My proposal of BITAsset 4.0 (EDIT about the fee)

[lastagile]

This can not happen, as many BITUSD are not placed on market.

I mean the shorter can just spare some of  the "collateral" to cover his order.
Of course they need to buy BTA at market price.
So if there is no enough BTA sell order at the order book, the shorter can just wait or buy BTA at a higher price.

Yea this my second change


从我的 iPhone 发送，使用 Tapatalk

[xiahui135]

This can not happen, as many BITUSD are not placed on market.

I mean the shorter can just spare some of  the "collateral" to cover his order.
Of course they need to buy BTA at market price.
So if there is no enough BTA sell order at the order book, the shorter can just wait or buy BTA at a higher price.

[lastagile]

New proposal by xiahui135
Firstly, we need equal shorts' and longs' market position. So they can match each other, react to each other's action.
1、cancel short orders' time limit;
2、let shorts can cover at any amount.

Secondly, we should guarantee the system‘s safety.
3、force bad collateralized shorts to cover at a market price (like other futures)
4、the trading fee is interest, and can be paid to BTS holder (as stake holder)

I agree with you about what u said about why current system and ASSET 3.0 not work.

But I'm not agree your proposal.
 

1、cancel short orders' time limit;

No time limit will aggregate the chance of black swan. short have to cover their short if they lose money, or add collateral

2、let shorts can cover at any amount.

This can not happen, as many BITUSD are not placed on market.

[xiahui135]

I do not think bitAsset holders need to pay interest.
Because BTA long side selling bts is a market behavior, they just do a normal exchange——equal value BTS to BTA. So bitAsset holders do not owe anyone.

Make the shorts and longs in equal position.
Our purpose is let the market run very long time. So the market need to keep in balance. The longs and shorts are two sides of the market. If it is not equal, the market will fail to continue some day.

Problem of BitAsset Now
Now in BitAsset, the BTA shorters have an expiring date, but the BTA holders have not. This means holding BTA have advantage than holding BTS（or the bts collateral）. So the BTA holders are winner, and BTS price is falling all the way.

Problem of BitAsset 3.0
In BitAsset 3.0, there is no solid time limit for BTA shorter too. But BTA holders have another advantage: can settle back BTS whenever they want. This leads to the same result as now.
And the settlement makes BTA not currencies any more. If we want to create BTA as currencies, then we just need to let BTA can buy BTS whenever they want.
What you called settlement seems not basic function of currencies, but some kind of bond. Correc me if I make mistakes.

For a healthy market:
if market mainly want to sell, sellers need place lower price orders to match buyers'.This leads the price to go down.
if market mainly want to buy, buyers need place higher price orders to match sellers'. This leads the price to go up.

In BitAsset 3.0, the settlement function make the market do not work normally. Hold BitAsset to get BTS, will not leads BTS price go up, but Hold BTS to get BitAsset leads BTS price to go down.

New proposal by xiahui135
Firstly, we need equal shorts' and longs' market position. So they can match each other, react to each other's action.
1、cancel short orders' time limit;
2、let shorts can cover at any amount.

Secondly, we should guarantee the system‘s safety.
3、force bad collateralized shorts to cover at a market price (like other futures)
4、the trading fee is interest, and can be paid to BTS holder (as stake holder)

[lastagile]

I have a post about why the current rule is not working.
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,15888.0.html

Another post about why bitAsset 3.0 will not work.
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,15940.0.html

Based on the two post, I come up with an new proposal about short rule.
My proposal is quite simply. Only two change compared to current rule.
1. BitAsset holder pay interest to shorter. 1.BitAsset interesting can be negative or positive (negative means shorter pay to BTA holder, positive means  BTA holder pay to shorter). When shorter create bitUSD they need to set an interesting rate(can have a  limit for example -5% ~ 5%). Bit-asset seller executing first, then the lowest interesting rate will get executed first,  Shorter can not short bitAsset below feed price.
2. Make it easer for shorter to re-short when the monthly expire. If they have lost some money, they only need to add the collateral to continue to short. If they do not lost money they do not need to do anything.

This is very simple make it very easy to implement. Coder will love it.
 
Why bit-asset holder should pay the fee?
1. Shooters are the people who lock BTS, they are take the risk that they can not buy back bit-Aseet to cover. They need get paid.
2. BTS is not a bank, Bit-asset is for people freely trade on Internet, not for people to hold.  People who have bit-Aseet can benefit from all they other advantage of bit-asset they need to pay for the benefit.
3. BTS system can benefit from the adoption of bit-asset. Now bit-asset is sucking bleed from BTS system.

Change two is quite straight forward, no explanation needed.