[poll] Should we use a worker proposal to reduce the premium for bitassets?

[Shentist]

Nubits is just a little bit under the market value of Nushares, so what will happen when some whale will dump Nushares and the value will drop below that?

i don't get it how they will solve this problem, but anyway in my understanding most of the nubits are holded by liquidityprovider and not so much with users.

we have our issues with liquidity - thats for sure - but we are all aware of this problem and are thinking hard about solutions.

lets look from a standpoint of a merchant

1. at the moment i would be happy to get 1 bitUSD for 1 USD because i can sell them with a premium, but more likely no one will give me 1 bitUSD for 1 USD so i will
give a different conversion rate. so no big deal. the only problem here is that the similar names imply that the value is the same.

2. perspective of a shorter . difficult, because if i get margin called i will pay a huge premium as well and will loose a lot, and this only because no one is selling the
assets for a reasonable price for this trader. But i think a big problem at the moment is this long downtrend in all altcoins, if we can brake this we will get people to short again.

3. buyer of bitUSD? if you want to have it instantly you have to pay a huge premium on the internal DEX so, maybe not a good choice to do it.

[mf-tzo]

Ok...Now that the wording of the poll has changed I don't have a problem and would support a worker proposal for that reason. I will even start voting if we have a worker proposal to reduce the premium for bitassets..Just please never mention the word dilution in the forum even if the worker proposal is essentially that please don't mention this word..!!

[CoinHoarder]

They have liquidity and strong peg. The two things we need the most.

Exactly. I would 100% unequivocally buy 1 Nubit before buying 1 bitUSD, because it is way more likely that there will be someone to buy it back close to parity whenever I happened to want to sell it.

Everyone is still disillusioned that these issues can be fixed by adoption or market maker bots. Adoption is a chicken and egg problem... if there is not liquidity no one will adopt smartcoins, if there is no adoption there is no liquidity. We have been saying that adoption will fix the liquidity problem for two years now. Furthermore, market making bots currently exist and existed in BTS 1.0 with little effect on the peg or liquidity. There are market making bots running on BTS 2.0 right now already.

Bitshares needs to put its customers first, as that is the only way it will be adopted. We have the ability to deliver a one-two punch to Nubits, our biggest competitors. We can do this by diluting shareholders to provide liquidity to the Smartcoin markets in a similar way that Nubits does.  You guys are so adamant that dilution is the issue- it is not. It is the shitty service that we provide.... lets face it.... the DEX sucks. Every time I buy a Smartcoin I pay a huge premium, and then to make things even worse there is no one that wants to buy them back without paying another huge premium. Do you guys not understand that? All of this rhetoric "focus on the DEX", yet you guys are too cheap to do something that would truly improve the DEX... more so than anything else.

I don't understand how you guys don't get this... this is part of the reason I have been recently diversifying into Nushares/B&C because you guys don't seem to get it that the DEX sucks as a product..

[onceuponatime]

I changed the wording of the poll. 

Looks like we lost the ability to reset our votes when I did though.

Thank you. Was able to vote now. Perceptions count!

[puppies]

I changed the wording of the poll. 

Looks like we lost the ability to reset our votes when I did though.

[merivercap]

The word 'dilution' is a bad word to use in cryptoland.  I say we stop using it around here and not consider it.

Maker and lending are best for increasing liquidity organically in a more market-driven, p2p fashion.  These two features combined with some market making with the reserve pool should be the first steps towards increasing liquidity.

Yeah I agree.  It's better to ask 'Should we fund a worker proposal to create a liquidity bot'..  A market making bot can be managed to break even or make a profit.  You can even have insurance just like Rune's Maker Dao proposal to support extreme adverse events.

[Pheonike]

They have liquidity and strong peg. The two things we need the most.

[mf-tzo]

Can someone please explain me what is so amazing about Nubits? I see them mentioned a lot lately in our forum and I really don't understand why.. What is so special about them? Nushares had a max market cap of $6 mil a year ago and bitshares had a market cap of $80 mil. Currently Nushares ar $3 mil and we are more than double that..Nubits is a bit less than a usd and bitusd is always at premium to usd except in the very beggining of bitsharesX..So what is so special about Nubits and we should imitate them?

You want some bitusd liquidity? I bet that if bitshares market cap goes to $3 mil, lots of people will short the hell of bitusd and a lot of bitusd will be created.. Do we want bitshares market cap at $3 mil?? Because if we keep talking about dilution I bet you it will go below $3 mil...

[CoinHoarder]

My vote is yes.... we have the chance to crush our competition (Nubits) by implementing such a feature.

Pretty much Nubit's only benefit is that they dilute Nushares holders to provide liquidity for Nubits, and I think we should level the playing field and do this ourselves with Smartcoins. However, the way you state it should work in your OP is flawed because it only helps people that want to buy Smartcoins at a reasonable price, and does nothing to ensure that they can sell them at a reasonable price. There is a reason Nubits puts up both sell and buy walls... if I am buying Smartcoins I want to be reasonably certain that I will be able to sell them close to parity. I think the way Nubits/Nushares provides liquidity is a much better way of doing it... by the use of elected custodians which are provided incentive by diluting Nushares. Each custodian provides their own funds for operating liquidity operations and is incentived by payments made from Nushares dilution.

In my opinion Smartcoins would truly be a superior solution to Nubits' solution in every way if this were to be implemented. If you guys are going to pass this proposal, then make sure to let me know so I can dump my Nushares... lol. 

[Akado]

Maker and lending are best for increasing liquidity organically in a more market-driven, p2p fashion.  These two features combined with some market making with the reserve pool should be the first steps towards increasing liquidity.

This is true and would love to see it, however I just don't see lending any time soon. And maker, well, maybe after stealth. Stealth should be done by what, March? i'd give it two more months for maker, this if we don't have anything getting in it's way. Maybe after summer we will see the liquidity increasing. We also are having an API similar to Polo so that may facilitate bots.

[Shentist]

The reserve pool should be used to create a supply of bitasset and then they should be put up for sale as a single large wall at no lower than feed price +10% 
This is important for those wishing to close their bitasset debt obligations at a reasonable price.
If bitasset creators are not confident they will be able to exit their positions they are less likely to create bitassets which is bad for liquidity.
The committee will have to be trusted with value that is 300% than the assets created because of reserve requirements.
the proceeds of these sales should be returned to the reserve pool so it is less of a dilution and it stops the committee destroying the bitassets created.
I think this should be done with bitusd only first as a trial.

  and maybe BTC

the lack of closing as a shorter is really bad. we should think about some solutions like this.

[mf-tzo]

The word 'dilution' is a bad word to use in cryptoland.  I say we stop using it around here and not consider it.

Maker and lending are best for increasing liquidity organically in a more market-driven, p2p fashion.  These two features combined with some market making with the reserve pool should be the first steps towards increasing liquidity.

fully agree! Please let's stop using the word dilution! lending, margin trading, POS, developers accepting bitasssets as donations these things will increase liquidity. Please start thinking how to destroy and burn some bts and reduce their supply instead of further dilution..

[abit]

The word 'dilution' is a bad word to use in cryptoland.  I say we stop using it around here and not consider it.

Agree.

Maker and lending are best for increasing liquidity organically in a more market-driven, p2p fashion.  These two features combined with some market making with the reserve pool should be the first steps towards increasing liquidity.

[morpheus]

The word 'dilution' is a bad word to use in cryptoland.  I say we stop using it around here and not consider it.

Maker and lending are best for increasing liquidity organically in a more market-driven, p2p fashion.  These two features combined with some market making with the reserve pool should be the first steps towards increasing liquidity.

[xeroc]

I further recommend to use a separate multisig account controlled by people familiar with trading and scripting to not bother the committee more.

How to run a trading bot with a multisig account, would be a challenge. Maybe MAKER is easier/sooner.

One master in multi sig proposes transactions and others in multisig approve automatically using a bot/script (according to some predefined rules/protocol)