Quote from: CrazyBit on April 11, 2014, 01:18:57 am

Should we allocate more shares for the AGSer in the coming DACs, let us say not 50/50 for PTS/AGS, but 60/40, 70/30...., coz i think the AGSer shows more support and confidence for the project ,without the AGSer, the crowdfunding would not such successful as we are seeing now, the AGSer contributes more for 3I, even for the DAC industry. there is a Chinese proverb:get more pay for more work done.

This decision must be made by the developers of each new DAC based upon their marketing and business plans.

As long as they treat both PTS and AGS equally with the first 10% each, they have honored the Social Consensus.

Now, they need to tune the remaining 80% to make their DAC successful.  If they need to attract donations, then emphasize a pool of proven patron donors - like AGS.  If they want to attract people who buy and hold liquid shares in the whole industry, or a specialized industry sector, then emphasize a deal tuned for PTS or one of its proto-children.

Whatever they choose, they must remember to ask what opportunity they are leaving open for their competitors to fork some other, "better" mix.

In the end, smart developers will do whatever gives them the best competitive edge for their new DAC. 

Market forces rule.

 

Quote from: CrazyBit on February 17, 2014, 01:18:59 pm

Quote

网络强制挂出一个买单：按  1000usd/1.5bts 的价格，买 1000 usd。

如何强制，强制谁买？

BTC网络强制挂单，挂一个买单，拿 1.5bts买 1000bitusd。
可以和bitusd的卖单撮合

                  if( payoff > bid_usd )
                         { // consume the full bid, leaving a balance on the call
                            loan_amount         += bid_usd;
                            collateral_amount   += bid_usd * call_price;// line 474 of blockchain_db.cpp,why not double collateral in this short position?half from long bid, half from cover, should be bid_usd * call_price+bid_usd * call_price?

                            working_call.amount -= bid_usd * call_price;
                            cover_claim.payoff  -= bid_usd;

                            // add bid as input, and give the bidder their new cover position
                            market_trx.inputs.push_back( bid_itr->location );
                            market_trx.outputs.push_back(
                                       trx_output( claim_by_cover_output(loan_amount, bid_payout_address), collateral_amount) );
                            collateral_amount = asset();
                            loan_amount = asset( 0.0, quote );

                            // goto next bid
                            ++bid_itr;
                            if( bid_itr != bids.rend() ) working_bid = get_output( bid_itr->location );
                         }

else // payoff == bidusd
                         { // consume full call and bid..
                            auto cover_amount    = bid_usd * call_price;
                            loan_amount         += bid_usd;
                            collateral_amount   += cover_amount + cover_amount; // collat from bid+cover
                            working_call.amount -= cover_amount;

                            market_trx.outputs.push_back(
                                       trx_output( claim_by_cover_output( loan_amount, bid_payout_address ), collateral_amount) );
                     //line 521 of blockchain_db.cpp ,why needn't reset the variables collateral_amount and loan_amount after pushing short position output,won't it cause the incorrect output in next round  matching, is following code required?
                            collateral_amount = asset();
                            loan_amount = asset( 0.0, quote );
                           
                            if( working_call.amount.get_rounded_amount() > 0 )
                            {
                               // TODO.. charge a 5% fee
                               market_trx.outputs.push_back(
                                       trx_output( claim_by_signature_output( cover_claim.owner ), working_call.amount ) );
                            }

                            market_trx.inputs.push_back( call_itr->location );
                            market_trx.inputs.push_back( bid_itr->location );

                            ++bid_itr;
                            if( bid_itr != bids.rend() ) working_bid = get_output( bid_itr->location );

                            ++call_itr;
                            if( call_itr != margin_positions.end() )
                            {
                               working_call = get_output( call_itr->location );
                               cover_claim  = working_call.as<claim_by_cover_output>();
                            }
                         }