Short Term Roadmap

[xeroc]

That's how I understand it .. yes

[bitcrab]

From what I understand, this updates results in the short order being able to "buy cheap" but the SQP is still an upper limit for the price a called position needs to pay ..

take the pic as an example:
now settlement price=300
SQP=360
Lowest Call Price = 325

so when settlement price go up and finally reach 325(meanwhile SQP reach 390), the CDP with call price = 325 will be margin called and the highest price it need to pay is 390...right?

[xeroc]

From what I understand, this updates results in the short order being able to "buy cheap" but the SQP is still an upper limit for the price a called position needs to pay ..

[bitcrab]

seems the first step is finished at 1216 version.

https://github.com/cryptonomex/graphene/issues/436

so according to my understanding, now the SQP parameter will make no use,  in other words, margin call will occur only  when feed price touch "Your Call Price", then need not to care the "Margin Call Price" .

and this change is for all the public and privated  smartcoins.

is this understanding correct?

[cass]

4.  Launch a Demo/Dev chain that gives all signups a significant balance and an opportunity to play with all of the features.

That would have been extremely usefull for websummit ... net conference to come anyway ... Looking forward to show case this to pot. investors!!!

indeed this would be extremly valuable .. !

[xeroc]

4.  Launch a Demo/Dev chain that gives all signups a significant balance and an opportunity to play with all of the features.

That would have been extremely usefull for websummit ... net conference to come anyway ... Looking forward to show case this to pot. investors!!!

[tonyk]

[and I am even willing to even give you a pass, as in the cat never falls in its back, for the "popular demand" instead of the true reason 'common sense']

@tonyk, that's a good catch.

Yep.
 Me,  Xeldal, to some extend clout, and you after days of persuasion, hardly qualifies as "popular demand". Popular is something like the "Are you a brownie holder" thread.

[tonyk]

1.  Prevent margin call from being triggered unless the price feed is less than call price  (popular demand)

Does it mean we still keep the SQP concept or not?
I'd suggest we keep it but not use it for triggering a margin-call but only for executing it - as I described it here.

And does it mean we will stop having absurd order-books like this one:

"Shorts Quality of Punishment " [SQP] is gone  as per this proposal [ tonyk is making circles dancing with joy  ]

I would suggest just keeping it as a  vote-able option for the future - the future when BTS dex trade volume is bigger than all other BTS:XXX markets.


My 2*e^20 brownies.

[Thom]

@bytemaster
And what about these tasks:
- A migration solution for the owners of a larger number of private keys (what is the progress here?)
- The affiliate part of the referral program practically working on Open Ledger (maybe it's already done and I just don't know about it?)
- API ready for trading bots (as far as I know, we are still missing the ability to query your open orders)
- Worker/Committee proposal creation on the GUI level

maybe I can help

1. https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,19390.0.html
2. referral program works, I sign-up people since 2 days now
3 & 4 no idea

(1) But is the final solution BM was saying CNX was working on?
If so, why are people like @Ander still not migrated?

(2) Is it the final solution BM said in the last mumble session that @valzav was working on?
If so, why wasn't it properly announced?

Communication clearly sucks here.
I'm spending several hours a day on this forum and I'm still unaware how things are progressing.

Welcome to BitShares Jakub! I've been around over a year and can say the exact same thing. In general COMMUNICATION SUCKS! One really has to dig deep to find answers, often they're just not visible b/c those with the answers are too busy to share their knowledge or, in the case of CNX are afraid they'll share too much.

It has been discussed extensively but CNX has not taken to heart the need for a small, hand picked team of trusted community members who will help CNX decide what info should be made available and also help to make it so. Why this hasn't happened only Stan & Dan can say. Not having such a process only leads to questions about management competency and distrust in their decisions. Providing access to trusted, hand picked community members about the decision making process, if only for observation, will go a long way to spreading information and improving confidence in where this community is going.

[lakerta06]

@bytemaster
And what about these tasks:
- A migration solution for the owners of a larger number of private keys (what is the progress here?)
- The affiliate part of the referral program practically working on Open Ledger (maybe it's already done and I just don't know about it?)
- API ready for trading bots (as far as I know, we are still missing the ability to query your open orders)
- Worker/Committee proposal creation on the GUI level

I hope we can see more than 2 'real' committee members.  There are 9 inits and 2 com members - bitcrab and clayop - total 11 active com members.  When bitcrab was voted in, puppies was voted out. When clayop was voted in, bitcrab was voted out.  And now, when bitcrab was voted in, mindphlux was voted out.  How can we have more than 2 'real' committee members?

easiest way is @bytemaster voting out 3 of the inits

[xiahui135]

this a good rule. We learn something from the real world exchange finally.

[cube]

@bytemaster
And what about these tasks:
- A migration solution for the owners of a larger number of private keys (what is the progress here?)
- The affiliate part of the referral program practically working on Open Ledger (maybe it's already done and I just don't know about it?)
- API ready for trading bots (as far as I know, we are still missing the ability to query your open orders)
- Worker/Committee proposal creation on the GUI level

I hope we can see more than 2 'real' committee members.  There are 9 inits and 2 com members - bitcrab and clayop - total 11 active com members.  When bitcrab was voted in, puppies was voted out. When clayop was voted in, bitcrab was voted out.  And now, when bitcrab was voted in, mindphlux was voted out.  How can we have more than 2 'real' committee members?

[Musewhale]

 be blind to 

[brownie.pts]

I'm right there with you. Please see my new signature line. Bonfire of the Brownies.

I feel like there has been less focus on me for the last month or so. I wouldn't be surprised if the share dropping on brownies idea is swept under the rug and doesn't ever happen.

I originally signed up on the forum to poke fun of brownies, but then just ended up giving out HUGS - it was a lot more fun.

So if Brownies just become a fun social currency that are passed out for hugs and giggles - I'm down for that.

On a personal note - I went on holiday for the past few weeks with some pals of mine - Gold Star, Kudos and Me had a nice time - happy to be back though!

HUGS! (Especially for tonyk :-) )

[jakub]

(1) But is the final solution BM was saying CNX was working on?
If so, why are people like @Ander still not migrated?

(2) Is it the final solution BM said in the last mumble session that @valzav was working on?
If so, why wasn't it properly announced?

Communication clearly sucks here.
I'm spending several hours a day on this forum and I'm still unaware how things are progressing.

1. as far as I know MUSE does this by default, no Idea if it's implemented in the official BTS client
2. announced properly here: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,19726.0.html

Ok, thanks fav
(2) It's a big thing - it should have been announced in the General Discussion.