Author Topic: Committee Proposal: Urgent call for help by the Chinese Community  (Read 41202 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline mindphlux

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 232
    • View Profile
Actually, TonyK, that is wrong. Please see:

https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,20299.msg261819.html#msg261819

However, we're considering to create the proposal as soon as the new script is tested and adopted by the majority of the witnesses. Which could be as early as tomorrow.
Please consider voting for my witness mindphlux.witness and my committee user mindphlux. I will not vote for changes that affect witness pay.

Offline tonyk

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3308
    • View Profile
The solution should have been to fix the price feeds, better document the system, and correct the business model, not turn off a working and essential feature.

We decided to temporarily disable the settlement feature just to give time to xeroc to "fix" the script.
The script needed a partial refactoring, and obviously xeroc needed time for this.

I see the script being ready!

https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,18852.msg262147.html#msg262147

What I fail to see is the proposal to revert back the temporary "solution"
We want to check the script and find the "best" settings for it before witnesses mass adoption.

It should not take too much time.

The claim was after the script is available - not after bitcrap approves it to work to its liking

plus It takes time for the proposal to be voted, doesn't it?
Lack of arbitrage is the problem, isn't it. And this 'should' solves it.

Offline Bhuz

  • Committee member
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 467
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: bhuz
The solution should have been to fix the price feeds, better document the system, and correct the business model, not turn off a working and essential feature.

We decided to temporarily disable the settlement feature just to give time to xeroc to "fix" the script.
The script needed a partial refactoring, and obviously xeroc needed time for this.

I see the script being ready!

https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,18852.msg262147.html#msg262147

What I fail to see is the proposal to revert back the temporary "solution"
We want to check the script and find the "best" settings for it before witnesses mass adoption.

It should not take too much time.

Offline tonyk

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3308
    • View Profile
The solution should have been to fix the price feeds, better document the system, and correct the business model, not turn off a working and essential feature.

We decided to temporarily disable the settlement feature just to give time to xeroc to "fix" the script.
The script needed a partial refactoring, and obviously xeroc needed time for this.

I see the script being ready!

https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,18852.msg262147.html#msg262147

What I fail to see is the proposal to revert back the temporary "solution"
Lack of arbitrage is the problem, isn't it. And this 'should' solves it.

Offline Bhuz

  • Committee member
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 467
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: bhuz
The solution should have been to fix the price feeds, better document the system, and correct the business model, not turn off a working and essential feature.

We decided to temporarily disable the settlement feature just to give time to xeroc to "fix" the script.
The script needed a partial refactoring, and obviously xeroc needed time for this.

Offline maqifrnswa

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 661
    • View Profile
My point was, manipulating the market due to one actor not being able to get their pricing straight is strange to me.  I get why it is done and wish Transwiser wasn't being bled to death for Bitshares sake, but the point is... this thread kinda backs up his question.

I agree, and this is what I don't understand:
1) Force settlement was working perfectly as intended and has been described for 6+ months
2) Force settlement is pretty much the same situation as in 0.9.* (every position older than 30 days could be settled at feed and in priority of collateralization).
3) Inaccurate price feeds combined with a misunderstanding of the system lead to a mistake in a business model that cost a business money.

The solution should have been to fix the price feeds, better document the system, and correct the business model, not turn off a working and essential feature.

Why is forced settling essential? Since the blockchain cannot exchange 1 bitCNY for 1 real CNY in your bank account, it must give incentives to control supply such that 1 bitCNY is approximately equal to 1 real CNY. Forced settlement accomplishes that when there is an oversupply (profiting the forced settler), and short selling a premium accomplishes that when in undersupply (profitting the short seller, although I think there should be something else more explicitly helping the short seller). This is essential to understand by everyone involved in trading. You can make the argument to increase the fee to settle or to increase the difference between settlement price and feed (both are settings that can be adjusted by the committee), and I agree that those could be good solutions.

I want Transwiser to succeed, but the response of stopping all asset settlement seems to be the equivalent of "cutting off your nose to spite your face."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cutting_off_the_nose_to_spite_the_face
« Last Edit: November 30, 2015, 07:03:24 pm by maqifrnswa »
maintains an Ubuntu PPA: https://launchpad.net/~showard314/+archive/ubuntu/bitshares [15% delegate] wallet_account_set_approval maqifrnswa true [50% delegate] wallet_account_set_approval delegate1.maqifrnswa true

Offline gamey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2253
    • View Profile

Talking to a guy recently who is very knowledgable about crypto projects in general... he knew of my past interest in Bitshares and asked me if it is true ...   Is BitShares controlled by a small number of Chinese whales?

I told him I do not know, but such a thing could very well be true...

After reading this thread I really do wonder.

Some Chinese guy(including some so-called whales )  have asked me if BitShares is an ATM and controlled by a few western developers in I3 . why they can keep bleeding dilution on Chinese , Why the developers can put up a proposal that could grant them more BTS just in 2 month than any single whale in the Chinese community .

Sometimes I just don't know what to tell them .
Guess we all have our troubles .

Well those really are some dumb questions.  "keep bleeding dilution on Chinese" - as if the blockchain knows the difference between East/West.  One could make the argument that the poor documention is even worse for non-native English speakers, but anyway...  The rest of those questions can be answered by looking at labor market. 

My point was, manipulating the market due to one actor not being able to get their pricing straight is strange to me.  I get why it is done and wish Transwiser wasn't being bled to death for Bitshares sake, but the point is... this thread kinda backs up his question.

I have no idea how many "Chinese whales" there are or what is required for one to be a whale... but this question was asked by an exceptionally knowledgable person and not out of random ignorance.

edit - ^^^^ This means that this is some sort of prevailing perception OR he had some anti-Bitshares person who is a manipulator whispering into his ear.  (Just to make it CLEAR)  This was my point. This person has no interest in BitShares what so ever beyond a passing academic curiosity. In no way were they complaining about the Chinese or anything else because it would be hard for this person to care less. (Yes, sorry for ridiculous explanation, but I feel it is needed since people read non-existent implications into things and then have the nerve to call other's "stupid")
« Last Edit: November 30, 2015, 07:03:51 pm by gamey »
I speak for myself and only myself.

Offline pc

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1530
    • View Profile
    • Bitcoin - Perspektive oder Risiko?
  • BitShares: cyrano
Anyone with a couple million BTS could move the price by that much in an instant. 


And THIS is where the real danger of the forced settlement feature lies...
Bitcoin - Perspektive oder Risiko? ISBN 978-3-8442-6568-2 http://bitcoin.quisquis.de

Offline Helikopterben

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 202
    • View Profile

Talking to a guy recently who is very knowledgable about crypto projects in general... he knew of my past interest in Bitshares and asked me if it is true ...   Is BitShares controlled by a small number of Chinese whales?

I told him I do not know, but such a thing could very well be true...

After reading this thread I really do wonder.

Some Chinese guy(including some so-called whales )  have asked me if BitShares is an ATM and controlled by a few western developers in I3 . why they can keep bleeding dilution on Chinese , Why the developers can put up a proposal that could grant them more BTS just in 2 month than any single whale in the Chinese community .

Sometimes I just don't know what to tell them .
Guess we all have our troubles .

Tell them they control bitshares proportionally to their stake and ask them if they have voted.

As far as forced settlement, MPAs are still highly experimental and its difficult (nearly impossible) to tell how things such as forced settlement will work until put into practice in a live environment.  We have found that this parameter can be exploited in illiquid markets and will have to be tweaked, along with other MPA parameters.  You can't blame someone for not understanding the implications.


Offline bitcrab

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1928
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: bitcrab
  • GitHub: bitcrab
Email:bitcrab@qq.com

Offline xeroc

  • Board Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12922
  • ChainSquad GmbH
    • View Profile
    • ChainSquad GmbH
  • BitShares: xeroc
  • GitHub: xeroc
....as most of the BitCNY users agree.
I am curious .. how did you evaluate this?

Offline sudo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2255
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: ags
settlement should be Limited within a certain range of collateral rate

when collateral rate of bill  went into for example  ≤150%  bitAsset can start settlement
but when all collateral rate is enough   for example ≥200%  no need to  settlement


bitUSD lack Acceptance dealer    for example 1.1USD sell bitUSD at the same time  1.09 buy bitUSD
provide liquidity & make profit

Offline bitcrab

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1928
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: bitcrab
  • GitHub: bitcrab
I have read  https://bitshares.org/technology/price-stable-cryptocurrencies/ long ago, I admit at that time I haven't paid much attention on it, when the first 2.0 version launched, I even forgot the "force settlement", only when the settle button appeared in the latest version light wallet I begin to realize how serious the thing is.

you can say it is my fault to forget it, but anyway now it is a problem and we need to face it and handle it.

if it is possible to disable force settle for BitCNY only, I think it will be the best option. as most of the BitCNY users agree.








Email:bitcrab@qq.com

Offline BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode

I am glad you realise that it is not fun to be on the receiving end.  So play nice and it will be reciprocated. You can ask objective questions in a polite way instead of putting up unhelpful assumptions and throwing baseless accusations. I am sure you will get an answer from the Committee soon enough.

This is false and completely misses the point of what I and others in community have been trying to make clear to some Committee members here.

I have been very polite, irrespective of this type of defacing tone put towards me and others who are wanting better communication.

Committee needs to get a handle on it's processes and communication.

Community members like @sittingduck seem to understand that the language being used here is dangerous and should not be how issues are looked at.

Please stop calling this a 'flaw'.
« Last Edit: November 30, 2015, 03:34:10 pm by BunkerChain Labs »
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
www.Peerplays.com | Decentralized Gaming Built with Graphene - Now with BookiePro and Sweeps!
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+