Can you post a summary of this worker in here as well please? If possible with links and references of media and social media coverage
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=25196.15

I am confused by the way you have setup the table there. You mention incoming and outgoing payments, and I can't identify where this workers own budget comes in. My questions:

• How much funds have been collected through this worker?
• Where are those funds shown in the table of https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=25196.15?
• Is there anything left over that will be returned?
• Can you please clarify what "market fee for huodongxing" and "safeguard service" is?

Please summarize and finalize this worker before tapping into funds of another worker.

Have a look at dexbot and extinctionevent first. Market making and ta trading bot.

Followed abit's style and added a 6th option to https://github.com/bitshares/bsips/issues/179#issuecomment-513269772

Quote from: sschiessl on July 19, 2019, 07:12:25 am

Let's assume we want to explicitly allow undercollaterization. In my opinion, a more suitable way would be to implement a bitasset parameter "prevent global settlement", which then can be turned on by committee, and leave the price feed as is. Then the undercollaterization is transparent.

What are your thoughts on that?

what does bad debt mean? which means the debt in the position cannot be fully paid by selling the collateral with margin call/force settlement referencing the market price.

then you choose to disable margin call and force settlement while bad debt appears? or you allow the existence of a debt position with pure debt and 0 BTS?

Margin call price would need to be adjusted. If CR is less than MSSR, adjust the price such that the full debt would be bought (which is essentially their global settlement price). If CR is higher, use existing rules. Force settlement would still eat the least collaterized positions first, in that sense the punishment goes to holders that decide to force settle instead of sell on the market. Incentivization would be possible by adjusting the force settlement price if it settle a margin position with CR < MCR (the force settlement offset could then be MSSR (punishment for margin position holder)).

For the bitasset holders it is similar as compared to being in global settlement state.

With "prevent global settlement flag":
 - bitasset holder can sell into the margin calls which is equal or even better compared to global settlement price instead of force settling
 - bitasset holder can force settle, accepting the undercollaterization
 - margin position holder can recollaterize
 - new margin positions can be created
 - margin positions with CR < 1 receive a bit of protection that is shifted to bitasset holders iff they are using force settlement, on the other hand force settling is incentivized if applied to a margin position that is currently being called

https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?action=post;topic=28677.0

Voted, directly on the site

I say it again this is the UI team's fault
they got many payment but continue give us a shit.
I don't known why anybody can be shown as a receiver in the form, even filled automaticly.
I don't known why anybody create a prosposal can be shown in your wallets
when we use a traditional financial app, we known we should only trade to the one in whitelist.

Please have a look how the UI renders the proposal scam at this point. I'd say it is impossible to accidently approve it.

@kurtduncan
You must have been using an old version that did not show you the warning. I checked your history, at the moment you approved the proposal your account was handed over to the attacker. There were 4 proposals showing in your account at this point in time. Unfortunately there is not much that can be done, if you are lucky the gateway can mitigate by blocking quick enough.