[Committee Proposal] Set force_settlement_offset of bitCNY from 2 % to 5%

[binggo]

既想让抵押者提供锚定资产的流动性，又想让抵押者清来清去提供bts流动性，互相戳屁股玩，系统还能从互相戳屁股过程中捞到好处，整个稳定币圈也就是你们这些个鼻祖聪明绝顶了。

你们可以继续这样搞稳定币，继续这样玩，看看到最后谁死。

[binggo]

I doubt it would have changed something.

Increasing the offset to 5% would only move the buy orders and sell orders at a higher price.

Debt holders who get force settled mostly instantly adds buy orders near price they receive for forcesettle.

Instead an offset of 5% it should be offset 0% and a "penalty" fee for network of 3% which would create a gap between buy and sell orders which would hopefully reduce force settlements.

This is the risk to maintain DEX price = feed price*（1+offset or “penalty" fee）in the market.

Maintain price Risk = {1/MCR - 1/(MCR+MCR*offset)}/ (1/MCR)

let's make it simple: Maintain price Risk= offset or “penalty" fee.

also you can check the FOREX.

If you still didn't understand it, sorry about that.

May be most of you not clear about the trade logic and the market, have lost the spirit of free market, just want a dead and fixed exchang rate market.


---------------------

Besides:

The window time of lock feed price is too long，BTS community still didn‘t find out the solution，that make BTS became a joke in DEFI, BSIP76 beame meaninglessness.

[Thul3]

I doubt it would have changed something.

Increasing the offset to 5% would only move the buy orders and sell orders at a higher price.

Debt holders who get force settled mostly instantly adds buy orders near price they receive for forcesettle.

Instead an offset of 5% it should be offset 0% and a "penalty" fee for network of 3% which would create a gap between buy and sell orders which would hopefully reduce force settlements.

[binggo]

CLOSED. 

SUPPORTERS, please remove your vote from me, thanks.

[binggo]

Let's check：

https://github.com/bitshares/bsips/issues/260
----------------------

Force settlement order price = settlement price*(1+FSO)/(1-FSFR)

smartcoin quantity： X

the buyer：X*(1-FSFR)/[settlement price*(1+FSO)]

the settled debt position owner：X/[settlement price*(1+FSO)]

settlement price：1.0
DEX price：1.025
offset：2%
fee：1%

so，everyone can calculate these very easy and got the result，

so，who can tell me， how to restrain the settlement like now，or just want to charge the fees？！

and if：
offset=0
fee=3%
so the Force settlement order price=1.03093，en very interesting.

a basic trade logic of settlement.

---------------------------
强清订单价格=喂价*（1+强清补偿）/（1-费率）
强清金额为：X 数量的bitcny
强清者获得的bts数量为 ：X*(1-费率）/ 喂价*（1+强清补偿），付出X
被强清者付出的bts数量为：X / 喂价*(1+强清补偿）, 获得X

喂价：1.0
内盘价格：1.025
强清补偿：2%
强清价格：1.02

现在的强清逻辑的话可以直接清了。

改后的强清逻辑：
假如手续费为：1%，
那么强清的价格为：1.0303
这样的话内盘价格到1.035就可以了/

这样看着似乎不错了，但是这个价格空间，你们还是会被清的活来死去。

而且如果我预估没有错的话，到时候可能强清补偿会为1%，手续费1%[哈哈][哈哈][哈哈][哈哈][哈哈][坏笑][坏笑][坏笑][坏笑][憧憬][憧憬][憧憬][憧憬] 嗯，似乎什么地方不对[笑cry][笑cry]

假如补偿为零，手续费为3%的话，嗯，似乎就更有趣了。

也许，你们就是为了想要收费而已...

[binggo]

[binggo]

Everyone should clear:  force settlement = Exchange Rate Manipulation.

Everyone should clear:  fake price feeds = Exchange Rate Manipulation.

I know that.

A higher MSSR is

BAIP2 is

BSIP76 is

We open a window for so long time hope to fix the the defects of mechanism in the open window time, did we finish something? now all you know BSIP 76 and BAIP2 is Exchange Rate Manipulation, but many of you didn't have any adverse options to force settlement, and think it's very right for such long time, that make me very confused.

We lost the spirit of the free market in the beginning, and never found we have lost it for so long time until now.

[bench]

Everyone should clear:  force settlement = Exchange Rate Manipulation.

Everyone should clear:  fake price feeds = Exchange Rate Manipulation.

[binggo]

Everyone should clear:  force settlement = Exchange Rate Manipulation.

[binggo]

This proposal is ridiculous.

YES.  OMG we agree on something bitasset related!   Mark the day on the calendar!   Festival next year!

...but I'm not sure which is more ridiculous:

increasing from ridiculous 2 to ridiculous 5

or

having the ridiculous notion of "force settlement offset" at all



*perplexed*

"They first came for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up
because I wasn't a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up
because I wasn't a Jew.
Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up
because I wasn't a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn't speak up
because I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me,
but by that time,
there was no one left to speak up."

This is the essence of force settlement, when a force settlement happened, every debtor have the original sin, everyone should get the punishment equally，now we push out the one at the top of the list and kill them, then think we have solved the problem happily and say this our way.

The prices fixed or guided by the government was very common in China, but i found it was well received by the foreign friends, especially in force settlement,

NOW, you should understand, amigo, we used the fixed and guided price by the government as our principle from the beginning.

[litepresence]

This proposal is ridiculous.

YES.  OMG we agree on something bitasset related!   Mark the day on the calendar!   Festival next year!

...but I'm not sure which is more ridiculous:

increasing from ridiculous 2 to ridiculous 5

or

having the ridiculous notion of "force settlement offset" at all



*perplexed*

[binggo]

IMO in order to update a parameter of a bitasset, a BAIP is needed.

BAIP5: Set force_settlement_offset of bitCNY from 2 % to 5%
https://github.com/bitshares/baips/issues/22

[binggo]

This proposal is ridiculous.

every trader is clear that force settlement is the power to keep BTS/bitCNY price close to force settlement price, increasing force settlement offset will definitely lead to higher bitCNY discount. and will give no help to the market.

after implementation of BAIP2, force settlement is playing an important role in BTS liquidation offering. and it create a lot of trading chance for both bitCNY holders and debt position owners.

to avoid making things worse, I hope every committee member follow his own logic and judgment, not to support this proposal.

plan to raise the bitCNY force settlement offset to 5%
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=25293.msg312379#msg312379

suggest to disable forcesettlement for bitCNY
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=27362.msg323693#msg323693

[Committee Proposal] set force_settlement_offset of bitCNY to 1%
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=28619.msg332397;topicseen#msg332397

I have got your volatile logic, thanks.

I think you would still keep your volatile logic with the discount of bitasset.

You seems didn't understand how the water flows.

Best regard.

[binggo]

Just accept the fact, people are not interested to hold a broken mpa.

You could also use your BTS to provide a real mpa, like HONEST.Assets.

The broken MPA still have the largest user-base and the maximum trad volume in BTS DEX，so this is the fact.

"I don't like your MPA, so i will creat new one HONEST.Assets, peopel will like it as it is HONEST."
So, this is the biggest problem of BTS  for so long，"i don't like it, so i will creat new one : HONEST.Assets,  HONEST2.Assets,  HONEST3.Assets,  HONEST4.Assets, TCNY....."

I don' t think the design of bitasset is successful, we have lost many bitassets in this design, no one want to solve the essential problems，just want to creat new one and think it will be better or just wait for something happend and see what is happening.

So you may know what i say.

[abit]

IMO in order to update a parameter of a bitasset, a BAIP is needed.