没事到这里投投票吧。
虽然希望渺茫，但还是尽力争取一下，https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=27362.0

Quote from: bitcrab on November 06, 2018, 03:05:22 pm

喂价理论上可以低于市场价，但是却必须考虑到强清防护。
当前CNY强清补偿是5%，USD强清补偿是1%。
那就要求CNY喂价不得低于市场价*96%，USD喂价不得低于市场价，这样既防护了强清，也算是最大限度支持了负反馈，可算作不完美的权宜之计。
如何？

不好，想要保留喂价反馈与防止被恶意强清须采用最高价法，最高价法灵活性更大一些，即使每个人的参数不一，对最后出来的喂价结果影响不会太大，只存在喂价反馈什么时候会超过或低于外盘喂价的问题，也就是喂价反馈进场与出场的时机问题，留给市场自由竞争的空间更大，即使不想承认，最高价法已经是妥协中的最好办法。

即使不低于市场价的96%，依然存在喂价向下反馈压制内盘向上空间的问题，也属于变相的恶意强清，不属于市场自身调节。

喂价反馈在外盘喂价上升时属于几乎不动的情况，即使动也远低于以前外盘喂价上升速度，一旦内盘价格一时超过外盘，就会反馈爆仓，形成空间严重压缩。

抵押低于外盘喂价被爆了无话可说，被喂价反馈爆了这就属于被计划，高于外盘喂价时候的向下反馈还能接受。

最好舍弃锚定精度的想法，没有强大的外汇储备与经济实力想控制汇率基本不可能，但是抵押者不是筹码。

另外，左右堵窟窿是堵不住的，问题出在喂价反馈上，不是出在强清上，提高强清补偿也不能彻底解决喂价反馈本身的问题。

现在的这个体系，需要内盘与外盘联动，如果内盘对价格的拉升不能传导到外盘，那么这种拉升本身就没多大意义。被压缩就被压缩呗。

当然，现在内盘与外盘联动的程度还比较低，需要提高。

抵押者本来就需要承担各种风险，现在抵押者承担的风险，比起719之前已经小多了。

喂价理论上可以低于市场价，但是却必须考虑到强清防护。
当前CNY强清补偿是5%，USD强清补偿是1%。
那就要求CNY喂价不得低于市场价*96%，USD喂价不得低于市场价，这样既防护了强清，也算是最大限度支持了负反馈，可算作不完美的权宜之计。
如何？

Quote from: bitcrab on November 06, 2018, 01:50:20 pm

I own a debt position with CR=3, now you force me to sell the collateral to you with a under market price, this is not exploiting, are you joking?

Well, that is a consequence of BSIP42 and not of settlements per se.
Multiple solutions to that have been proposed already among which are:
- let the price feed reflect the actual pricing again and do negative feedback through MCR
- introduce a distinct price for settlements (though I believe that would allow exploting BSIP42)

The proposal to remove one of the strongest reasons for bitassets to have a "floor"-price isn't easy for me to understand.

the force settlement is already a problem for long time, that's why the bitCNY offset is set to 5%. BSIP42 just make the problem apparent.

maybe the MCR solution can make things better, but I think it will cost at least several months for it to come, in this period we just let the debt position owner be put into the risk of being exploited?

You are turning a free market into a centrally planned economy

what you called free market is a forrest where beasts can kill and eat people.

the real free market is a common infrastructure, it need careful design and will evolve with consensus.

price feeding become more critical after the BSIP42 implementation.

currently the feed price in CNY is 4.5% lower than the latest price, in the past several days the gap was even bigger.


according to the negative feedback logic, it's possible and acceptable that the feed price be lower than the latest price, but we still need to review whether there are some flaws here that may hurt the ecosystem.

there are always some price gap between DEX and CEX, if the gap is not big enough, we can not expect the gap be removed by arbitrage，if the CEX price keeps a little lower than DEX price, the negative feedback algorithm may respond and reduce the feed price, in some extreme situation the reducing feed price may trigger continuous margin call which is not so necessary.

while reducing feed price directly lead to margin call that force sell, increasing feed price do not lead to force buy, witnesses need to be more careful while reducing the feed price.

I suggest that we can introduce a "protect discount limit" in the price feeding algorithm, if the smartcoin discount is not bigger than this limit, algorithm does not start the negative feedback process.

that's why gdex-witness updated the algorithm as below:

Pdex：BTS price in DEX in smartcoin
Pf: current feed price
premium: current premium

scale=1;
get Pdex, Pf, premium;

while True:
   
   get Pdex, Pf, premium;
   if 0.3%>premium>-0.5%: ##just adopt the current median if the absolute premium is low enough.
       feed price = Pf;
   else:
       feed price = Pf*(1+premium*scale);
   time.sleep(120); ##update every 2 minutes.
I also suggest that each witness publish the price feed algorithm, which can help proxies to review and evaluate the witness work.

support！

I believe this is a powerful solution and meet the requirement of the ecosystem.