is it a good idea to disable force settlement and black swan for bitCNY?

[天籁]

Jurisprudentially, the global liquidation of the Black Swan occurs as an infringement on both the mortgagee and the holder of the anchored asset. The black swan is the result of the two sides short playing game, and it is the two sides that should bear the consequences together. After the black swan occurs, if the market warms up，then the global liquidation causes mortgage damage, and if the market continues to fall, the global liquidation aggravates the holder's injury.

[gghi]

     At present, the price of RMB is ideal for bitcny. The anchoring effect is very good. Why is there any objection to the feed price reform? You go to the English speaking area to urge foreigners to oppose reform, so what's good for BTS?

     

目前bitcny对人民币的价格很理想。锚定效果很好，有什么理由反对喂价改革。你去英文区怂恿老外反对改革，这样对BTS有什么好处。

[bench]

Thul3 concerns are valid and we should not allow manipulating core functions to cover a lack of trading abilities.

[Thul3]

*To Mods.
I use my right for free speech and expressing myself in the way i like to.

Let me make this very clear to you and everyone else, right away. This forum is operated by the BitShares Blockchain Foundation and as such lives under Dutch law.
Your 'free speech' has been granted to you by your government, is limited to public law and does NOT apply in this forum which is privately operated.
Consequently, you can (and will be) lectured by means available to the operator, if they so chose, in case you continue personal rampage. Your tone is unacceptable not just for this community and the desire to cooperate to solve current issues (which constantly change) but is also unacceptable for the internet as a whole.

Provided that I dont speak for the BBF, i cannot give you an official warning, but rest assured that this is escalated to the proper authorities.

So, please stick to basic netiquette or go somewhere else.

Dear Xeroc ,
I'm sorry to say it but you are once again wrong.
The only terms which are binding are the terms of that forum which i had to accept when registering an account here.
Based on these terms there was no information that this forum is run under the bitshares blockchain foundation nor is that forum hosted on a dutch server.
But the terms i and everyone else agreed on cointain.

or otherwise in violation of any International or United States Federal law.

If you want to put that forum under dutch law because its being run by bitshares blockchain foundation which i didn't knew before and to which i have no contract you would have to update the terms stating who the owner of that forum is and which law apply.If i'm not mistaken you would have also to add an imprint.


Also i want to inform that based on many requests of community members who support my actions but don't want me to get banned but keep posting i will change words to basic netiquette
which doesn't mean i will change my point of view or the demand to change bitshares back to the right track.

Also i would like to inform about your misleading argument that i don't have a personal rampage against anyone but his name is mentioned so often because its him who is the main force behind all negativ changes which accured during the last months and to which majority of the community disagrees.

I would also like to ask since you want to punish me as my tone is according to you unacceptable and harmful what punishments do you have for people who break massivly
community consensus and put community funds in risk or even lose a part of it ?
I highly doubt i will get an answer to that.


Regards Thul3

[xeroc]

*To Mods.
I use my right for free speech and expressing myself in the way i like to.

Let me make this very clear to you and everyone else, right away. This forum is operated by the BitShares Blockchain Foundation and as such lives under Dutch law.
Your 'free speech' has been granted to you by your government, is limited to public law and does NOT apply in this forum which is privately operated.
Consequently, you can (and will be) lectured by means available to the operator, if they so chose, in case you continue personal rampage. Your tone is unacceptable not just for this community and the desire to cooperate to solve current issues (which constantly change) but is also unacceptable for the internet as a whole.

Provided that I dont speak for the BBF, i cannot give you an official warning, but rest assured that this is escalated to the proper authorities.

So, please stick to basic netiquette or go somewhere else.

[paliboy]

bad idea

[armin]

After thinking about it, I don't think this is needed actually. The margin calls will eventually be eaten up in a bull market. Although, the risk of black swan is higher in a bear market with the new feed algorithm. Thats true

[JonnyB]

If you are against inaccurate price feeds you need to actively vote against it not just abstain.  BSIP42 basically says witnesses can feed in manipulated prices.

https://github.com/bitshares/bsips/blob/master/bsip-0042.md

[Thul3]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Igct_XWpAQ&feature=youtu.be

[Crypto Kong]

I think the amount of outrage at this proposal is quite clear from posts in this thread and @bitcrab should withdraw it and rethink how else our smartcoins can be improved. This idea is a no go.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

[kimchi-king]

Nope, not a good idea at all.

End of story.

[Thul3]

@bitcrab

is the cancelation of global settlement again a trojan horse to protect your both own assets which are getting margin called ?

Bitcrab didn't you bought using the OMO funds already your own margin called BTS at highest possible price ?

Bitshares is not your fucking own ecosystem.

You are clearly abusing it which i already saw in your beginning placing trojan horses so changes come quick which can't be reversed easily anymore.

You are a clear cancer to bitshares abusing currently that ecosystem and you are a fucking LIAR.


When i posted that increasing feed price is going to create these exect situation that there will be high risk of global settlement and according to my trading experience its going to happen because of you moron but you answered that the feed price will stabalise the price and make the smartcoin more safe against global settlement.

Now you fucking LIAR have your fucking manipulated feed price which is causing big margin walls which i predicted and which will only increase the global settlement price and never decrease it since no margin call ever will be bought anymore because of your fucking stupid manipulated feed price.Now you fucking LIAR have the gut to come here and
try to confince that taking away the fucking global settlement is something positiv.

You fucking know what a stablecoin is ?You know what it means to be backed by something ?
Bitshares whole promotion was based that bitassets are fully backed where the USD is backed by air.
Now you want to change this major rule from bitshares ?

Why don't we call it by its real name ?
We are going to protect your own ass as your trading abilities are horrible.You totaly fucked up the last couple of months and are fearing now to lose majority of your BTS
and lose control over bitshares.

You are just a liar adding never ending trojan horses to the bitshares community trying to safe your own ass at the cost of the community.

You are an egoist who is a real cancer to this community.


If bitshares community let the global settlement fall i will be the first spending $1000 for ads promoting that BTS is no more backed by anything just by incompetent commitee members who are supporting this kind of crap and nothing more.

You clearly overcrossed your line long ago.Its just sad people needed so long to see your real intentions.


*To Mods.
I use my right for free speech and expressing myself in the way i like to.

Technically, black swan can be avoid by feeding a price always higher than black swan price * MSSR. It might be considered as manipulation.

I guess this says everything.

Why not just add 1.000.000.000 bitusd and buy BTS to nirvana ?Or instantly set a BTS feed price of 70 CNY ?What other manipulation can we use since we own majority of voters heh ?

what we should do is to make bitCNY/bitUSD the best stable coins in the token economy world

LOL based and backed on what ?Your poor promises and manipulation ?
People get mad saying Tether may have no backing and your way BTS will clearly have no backing at all.
Your statements are so poor its just insane how so much people could trust you their funds.

But you surely will increase it by manipulation the whole ecosystem to not lose face



Also a word to the naive comitee members who are protecting this clear manipulation claiming its just for bitcny which is backed by real cny.All i can say its not backed by real CNY 1:1 .
If you claim it is please post full proof that you have enough fiat for bitcny to back it 1:1 .
And more important Bitcrab already posted the next quick step will be the implementation of the manipulated feed price on BitUSD which has completly no liquidity.What this will cause is the bitshares community will be forced to cancel global settlement and bitcrab has his goal achieved.
All his accounts with BitUSD and BitCNY can't get margin called anymore or lose its collateral to global settlement.

Maybe we should also ask these manipulators how many million BTS they bought during last days when changing everything knowing they can't get margin called anymore.
You deserve a kick in your buts for this kind of actions and the comitee members supporting it deserve also a kick in their butt for their blind stupidity which leaded us here and defending each time this actions which the whole community disagrees.


And am making also a promise as community member and marketing guy.I will be the first advertising EVERYWHERE that BTS is backed by horseshit should the global settlement be removed.

Let's see what is more important a manipulated feed price with bitcrabs saved ass or the trust of community and people in bitassets.


And a final suggestion to bitcrab.
After removing the global settlement we should also change MCR from 175% to 0.1%. Since global settlement isn't working anymore and bitassets are not backed anymore what diffrence does it make ?It will be even positiv for bitshares ecosystem because this way everyone can create at least 1.000.000 new bitcny and the price of BTS will skyrocket to 1000 BitCNY where the price of DEX will dictate the external exchange prices since the biggest volume will be on DEX......
Perfect plan and working so quickly.Lets be millionars in just 4 weeks.
BitCNY will be the best stable coin in the token econemy world.

Agree ?

[abit]

In current situation, I concern more about forced settlements than black swan or global settlements. IMHO forced settlements are needed. For better user experience, perhaps we should match force-settle "orders" with limit orders when prices of limit orders are better than settlement price for the settler.

if then, why not disable force settlement and just let the users place buy orders in market if they want to convert bitCNY to BTS? what's the difference?

The difference is that without force settlement there might as well be no backing collateral, especially if nobody buys your sell order entirely within 24hrs of placing it at/around the settlement price.

It's also possible that the "if" will not happen. If the price of your order is competitive, IMHO it will be filled quite soon in a liquid market. Being able to buy a large amount without affecting the market trading price is a stupid design.

So if the 'if' will not happen, why disable forced settlement at all in the first place? Fractional reserves should not be encouraged due to shorters poor gambling choices - they should be globally settled upon rather than bailed out, as laid out in BSIP 18.

I've analyzed in the first page why forced settlement is not necessary but even harmful.
The situation is different between in bull and in bear.
Due to BSIP42, "the settlement price" is no longer the fair market trading price. The fairest price would be on the order book.

[R]

In current situation, I concern more about forced settlements than black swan or global settlements. IMHO forced settlements are needed. For better user experience, perhaps we should match force-settle "orders" with limit orders when prices of limit orders are better than settlement price for the settler.

if then, why not disable force settlement and just let the users place buy orders in market if they want to convert bitCNY to BTS? what's the difference?

The difference is that without force settlement there might as well be no backing collateral, especially if nobody buys your sell order entirely within 24hrs of placing it at/around the settlement price.

It's also possible that the "if" will not happen. If the price of your order is competitive, IMHO it will be filled quite soon in a liquid market. Being able to buy a large amount without affecting the market trading price is a stupid design.

So if the 'if' will not happen, why disable forced settlement at all in the first place? Fractional reserves should not be encouraged due to shorters poor gambling choices - they should be globally settled upon rather than bailed out, as laid out in BSIP 18.

Alternative proposal - disable (permanently) the following centralized permissions in bitCNY/bitUSD:
White list
Override authority
Transfer restricted
Disable force settle
Disable confidential

This is off-topic.

I disagree, with these permissions available (including 'Disable force settle' as referenced in this topic) there is the risk of malicious actors attempting to abuse such centralized permissions.

[abit]

In current situation, I concern more about forced settlements than black swan or global settlements. IMHO forced settlements are needed. For better user experience, perhaps we should match force-settle "orders" with limit orders when prices of limit orders are better than settlement price for the settler.

if then, why not disable force settlement and just let the users place buy orders in market if they want to convert bitCNY to BTS? what's the difference?

The difference is that without force settlement there might as well be no backing collateral, especially if nobody buys your sell order entirely within 24hrs of placing it at/around the settlement price.

It's also possible that the "if" will not happen. If the price of your order is competitive, IMHO it will be filled quite soon in a liquid market. Being able to buy a large amount without affecting the market trading price is a stupid design.

Alternative proposal - disable (permanently) the following centralized permissions in bitCNY/bitUSD:
White list
Override authority
Transfer restricted
Disable force settle
Disable confidential

This is off-topic.