BSIP failed bitUSD, why should it be reactivated?

Quote from: bitcrab on November 27, 2018, 06:14:52 am

frankly speaking, bitCNY is already in black swan status if the feed price reflect the real market price.

however, I don't think it's good to return to feed real market price and leave black swan happen for bitCNY,  as we have seen in bitUSD, after black swan happened, now the peg break, borrowing stop, hard to revive.

I suggest to protect bitCNY from black swan by setting a black swan protection price, say black swan protection price = global settlement price*1.11.

feed price = max(market price, black swan protection price)

then when market price goes up, the margin called orders will be eaten step by step, the black swan protection price become lower and lower, and bitCNY has chance to revive.

Thoughts?

 
In any market you can't never be sure of anything, if the price never goes back bitCNY loses forever its PEG

Yeah, following BSIP18's bitasset revive process, bitCNY would automatically revive once the settlement fund value increases https://github.com/bitshares/bsips/blob/master/bsip-0018.md#auto-revive-after-increase-of-settlement-fund-value

With bitUSD's GS, vote weight slightly changed because the BTS is in the settlement pool which doesn't have voting rights. If bitCNY globally settles, perhaps there will be a larger shift in voting power which impedes experimental changes to bitassets?

There's some interesting threads:
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=27459.0
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=27451.0;all

Disagree.

Increase MSSR to 30% (1.3) so that the margins are eaten.

We need a robust system that will work in the future. This stop gap doesn't do anything to improve the system it just breaks the promise of it.

30% would be highly attractive given recent crypto volatility, better to punish under collateralized positions than to punish everyone (all margin positions) for 1 bad-debt holder's behaviour.

If anyone's interested in another USD pegged bitasset, you could check out Hertz https://bitsharescan.com/asset/HERTZ It's got approx 12 feeds, several fully surrendered permissions (more trustless), no market fees, a 14% amplitude oscillation applied to the feed price over 28 days & borrowing is possible (whereas it's not for bitUSD until the price increases?). https://crypto.fans/hertz

Anyone focusing on other bitassets instead? bitCNY probably? Can't borrow HERO neither I don't think..

Would anyone be interested in a BTS pegged bitasset with an applied oscillation (without external volatility)?

Great idea! We used to have this functionality in btsx (see forum bts:username links), its introduction to BTS2.0 is a welcome one, keep up the great work! 👍

These assets you refer to are the responsibility of the committee, given that they have asset ownership rights over these assets.

I feel like we need a larger committee than 11, we've got 27 witnesses so why is 11 ok? I'd hope that a larger committee size would lead to greater community involvement.

In terms of Bitshares leadership, this is a DEX not a CEX, you need to take action yourself to engage with elected Bitshares roles and active workers.

Would it not be better to get BTS added to these CEX instead of a single bitasset?

No way. I'd far rather see a global settlement take place than for force settlement to be disabled. If I'm unable to claim the backing collateral directly, then there might as well be no backing collateral (fiat's worst practice).

I'd far rather see these permissions/flags entirely surrendered preventing any such proposal. Funnily enough though, I'm unable to do so within the UI at this time: https://github.com/bitshares/bitshares-ui/issues/2043

RE: P2P lending, if you were to create a smartcoin backed by [BTS|bitAsset] with an internal [BTS|bitasset] price reference then apply a sine wave oscillation to the price feed, then both the shorter and holder would have confidence in the limited volatility range associated with the debt and global settlement risk would be disassociated from external price movements, allowing both parties to focus solely on the terms of oscillation.