Quote from: Akado on January 04, 2016, 01:41:09 am

Quote from: abit on January 04, 2016, 01:33:36 am

Quote from: alt on January 04, 2016, 01:20:58 am

Quote from: Akado on January 04, 2016, 12:09:18 am

so, committee members, do you have something here with proposal potential?

@mindphlux @BunkerChain Labs @baozi @bitcrab

I agree we should use the fund to support liquility.
and I agree tony's advice

Make a proposal please?

Can you discuss that here/telegram and see if you can come up with a proposal?

In order to actually perform tony's idea, I see two options

- stick with multisig and have all committee members agree on
 * withdraw accumulated fees
 * place order
 * cancel order
which is IMHO quite an overhead

instead I would propose to either pick a trusted committee/non-committee member that knows about
trading (read: not me) that can perform the trades on a new/empty account. Pay him a flat .5-1% or so
for his efforts

Just my thoughts

If we can increase liquidity.  Even artificially.  And that leads to a better peg.  And people actually use our bit assets.  That would be a great boon to the price.  Lots of ifs in there I know. 

Improving the peg is improving the product.  Improving the product should help adoption and price.

I'm trying to find ways that we can improve things now.  Without waiting for the devs to fix things, or complaining when they don't do what we want or think is best.

I'm doing this because I care about the price.  In fact, I'm pissed about the price.  The price is a direct reflection of how the market views the value of our product.

We should focus on only one BTS/BITASSET market.  Probably CNY or USD.  Then we should have market making in the CNY/USD market where the risks are lower.

Quote from: JonnyBitcoin on January 03, 2016, 03:32:42 pm

Quote from: btswolf on January 03, 2016, 03:05:29 pm

What is needed to bring Stock derivatives online?
If I understand it correct the Committee could bring in a lot of MPAs that reflect the price of real Stocks, ETFs etc?
What is holding us back in creating those assets?

I would love to diversify my portfolio by mixing it with many more kinds of investments.
We could be the first Exchange to trade really anything.

This would bring us a lot of attention and thus more users and liquidity.
We should bring ever week a couple of new assets.
every week in the news
growing a bit every week

Thoughts?

Unfortunately none of the MPAs/bitassets/smartcoins are serving there purpose due to lack of liquidity, large spreads and no depth.

All efforts should be focused on getting bitUSD and bitCNY functioning with low spreads and market depth.

We are a long way from having stock market indexs as MPAs let alone individual stocks.

There has to be a reason why people should buy bitUSD CNY etc. The more Assets can be traded against pegged FIAT the more demand and liquidity will come.

we can think and talk all the time about how to bring liquidity, but whatever we try to create artificially will be a waste of time and resources. we need to create demand through opportunities. give me the possibility to create a buy order on my favorite stock and I`m sure I will find someone to short it.

Quote from: iHashFury on January 03, 2016, 11:08:38 am

@JonnyBitcoin @mindphlux and myself had a brief chat on Bitshares Telegram Group chat about this.

We were thinking of setting up a multisig worker proposal to fund borrowing smartcoins, add liquidity and set a recurring daily payment back to the reserve pool.

What would happen when the worker proposal ends? That means no more funds which means no more liquidity. That seems kind of a temporarily solution..
Although I could go for it and maybe support it since we need to start with something, like @cube  mentioned, the blockchain shouldn't take the risk, instead, their users should. I think this would give a nice discussion to understand the whys. I think most people support this, however, what if we can't come up with any other solution? Do you prefer continuing with no liquidity or have the blockchain take the risk? Cause if we see it from another point of view, it's not the blockchain itself taking the risk, the risk is just being taken by every shareholder and evenly distributed according to their holdings right? That's an interesting topic!

And thanks @alt for your work, it's nice seeing more bots around!

@iHashFury do you think you could have a more in depth chat on the telegram group or maybe redirect the members here so we can discuss this?

What is exactly the problem you are trying to solve here? I think the system works as it should be working. Those who have the most BTS will have the most voting power.

Bigger problem right now is that we don't have enough high quality committee members. One reason is the lack of GUI for committee, I suspect that many aren't interested using the text client.

Correct if I'm wrong, but I have the understanding that when shareholders vote for committee, they don't vote only for individual members but for size of the committee also. If everybody votes for only three members, there won't be more than three members in the committee, and that's pretty much centralized then.

Quote from: JonnyBitcoin on January 03, 2016, 03:00:18 am

Quote from: Xeldal on January 03, 2016, 12:20:58 am

You can't guarantee trades will be profitable, but I like the idea. 

The committee is currently long 6910 USD, 7860 CNY, and .473BTC these positions are not guaranteed profitable positions to hold either.

We need to create bitassets and sell them into the market for liquidity not worry about the profits from it.

If those 6k would be divided between 3-6 different members doing some market making on the DEX it could help get some traction.

I say not sell them but have that spread on people who can do market making and of course, we can trust. Multi sig account shared with committee members or other trustworthy people with more weight over the account.