Author Topic: [Committee Member] - clockwork's proposal to join the bitshares committee  (Read 3071 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline binggo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1256
    • View Profile
I didn't find andy evidence to prove we have a “Much better feeding”, settled volume can't prove it, as the offset is 2%.

I didn't find any rule of the feed price,the feed price still control by the witness, and i found we didn't have any method to deal with the witness like “verbaltech2” and the GS Protection.


So, did we have a stable measure to solve this kind problem?

You have support the: https://cryptofresh.com/p/1.10.38714

Give the reason!!!

I never agreed with raising the settlement offset in the first place and always thought all bitAssets should have the same one.

5% was supposed to only be a temporary measure in the first place.

Much better feeding....We've had wild swings on CEXs that did not affect the feed price like the case used to be which led to manipulation and abuse of the settlement mechanism.

A good proof of that is the fact that only 170 000 bitCNY has been settled over the last 6 months....That's a grand total of less than 25k USD over SIX months.

If you think this makes any real difference in the market, you're looking at the wrong place.

Offline clockwork

  • Committee member
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 309
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: clockwork
I didn't find andy evidence to prove we have a “Much better feeding”, settled volume can't prove it, as the offset is 2%.

I didn't find any rule of the feed price,the feed price still control by the witness, and i found we didn't have any method to deal with the witness like “verbaltech2” and the GS Protection.


So, did we have a stable measure to solve this kind problem?

You have support the: https://cryptofresh.com/p/1.10.38714

Give the reason!!!

I never agreed with raising the settlement offset in the first place and always thought all bitAssets should have the same one.

5% was supposed to only be a temporary measure in the first place.

Much better feeding....We've had wild swings on CEXs that did not affect the feed price like the case used to be which led to manipulation and abuse of the settlement mechanism.

A good proof of that is the fact that only 170 000 bitCNY has been settled over the last 6 months....That's a grand total of less than 25k USD over SIX months.

If you think this makes any real difference in the market, you're looking at the wrong place.

If you don't think we have better feeding then you probably don't remember what was happening due to odd CMC , poloniex etc prices back when the offset was changed to 5%

I heard the same argument about settled volume not proving anything when we went from 5% to 2% as well... But nothing changed.

There are not supposed to be any rules and the price IS supposed to be chosen by the witnesses themselves. Fairness comes from the stakeholders ability to vote/unvote witnesses based on their perceived feeding performance.

anything else is more centralized and completely defeats the purpose of having the witness fed system in place

Offline binggo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1256
    • View Profile

“Fairness comes from the stakeholders ability to vote/unvote witnesses based on their perceived feeding performance.”

This is a very wrong thought,“Fairness” come from the rule,then the stakeholder can judge which wittness didn't follow the rule.

The bitusd had destroyed by the GS, NOW the committee want to destroy the bitcny with settlement, excellent, just do want you want to do.

 I see, NO ONE in the committee know the market.

 That' all, end.

I didn't find andy evidence to prove we have a “Much better feeding”, settled volume can't prove it, as the offset is 2%.

I didn't find any rule of the feed price,the feed price still control by the witness, and i found we didn't have any method to deal with the witness like “verbaltech2” and the GS Protection.


So, did we have a stable measure to solve this kind problem?

You have support the: https://cryptofresh.com/p/1.10.38714

Give the reason!!!

I never agreed with raising the settlement offset in the first place and always thought all bitAssets should have the same one.

5% was supposed to only be a temporary measure in the first place.

Much better feeding....We've had wild swings on CEXs that did not affect the feed price like the case used to be which led to manipulation and abuse of the settlement mechanism.

A good proof of that is the fact that only 170 000 bitCNY has been settled over the last 6 months....That's a grand total of less than 25k USD over SIX months.

If you think this makes any real difference in the market, you're looking at the wrong place.

If you don't think we have better feeding then you probably don't remember what was happening due to odd CMC , poloniex etc prices back when the offset was changed to 5%

I heard the same argument about settled volume not proving anything when we went from 5% to 2% as well... But nothing changed.

There are not supposed to be any rules and the price IS supposed to be chosen by the witnesses themselves. Fairness comes from the stakeholders ability to vote/unvote witnesses based on their perceived feeding performance.

anything else is more centralized and completely defeats the purpose of having the witness fed system in place

Offline Digital Lucifer

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 286
  • 13 years of being Slackware abUser
    • View Profile
    • BitShares 3.0
  • BitShares: dls.cipher
  • GitHub: dls-cipher

“Fairness comes from the stakeholders ability to vote/unvote witnesses based on their perceived feeding performance.”

This is a very wrong thought,“Fairness” come from the rule,then the stakeholder can judge which wittness didn't follow the rule.

The bitusd had destroyed by the GS, NOW the committee want to destroy the bitcny with settlement, excellent, just do want you want to do.

 I see, NO ONE in the committee know the market.

 That' all, end.

I didn't find andy evidence to prove we have a “Much better feeding”, settled volume can't prove it, as the offset is 2%.

I didn't find any rule of the feed price,the feed price still control by the witness, and i found we didn't have any method to deal with the witness like “verbaltech2” and the GS Protection.


So, did we have a stable measure to solve this kind problem?

You have support the: https://cryptofresh.com/p/1.10.38714

Give the reason!!!

I never agreed with raising the settlement offset in the first place and always thought all bitAssets should have the same one.

5% was supposed to only be a temporary measure in the first place.

Much better feeding....We've had wild swings on CEXs that did not affect the feed price like the case used to be which led to manipulation and abuse of the settlement mechanism.

A good proof of that is the fact that only 170 000 bitCNY has been settled over the last 6 months....That's a grand total of less than 25k USD over SIX months.

If you think this makes any real difference in the market, you're looking at the wrong place.

If you don't think we have better feeding then you probably don't remember what was happening due to odd CMC , poloniex etc prices back when the offset was changed to 5%

I heard the same argument about settled volume not proving anything when we went from 5% to 2% as well... But nothing changed.

There are not supposed to be any rules and the price IS supposed to be chosen by the witnesses themselves. Fairness comes from the stakeholders ability to vote/unvote witnesses based on their perceived feeding performance.

anything else is more centralized and completely defeats the purpose of having the witness fed system in place

Then where is that rule ? Show me whitepaper, docs or Bytemaster's statement (who originally started this all mess without rules or proper governance/limits) and we will follow it. Or you want me to educate you on basic principles and logic of BitShares blockchain ?
Milos (DL) Preocanin
Owner and manager of bitshares.org through Consensus
Move Institute - RN: 2098555000
Murska Sobota, Slovenia, SI.