Author Topic: Is it a good idea to lower MSSR of bitCNY from 1.1 to 1.05 or even lower?  (Read 10142 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline zhouxiaobao


Offline fav

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4278
  • No Pain, No Gain
    • View Profile
    • Follow Me!
  • BitShares: fav
BSIP drafted: https://github.com/bitshares/bsips/issues/97

I suggest big proxies who unvoted the witnesses that has already changed MSSR now revote them, witnesses who plan to change MSSR now stop and wait, let's discuss sufficiently under peaceful atmosphere to reach consensus first.

thanks!

Offline xeroc

  • Board Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12920
  • ChainSquad GmbH
    • View Profile
    • ChainSquad GmbH
  • BitShares: xeroc
  • GitHub: xeroc
BSIP drafted: https://github.com/bitshares/bsips/issues/97

I suggest big proxies who unvoted the witnesses that has already changed MSSR now revote them, witnesses who plan to change MSSR now stop and wait, let's discuss sufficiently under peaceful atmosphere to reach consensus first.
Thank you VERY much. I believe this is the right way to go and address all pros and cons.

I would also like to thank everybody in here for participating and providing valuable inside that hopefully leads to resolving that issue to the better of the entire community.

I'll revote as soon as i get to a desk, acknowledging the fact the communities are starting to work together.

Thank you!!

Offline bitcrab

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1917
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: bitcrab
  • GitHub: bitcrab
BSIP drafted: https://github.com/bitshares/bsips/issues/97

I suggest big proxies who unvoted the witnesses that has already changed MSSR now revote them, witnesses who plan to change MSSR now stop and wait, let's discuss sufficiently under peaceful atmosphere to reach consensus first.
Email:bitcrab@qq.com

Offline Yao

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 534
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: yao
  • GitHub: imYao

margin call is not bad or good, it will always happen, no use to blame bitCNY shorters who prefer being margin called, they have their risk and they provide liquidity.

I agree that the margin call as such is neither good nor bad. It is, however, an indication of a bad (read: dangerous) situation, i. e. short positions without sufficient collateral, which increases the likelyhood of a black swan.

The health of the system depends on shorters providing sufficient collateral. In bitCNY, shorters don't do that. They prefer being margin called. They even deliberately try to keep the collateral as low as possible ......


In the past year or so, if you take REAL MONEY to participate in the BTS:bitCNY market, you will find that this is the real market, isn't it? This is the result of full competition in the market under the existing mechanism of SmartCoins. Each participant is a real sample, each market participant truly shows their intentions in the market. The market is chasing interests, as long as they are profitable, they will make the actions that they think are most beneficial. The market is not as static as it was written in the white paper.

I have been a participant in the BTS:bitCNY market since 2016 and are also a bitCNY shorter. From the bear market to the bull market (2014~2017), and then from the bull market to the bear market (2017 to the present), I used REAL MONEY to participate, trade and short.

In the past year or so, the Chinese community has been committed to increasing the supply of bitCNY, so that it can be widely used as the exchange's withdrawal and deposit method like USDT.

Over the past year, on the battlefield of bitCNY, we took REAL MONEY enters the market, and the SmartCoins (bitCNY) mechanism is tested adequately by the market (BTS:bitCNY). We have discovered and summarized some market laws, so we have the proposal to try to change the parameters and test it by action. I admit that it is reckless to take action without consulting the non-Chinese community. So witness.yao changed MSSR back to 1.1 and waiting for consensus.
« Last Edit: August 17, 2018, 10:33:10 am by Yao »

Offline gghi

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 510
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: ttt888
        目前的问题就是bitcny的需求没有有效的传递到喂价,我们的喂价仅仅采集了交易所的价格而已,不是交易所控制了喂价,而是我们没有根据bitcny的需求及时确定合理的喂价。喂价应该是反映出合理的BTS的价格,然而目前的喂价明显很低。


      The problem is that the demand for bitcny is not effectively transmitted to the feed price. Our feed price only collects the price of the exchange. It is not that the exchange controls the feed price, but that we do not determine the reasonable feed price according to the demand of bitcny in time. The price should reflect the reasonable price of BTS, but the current price is obviously low.

Offline pluswave

So now magicwallet.witness is voted out as a backup witness, we can see that many stakeholders or big proxy are against this operation but not discussed here.

we just changed back to MSR of CNY to 1.1 and wait for broader consensus.
blog: https://blog.xiaofuxing.name
org: https://www.magicwallet.io
Please vote for magicwallet.witness !

Offline xeroc

  • Board Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12920
  • ChainSquad GmbH
    • View Profile
    • ChainSquad GmbH
  • BitShares: xeroc
  • GitHub: xeroc
.... perhaps because only the least collateralized positions can profit from the 5% settlement offset.

IMO this is an indication of a very unhealthy situation. The settlement offset is an incentive for shorters to keep their collateral as low as possible, and the current MSSR isn't sufficient incentive for providing enough collateral. Your suggestion increases the likelyhood of a black swan, as you correctly pointed out above.

So you are saying that the premium in bitCNY could well be the result of unaligned incentives with respect to MSSR and settlement offset.
Good call, need to think about this...


Offline bitcrab

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1917
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: bitcrab
  • GitHub: bitcrab
I agree that the margin call as such is neither good nor bad. It is, however, an indication of a bad (read: dangerous) situation, i. e. short positions without sufficient collateral, which increases the likelyhood of a black swan.

The health of the system depends on shorters providing sufficient collateral. In bitCNY, shorters don't do that. They prefer being margin called. They even deliberately try to keep the collateral as low as possible, perhaps because only the least collateralized positions can profit from the 5% settlement offset.

IMO this is an indication of a very unhealthy situation. The settlement offset is an incentive for shorters to keep their collateral as low as possible, and the current MSSR isn't sufficient incentive for providing enough collateral. Your suggestion increases the likelyhood of a black swan, as you correctly pointed out above.

the "just 1.75" debt position is not relevant to 5% force settlement, as the latter seldom happen and are always in very little quantity.

they have their own logic, the logic is that "to be margin called as early as possible", this is one kind of policy of "stop loss", this logic does not always works well, some time they lose because of this.

anyway, they do not do harm to the system, actually they provide more liquidity. so just let them play like this if they like. in bitUSD market there is no such players, do you think bitUSD market more healthy than bitCNY market?

it's hard or impossible to tell what collateral is enough, when the market price is 1.05CNY do you think it enough to set the margin call price = 0.67?

maybe it's safe enough to set call price=0.2, but what sense does this make?

increasing MSSR really increase the likelihood of black swan, however at the same time it lower the shorting incentive, we need a balance here. for bitCNY thanks to the help of target CR and good market depth, I feel bitCNY has very very little chance to reach black swan even with MSSR = 1.05. I hope we can try this after sufficient discussion.
 

 
« Last Edit: August 16, 2018, 03:58:16 pm by bitcrab »
Email:bitcrab@qq.com

Offline pc

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1530
    • View Profile
    • Bitcoin - Perspektive oder Risiko?
  • BitShares: cyrano
MSSR is an important parameter here, it determine the gap between margin call price and the margin call order sell price, and will impact the behavior of different roles.

the higher the MSSR, the bigger the gap, the easier the margin call order will be eaten, but at the same time, the higher profit of shorting and the bigger the shorting incentive.

the lower the MSSR, the smaller the gap, more difficult the margin call order will be eaten, however at the same time, the lower the profit of shorting and the smaller the shorting incentive.

I'm glad to see that we agree about the mechanisms.

margin call is not bad or good, it will always happen, no use to blame bitCNY shorters who prefer being margin called, they have their risk and they provide liquidity.

I agree that the margin call as such is neither good nor bad. It is, however, an indication of a bad (read: dangerous) situation, i. e. short positions without sufficient collateral, which increases the likelyhood of a black swan.

The health of the system depends on shorters providing sufficient collateral. In bitCNY, shorters don't do that. They prefer being margin called. They even deliberately try to keep the collateral as low as possible, perhaps because only the least collateralized positions can profit from the 5% settlement offset.

IMO this is an indication of a very unhealthy situation. The settlement offset is an incentive for shorters to keep their collateral as low as possible, and the current MSSR isn't sufficient incentive for providing enough collateral. Your suggestion increases the likelyhood of a black swan, as you correctly pointed out above.
Bitcoin - Perspektive oder Risiko? ISBN 978-3-8442-6568-2 http://bitcoin.quisquis.de

Offline bitcrab

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1917
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: bitcrab
  • GitHub: bitcrab
MSSR has one specific purpose: to incentivize shorters to avoid being margin called (or rather to punish them if they are). Margin calls are bad for the health of our smartcoins and should be avoided. Shorters are expected to actively manage their positions so they are *not* margin called.

It is clear, IMO, that bitCNY shorters are doing a very bad job here. As can be seen here (https://wallet.bitshares.org/#/asset/CNY ), most shorters make use of the recently introduced target_collateral_ratio to keep their collateral at the bare minimum. Obviously, they *prefer* being margin called. At the same time, they are *rewarded* from the settlement offset of 5% everytime someone settles a long position!

The logical conclusion is that the MSSR must be increased so its original purpose is fulfilled.


*Once again*, while BTS is in a downtrend, certain people come up with creative ideas to protect their own interests. So tired of this.

margin call is not bad or good, it will always happen, no use to blame bitCNY shorters who prefer being margin called, they have their risk and they provide liquidity.

in current condition it's clear one should not do force settlement, to just buy is obviously cheaper.

from the perspective of the whole system, the rules need to guarantee the risk being released in time and the BTS longers being encouraged enough.

Yes, while BTS is in a downtrend, I always think a lot on how to protect the interests of BTS longers, I feel this is  a BTS committee members' responsibility.
Email:bitcrab@qq.com

Offline gghi

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 510
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: ttt888
锚定不成功主要表现为bitCNY的短缺和过剩,其实感觉跟这些参数关系不大,原因在于bitCNY的市场需求和BTS价格没有直接的决定关系,需求无法有效传导给供应。

BSIP38等改动意义很大,可以很有效地降低出现黑天鹅的风险,但对于调节bitCNY供给来说,个人认为还是要靠公开市场操作这样的方式。

这两个参数虽然是BM拍脑袋得出,但个人觉得还算比较合理,不象当初40BTS的转账费用,以及0清算补偿那样明显不合理。

如果改怎么改呢?比如现在的价格下,把1.75改为1.5?虽然增加了供应量,但也增大了黑天鹅的风险吧?不一定是个好主意。

       巨蟹的认识很清楚,锚定偏差很大的确不是这些参数决定的。主要还是bitcny的市场需求和bts 的价格之间脱节了。应该是bitcny需求大,那么喂价随之升高才对。bitcny过剩那么喂价降低才合理。应该随着bitcny 的需求动态调整喂价的价格才是根本解决办法。bitcny的市场需求目前从鼓鼓的充值费看的比较清楚,所以鼓鼓给我们提供了bitcny的供求状况。那么我们应该参照鼓鼓的充值费率来动态调整喂价,是时候让喂价掌握在内盘系统手里了,不应该伸长脖子被外盘割了。

        靠巨蟹以及资金救市其实不是好办法,应该从机制上改变。只要让bitcny的需求和喂价之间联动,那么爆仓惩罚下调为20%,或者更高都行,做到无论牛熊锚定都很稳定。这样BTS就成功了。我的建议是只要鼓鼓充值费率为正值,那么就不断的抬高喂价,动态调整直到充值费为0而无法拉高为止。

        目前的问题应该是不合理的市场定价,从而导致了”喂价“不能很好的与bitcny需求联动。所以现在急需调整喂价,让喂价很好的反映出bitcny的需求。也就是根据bitcny的需求动态调整喂价,那么这些问题就迎刃而解了。智能货币bitcny的锚定人民币必将会更加精确,波动范围一定会很小很小。


     bitcrab  knows very well that anchoring bias is not really determined by these parameters. The main reason is that the market demand of bitcny is out of line with the price of BTS. It should be the demand of bitcny, so the price of the food is higher. Bitcny surplus, then the price reduction is reasonable. It is the fundamental solution to dynamically adjust the price of feed with the demand of bitcny. At present, the market demand of bitcny is clearly seen from the drum charge, so drum provides us with the supply and demand situation of bitcny. So we should adjust the price dynamically according to the drum charging rate. It's time for the price to be in the hands of the internal disc system. We shouldn't stretch our neck and be cut by the external disc.

Relying on cancer and capital saving is not a good way to change the mechanism. As long as there is a linkage between bitcny's demand and feeding prices, the penalty for bursting can be reduced to 20%, or higher, to be stable regardless of the bull-bear anchor. So BTS succeeded. My suggestion is that as long as the charging rate is positive, the feeding price will be raised continuously and adjusted dynamically until the charging rate is zero and can not be raised.

The current problem should be unreasonable market pricing, which leads to "feeding" not well linked to bitcny demand. Therefore, it is urgent to adjust the feed price so that the feed price can reflect the demand of bitcny very well. That is to say, according to the needs of bitcny, the price adjustment is dynamically adjusted. The anchor of the smart money bitcny will be more accurate and the fluctuation will be very small.

      参见  https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=26315.0
« Last Edit: August 16, 2018, 01:37:04 pm by gghi »

Offline binggo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2365
  • 世间太多瘪犊子
    • View Profile
MSSR has one specific purpose: to incentivize shorters to avoid being margin called (or rather to punish them if they are). Margin calls are bad for the health of our smartcoins and should be avoided. Shorters are expected to actively manage their positions so they are *not* margin called.

It is clear, IMO, that bitCNY shorters are doing a very bad job here. As can be seen here (https://wallet.bitshares.org/#/asset/CNY ), most shorters make use of the recently introduced target_collateral_ratio to keep their collateral at the bare minimum. Obviously, they *prefer* being margin called. At the same time, they are *rewarded* from the settlement offset of 5% everytime someone settles a long position!

The logical conclusion is that the MSSR must be increased so its original purpose is fulfilled.


*Once again*, while BTS is in a downtrend, certain people come up with creative ideas to protect their own interests. So tired of this.

very simple to solve the problem of keeping their collateral at the bare minimum.

1. Charge the mortgagor Margin Called(mandatory liquidation)deal  fees, charge 5% or higher

4. Change the collateral ratio to two parts: Margin Call ratio(175%)and Maintenance collateral ratio(185%or180%).

i don't want to explain why.

But Increased the MSSR is the worst idea, can't take any advantage to the bitasset.

110% MSSR was harming the system, i don't want to explain this too.

WHY?! WHY?! WHY?! EVERYONE WANT "BALANCE“, WHO GOT IT?
« Last Edit: August 16, 2018, 01:05:38 pm by binggo »

Offline pc

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1530
    • View Profile
    • Bitcoin - Perspektive oder Risiko?
  • BitShares: cyrano
MSSR has one specific purpose: to incentivize shorters to avoid being margin called (or rather to punish them if they are). Margin calls are bad for the health of our smartcoins and should be avoided. Shorters are expected to actively manage their positions so they are *not* margin called.

It is clear, IMO, that bitCNY shorters are doing a very bad job here. As can be seen here (https://wallet.bitshares.org/#/asset/CNY ), most shorters make use of the recently introduced target_collateral_ratio to keep their collateral at the bare minimum. Obviously, they *prefer* being margin called. At the same time, they are *rewarded* from the settlement offset of 5% everytime someone settles a long position!

The logical conclusion is that the MSSR must be increased so its original purpose is fulfilled.


*Once again*, while BTS is in a downtrend, certain people come up with creative ideas to protect their own interests. So tired of this.
Bitcoin - Perspektive oder Risiko? ISBN 978-3-8442-6568-2 http://bitcoin.quisquis.de

Offline xeroc

  • Board Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12920
  • ChainSquad GmbH
    • View Profile
    • ChainSquad GmbH
  • BitShares: xeroc
  • GitHub: xeroc
I can draft a BSIP, but seems a little strange...
Why strange? There are many informational BSIPs and BSIPs that merely show commonly used procedures. Not ever BSIP
must come with a hard fork. Also no need to have a worker voting for every BSIP (IMHO) ..