I suggest everyone to watch the movie 《American Factory》.
Why the American workers rejected UAW to come into FYA? don't they understand that UAW can help them to fight against the FYA managers?
Surely they understand clearly, but the other consideration has higher priority - they need to keep their jobs first.
Same logic, don't the BTS holders from China understand what sense can workers like wirex make?
They understand clearly, but at this moment, another consideration take higher priority - they need to stop a patient from continuously losing blood.
in my view, when BTS price is under 0.3CNY or there are margin call orders in CNY/USD markets, any big workers should be stopped immediately.
Please define "big workers" and define who takes responsibility for missing payments on agreements in that case towards 3rd parties (e.g. event organizers, hosting companies, service providers) ?
In current scenario, all events have penalties in terms of cancellation, so by current policy (refund400k) its better to throw away/donate (e.g) 10k USD rather than to invest (e.g) 50k USD ?
Wouldn't be "optimizing costs" be more productive than "cutting off entire production" ?
Don't get me wrong, I'm perfectly ok with any decision majority of holders make - but it goes on their credibility and reputation, not workers - in the long-term. Each and every collaborator on the workers being halted will know who was the reason of stopping/cancelling agreements, and it will not be the workers.
Does any of you even think how it will affect reputation of BitShares as a brand ?
You - Jerry as someone who built so much around BitShares should understand very well that i'm saying truth, and refund400k is not really a good way for anything. We had agreement on smaller refund workers not long ago in order to prevent disasters like this, and you were part of that agreement. Seeing you to encourage refund400k instead of selective improvement/cutoff doesn't really look good on you - if nothing as a man who cant keep his word/agreement on.
Many thanks.
the worker mechanism is just like a man to seek better life by selling blood.
yes, when he is strong and in good health, maybe there is no problem, but when he is seriously ill and is going to die, I don't think I can suggest him to sell blood without stop.
I don't know who should be responsible for what you mentioned, but every worker proposal owner should be clear that there is always risk on this, no one can guarantee that a worker be always voted active.
What is disaster? at this moment, releasing more than 260K BTS to the market everyday is disaster, the voters is just try to avoid this disaster.
1) Worker mechanics are simple - people are employed to provide work/hours/services for the blockchain, have jobs and be paid their salaries so they can use it for food, families, phones, whatever is in their minds - they WORK for a SALARY. Worker itself is an agreement. Go and tell your Investor in middle of the agreement that you're cancelling it, let me know what happens.
2) Escrow was defined so workers should stop throwing BTS away and additionally add liquidity/creation of bitAssets. So, escrow gets BTS, buy BitAsset, payout worker, worker sell the Asset. New assets generated and acquired by buyers on the network (for CNY mostly Chinese holders are buying back CNY, benefit from it).
3) We are living in modern world and real one, where no agreement can have the risk of "change of heart" or "accidental farts" or anyone would be signing it. It's utmost unprofessional to sign agreement and then piss on it - you as a businessman should know that.
You maybe in China are comfortable with starving people to death in front of factories and demonizing workers, for the sake of your investors/investments, but that's not gonna happen on international network such as BitShares. World will hear and know about this.
P.S. 260k BTS per day to the markets ? And you are ignoring the fact that single account is taking out/dropping 2M BTS per day that is not even part of the workers ? If you mean 260k daily of vesting balance, that doesn't go to the markets, and your statement would be wrong/miss-leading.
P.P.S. I like that tricky "yes, when he is strong and in good health,
maybe there is no problem".
Thanks for clarifying who are we dealing with here. Very nice.
Thanks and chee®s