Author Topic: Committee Proposal: Urgent call for help by the Chinese Community  (Read 29563 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline abit

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4635
    • View Profile
    • Abit's Hive Blog
  • BitShares: abit
  • GitHub: abitmore
As already stated the witnesses need a new script to fix the issue.
The script will needs a partial refactoring on how to calculate the feed for CNY related markets.
Xeroc needs time to make this happen.
My feed prices are always a bit higher than others.
Sources of the difference are:
1. I don't pull btc prices from bitcoinaverage but from btc/cny pair of yunbi/btc38.
2. I ignored other btc pairs of btc38 and yunbi

Wish this helps.
BitShares committee member: abit
BitShares witness: in.abit

Offline abit

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4635
    • View Profile
    • Abit's Hive Blog
  • BitShares: abit
  • GitHub: abitmore
if its a feed issue doesnt it mean ots on the witnesses to solve this? why dont they increase the price by 5% if thats the problem
Afaik Transwiser has paused operation.
BitShares committee member: abit
BitShares witness: in.abit

Offline Bhuz

  • Committee member
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 467
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: bhuz
if its a feed issue doesnt it mean ots on the witnesses to solve this? why dont they increase the price by 5% if thats the problem

exactly.  If its a feed issue, witnesses should move to making the proper adjustments.   blaming it on settlement and making radical changes to benefit an uninformed business is not the right approach.
+ 1

Why people doesn't read the whole post and the subsequent clarifications?

As already stated the witnesses need a new script to fix the issue.
The script will needs a partial refactoring on how to calculate the feed for CNY related markets.
Xeroc needs time to make this happen.


What radical changes? We are not asking to remove the settlement, nor are blaiming it as you already and wrongly stated.
We are asking to temporarily disable the function to have TIME to make the needed fix and in the meanwhile stop the "force settle" opportunists.
« Last Edit: November 27, 2015, 08:09:39 pm by Bhuz »

Offline svk

I've started adding the currently open settle orders to the GUI, there are 4 orders for CNY, 2 for USD, this is what it looks like:

CNY: BTS


USD:BTS


Doesn't look like there are too many people "taking advantage" of this situation.
Worker: dev.bitsharesblocks

Xeldal

  • Guest
By the way:
BTC38 BTS:CNY = .0206 - .0208
Yunbi BTS:CNY = .0205 - .0206
coinmarketcap Avg = .0207
Price Feed BTS:CNY = .0204

Price feed is off by approximately 1% 

BTS:USD avg = .00323
Pricefeed = .00319
Price feed is off by approximately 1%

What is the issue again???? 

Offline tonyk

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3308
    • View Profile
While I could always add it to the GUI if that's agreed upon as a desirable solution, I don't really think that hiding the settle button for certain market conditions will change anything here. I'm sure JonnyBitcoin or someone else who wanted to exploit this kind of situation is savvy enough to use the CLI wallet, which of course lets you make settle orders and has done so since launch. It was also talked about a bit in the announcement of Graphene but I guess none of us saw the implications.

I do think the mechanics behind this are a bit strange and poorly understood, which is no surprise given the complete lack of documentation of the market mechanics in general. To me it seems very harsh on shorters that they can have their positions force called and settled at feed price even though their collateral is more than sufficient. We're already screwing shorters over with the SQP mechanics and now with this as well.

Unfortunately I think the Americans are all off on for Thanksgiving holiday so it comes at a bad time.

Cue @tonyk for some scathing analysis of BM's market mechanics

When you combine BM's idiotic design decisions [SQP - "Shorts' quality of punishment"], to the ill informed but opinioned BTS early adopters [link *], to the clueless but fast acting committee members [this OP-er]  -

You Get Bitshares.




* https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,20214.msg261444.html#msg261444





if its a feed issue doesnt it mean ots on the witnesses to solve this? why dont they increase the price by 5% if thats the problem

exactly.  If its a feed issue, witnesses should move to making the proper adjustments.   blaming it on settlement and making radical changes to benefit an uninformed business is not the right approach.
+ 1
« Last Edit: November 27, 2015, 07:52:42 pm by tonyk »
Lack of arbitrage is the problem, isn't it. And this 'should' solves it.

Offline clayop

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2033
    • View Profile
    • Bitshares Korea
  • BitShares: clayop
if its a feed issue doesnt it mean ots on the witnesses to solve this? why dont they increase the price by 5% if thats the problem

exactly.  If its a feed issue, witnesses should move to making the proper adjustments.   blaming it on settlement and making radical changes to benefit an uninformed business is not the right approach.
That's we are waiting for.
Bitshares Korea - http://www.bitshares.kr
Vote for me and see Korean Bitshares community grows
delegate-clayop

Offline Bhuz

  • Committee member
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 467
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: bhuz
Settlement is not a loophole, and is nothing new.  Its been available since the begining.  it was thoroughly discussed and understood long prior to BTS2 and is a critical function. 
The 'loophole' is not referred to the settlement, but to the current situation on BitCNY market.

Any available arbitrage opportunity is due to improper pricing of bitCNY by its users/gateways etc.  If transwiser is taking a loss they need to adjust their pricing.  We do not need to change the entire design of bitshares markets to fit 1 gateways uninformed business model.
No. It is due to a not accurate feed for CNY related markets. This will need a partial refactoring of the pricefeed script by xeroc. He needs time.

There is no need to disable the settlement.  If it doesn't already, forced settlement should take all available bids below the feed before pulling from the least collateralized shorts.
We are asking for a TEMPORARILY disable of the function, just to give enough time to xeroc (for making the changes in the script) and to bitcrab (to put up a liquidity bot).
Plus: seems that the forced settlement doesn't works as you described. Seems that it currently doesn't take the available bids below the feed.

Xeldal

  • Guest
if its a feed issue doesnt it mean ots on the witnesses to solve this? why dont they increase the price by 5% if thats the problem

exactly.  If its a feed issue, witnesses should move to making the proper adjustments.   blaming it on settlement and making radical changes to benefit an uninformed business is not the right approach.





Offline Akado

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2752
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: akado
if its a feed issue doesnt it mean ots on the witnesses to solve this? why dont they increase the price by 5% if thats the problem

If so, USD and other feeds will become high

why not get individual parmeters then, one per asset?
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

Offline mindphlux

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 232
    • View Profile
While I could always add it to the GUI if that's agreed upon as a desirable solution, I don't really think that hiding the settle button for certain market conditions will change anything here. I'm sure JonnyBitcoin or someone else who wanted to exploit this kind of situation is savvy enough to use the CLI wallet, which of course lets you make settle orders and has done so since launch. It was also talked about a bit in the announcement of Graphene but I guess none of us saw the implications.

I do think the mechanics behind this are a bit strange and poorly understood, which is no surprise given the complete lack of documentation of the market mechanics in general. To me it seems very harsh on shorters that they can have their positions force called and settled at feed price even though their collateral is more than sufficient. We're already screwing shorters over with the SQP mechanics and now with this as well.

Unfortunately I think the Americans are all off on for Thanksgiving holiday so it comes at a bad time.

Cue @tonyk for some scathing analysis of BM's market mechanics

Maybe adding a feature to the blockchain to prevent force settlement when there are bids above the price feed makes more sense. We have to find balance between the shorters and the users/merchants.
Please consider voting for my witness mindphlux.witness and my committee user mindphlux. I will not vote for changes that affect witness pay.

Offline mindphlux

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 232
    • View Profile
if its a feed issue doesnt it mean ots on the witnesses to solve this? why dont they increase the price by 5% if thats the problem

Quote
2) Adjust price feed for bitCNY market by including other Chinese exchanges in sourcing CNY prices (xeroc has agreed to work on the changes)

I'm against disabling the settlement function because BTS2 was designed with it in mind, but I do recognize the issue in the CNY market, people are actively exploiting it. If the suggested remedy plan (adjust fee CNY price and disable button in frontend when there are no bids above feed, provide liquidity so it cannot be exploited) finds support by the community, I will consider voting for this proposal, to temporally disable the function so bleeding can stop and the necessary features can be programmed.

We absolutely need a price floor and the settlement function is the way to establish a price floor.
Please consider voting for my witness mindphlux.witness and my committee user mindphlux. I will not vote for changes that affect witness pay.

clout

  • Guest
The urgent crises is that we have many committee members gone wild, who do not understand the system they are representing. 
The other urgent crises is that we continue voting for these committee members who consistently demonstrate they don't have a clue how things work.

Settlement is not a loophole, and is nothing new.  Its been available since the begining.  it was thoroughly discussed and understood long prior to BTS2 and is a critical function. 

Any available arbitrage opportunity is due to improper pricing of bitCNY by its users/gateways etc.  If transwiser is taking a loss they need to adjust their pricing.  We do not need to change the entire design of bitshares markets to fit 1 gateways uninformed business model.

There is no need to disable the settlement.  If it doesn't already, forced settlement should take all available bids below the feed before pulling from the least collateralized shorts. 
 

If our gateways cannot maintain a tight spread, they are not useful. Transwiser isn't just one gateway for CNY out of many, it is our only CNY gateway. Their loss is our loss. We need people to be less rapped up in the theory behind how these markets should work and instead be more attentive to how these markets work in practice. As of right now Bitshares markets are dysfunctional to the point disrepair. We will collectively fail if we take this approach of "you should have known that the market works this way, its your fault and no one else's". We need to suspend this feature until we understand how to better account for it.

Offline clayop

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2033
    • View Profile
    • Bitshares Korea
  • BitShares: clayop
if its a feed issue doesnt it mean ots on the witnesses to solve this? why dont they increase the price by 5% if thats the problem

If so, USD and other feeds will become high
Bitshares Korea - http://www.bitshares.kr
Vote for me and see Korean Bitshares community grows
delegate-clayop

Offline svk

While I could always add it to the GUI if that's agreed upon as a desirable solution, I don't really think that hiding the settle button for certain market conditions will change anything here. I'm sure JonnyBitcoin or someone else who wanted to exploit this kind of situation is savvy enough to use the CLI wallet, which of course lets you make settle orders and has done so since launch. It was also talked about a bit in the announcement of Graphene but I guess none of us saw the implications.

I do think the mechanics behind this are a bit strange and poorly understood, which is no surprise given the complete lack of documentation of the market mechanics in general. To me it seems very harsh on shorters that they can have their positions force called and settled at feed price even though their collateral is more than sufficient. We're already screwing shorters over with the SQP mechanics and now with this as well.

Unfortunately I think the Americans are all off on for Thanksgiving holiday so it comes at a bad time.

Cue @tonyk for some scathing analysis of BM's market mechanics
Worker: dev.bitsharesblocks