OK, although it may be not the best,  just like " Pareto improvement ".
and I doubt whether a "Controller" model really work in a DAC. but anyone can try, he/she can try to build a pricing model with according fee structure, and finally the  votes will decide whether to adopt.

having seen suggestion to reduce more, and also to change the account_update fee, I feel the proposal need change, new proposal will be:

change both the call order update fee and account update fee to 1 BTS(for LTM to 0.2 BTS).

because:

1. neither of these fees is the core business fee.
2.we need to encourage shorters and also votes/proxy.
3.these operation cost few.

please revote.

below is the comment to the old poll, and when I changed the poll the result is: support:32 objection:1 neutral:1   

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I plan to create a proposal to change the call order update fee (margin position update fee) from 40 BTS to 5 BTS(for LTM  from 8 BTS to 1 BTS), please let me know your opinion to this change.

Why do this change?

1. As MPAs such as BitUSD and BitCNY are getting more widely used, we need to encourage shorters to supply more MPAs.
2. Cost for updating margin position is not high.

the poll is for the whole community and will last 5 days.

Quote from: imr3 on November 24, 2015, 12:42:42 am

引入ETH交易是可行的，只要这个交易品种有市场。如果开通ETH/BITCNY交易对的成本不高，那就赶紧搞起来。

开通IOU交易对没多少成本，但是现在使用成本比较高，一是下单手续费比较贵，二是转账手续费比较高也导致了不方便充值提现。

对于LTM来说还可以，但是现在20000的LTM费用实在太高，真想降到10000去。