Author Topic: [Poll] BAIP2: Reform on bitEUR feed price mechanism  (Read 2872 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline binggo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2267
    • View Profile
Re: [Poll] BAIP2: Reform on bitEUR feed price mechanism
« Reply #30 on: April 20, 2020, 01:11:07 pm »
If positions of Chinese holders are issue here, they would just need to spend some time on closing them and moving to bitCNY and it would be very acceptable process - since we don't want to damage anyone but just to restore health to certain parts of blockchain that are becoming very important in real world (future cashless society and importance of stablecoins).

They aren't able to close their positions unless
* majority of bitUSD holders force settle their holdings, and/or
* you found enough money in western to enter positions to replace current borrowers (like what's happening with bitEUR), and/or
* globally settle it (which technically can be done by the committee or witnesses).

If we have BSIP77, this problem can be easily soloved,increase the ICR and lower the MCR.

So what did we do in this mini maintenance?

en, set the force settlement offset to -5%?

Offline Thul3

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 574
    • View Profile
Re: [Poll] BAIP2: Reform on bitEUR feed price mechanism
« Reply #31 on: April 20, 2020, 01:24:06 pm »
If positions of Chinese holders are issue here, they would just need to spend some time on closing them and moving to bitCNY and it would be very acceptable process - since we don't want to damage anyone but just to restore health to certain parts of blockchain that are becoming very important in real world (future cashless society and importance of stablecoins).

They aren't able to close their positions unless
* majority of bitUSD holders force settle their holdings, and/or
* you found enough money in western to enter positions to replace current borrowers (like what's happening with bitEUR), and/or
* globally settle it (which technically can be done by the committee or witnesses).

If we have BSIP77, this problem can be easily soloved,increase the ICR and lower the MCR.

So what did we do in this mini maintenance?

en, set the force settlement offset to -5%?

Agree on BSIP77

Also posted before that committee funds could be used via force settlement to push up CR so nobody gets harmed when lowering threshold

Offline matle85

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 148
    • View Profile
Re: [Poll] BAIP2: Reform on bitEUR feed price mechanism
« Reply #32 on: April 20, 2020, 03:18:01 pm »
BSIP77 looks sensible.

I actually wouldnt mind hearing more details of a bail out / debt reduction proposal to see how that would work and how much it would cost.

Either way hopefully we can get some consensus that bitUSD should trial an alternative way.

Offline Digital Lucifer

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 367
  • 13 years of being Slackware abUser
    • View Profile
    • BitShares 3.0
  • BitShares: dls.cipher
  • GitHub: dls-cipher
Re: [Poll] BAIP2: Reform on bitEUR feed price mechanism
« Reply #33 on: April 20, 2020, 04:21:15 pm »
My reading is that the request by DL is that we transition to non-faked price feeds on bitUSD.

I support this - Abit has flagged up the primary challenge. It could be done via a phased transition to real price feed over a period of X weeks?

That would give time for big debt holders to shift their positions over and also maybe create some volatility / speculation opportunities in the market if people expect some improvement in price during the period.

Correct - I'm definitely not insane and definitely its not language barrier problem, thanks.

Yeah, idea is
step 1) that Chinese have X amount of weeks to move/close their positions to CNY under the current fixed feeds.
step 2) we restore original feeds and settings on bitUSD and recreate normal positions/markets

P.S. Yes Thule, on behalf of the West. Haven't seen you done much about it in any sensible way. Keep in mind Thule that not you are now just being publicly ignorant and stupid, but you also represent a vote of a Chinese, not West.

Chee®s
« Last Edit: April 20, 2020, 04:23:43 pm by Digital Lucifer »
Milos (DL) Preocanin
Owner and manager of bitshares.org
Move Institute - RN: 2098555000
Murska Sobota, Slovenia, SI.

Offline binggo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2267
    • View Profile
Re: [Poll] BAIP2: Reform on bitEUR feed price mechanism
« Reply #34 on: April 20, 2020, 11:56:07 pm »
BSIP77 looks sensible.

I actually wouldnt mind hearing more details of a bail out / debt reduction proposal to see how that would work and how much it would cost.

Either way hopefully we can get some consensus that bitUSD should trial an alternative way.

Rough idea:

Step 1: Lower the MCR;

Step 2: Increase the ICR;

Step 3: Lower the Fixed feed price slowly;

Step 4:Wait the ratio of debt higher than ICR;

Step 5: Repeat step 3.

Step 6: When the feed price close to Global settlement Price, we will use BSIP58;

Step 7:Recover the MCR and ICR, feed price.
« Last Edit: April 21, 2020, 12:13:36 am by binggo »

Offline bitcrab

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1895
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: bitcrab
  • GitHub: bitcrab
Re: [Poll] BAIP2: Reform on bitEUR feed price mechanism
« Reply #35 on: April 21, 2020, 01:53:07 am »
My reading is that the request by DL is that we transition to non-faked price feeds on bitUSD.

I support this - Abit has flagged up the primary challenge. It could be done via a phased transition to real price feed over a period of X weeks?

That would give time for big debt holders to shift their positions over and also maybe create some volatility / speculation opportunities in the market if people expect some improvement in price during the period.

Correct - I'm definitely not insane and definitely its not language barrier problem, thanks.

Yeah, idea is
step 1) that Chinese have X amount of weeks to move/close their positions to CNY under the current fixed feeds.
step 2) we restore original feeds and settings on bitUSD and recreate normal positions/markets

Chee®s

actually it's not so simple.

if it is decided to remove BSIP76 from bitUSD, everyone will expect that bitUSD will peg again and will cancel the BTS buying order by bitUSD, then the debt position owners will be not able to close their positions.

Offline bitcrab

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1895
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: bitcrab
  • GitHub: bitcrab
Re: [Poll] BAIP2: Reform on bitEUR feed price mechanism
« Reply #36 on: April 21, 2020, 10:12:42 am »
Why did you open your company in Singapore which is a global financial hub ,crypto friendly and regulated country and vote at the same time to have legal representative for westerns in Slovenia which is the opposite?

Is this not a legit question on your voting and support behavior?
Why don't you once in your life ask western members what they want when you decide to vote on matters which mainly effects them or at least apply the same standards you used for your own company and chinese community.


Remember your feed bsip which should be only applied to bitcny based on consenus and was later added to bitusd by you with no consent making western mad ?

Seems you want to dictate them your point of view instead letting them go the route the western community wants to go.

I voted ZAVOD as I have discussed a lot with DL, I feel the proposal is feasible, and it cost less.

After BSIP76 has been applied to bitCNY and make sure feed price above 0.22CNY, China community find it also necessary to apply it in bitUSD, to resist shorting attack/death spiral, setting USD threshold as 0.0345USD as at that moment the great amount of accumulated margin call orders is at price 0.0345USD, setting threshold as this will make release the margin call orders.

In my mind, the fact is not that bitCNY belong to China community, bitUSD belong to US community, bitEUR belong to Europe community, they all belong to the whole world, bitCNY has the biggest supply, then bitUSD, then bitEUR, bitUSD status also has big impact on BTS ecosystem/BTS price, that's why China community want to make some change on bitUSD but care less on bitEUR.


Offline Digital Lucifer

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 367
  • 13 years of being Slackware abUser
    • View Profile
    • BitShares 3.0
  • BitShares: dls.cipher
  • GitHub: dls-cipher
Re: [Poll] BAIP2: Reform on bitEUR feed price mechanism
« Reply #37 on: April 21, 2020, 12:16:52 pm »
My reading is that the request by DL is that we transition to non-faked price feeds on bitUSD.

I support this - Abit has flagged up the primary challenge. It could be done via a phased transition to real price feed over a period of X weeks?

That would give time for big debt holders to shift their positions over and also maybe create some volatility / speculation opportunities in the market if people expect some improvement in price during the period.

Correct - I'm definitely not insane and definitely its not language barrier problem, thanks.

Yeah, idea is
step 1) that Chinese have X amount of weeks to move/close their positions to CNY under the current fixed feeds.
step 2) we restore original feeds and settings on bitUSD and recreate normal positions/markets

Chee®s

actually it's not so simple.

if it is decided to remove BSIP76 from bitUSD, everyone will expect that bitUSD will peg again and will cancel the BTS buying order by bitUSD, then the debt position owners will be not able to close their positions.

Yeah order book doesn't seem to fill all the needs and positions currently opened, but still we can start the process and organize if we really wanted to.
Milos (DL) Preocanin
Owner and manager of bitshares.org
Move Institute - RN: 2098555000
Murska Sobota, Slovenia, SI.

Offline Digital Lucifer

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 367
  • 13 years of being Slackware abUser
    • View Profile
    • BitShares 3.0
  • BitShares: dls.cipher
  • GitHub: dls-cipher
Re: [Poll] BAIP2: Reform on bitEUR feed price mechanism
« Reply #38 on: April 21, 2020, 12:26:51 pm »
Why did you open your company in Singapore which is a global financial hub ,crypto friendly and regulated country and vote at the same time to have legal representative for westerns in Slovenia which is the opposite?

Is this not a legit question on your voting and support behavior?
Why don't you once in your life ask western members what they want when you decide to vote on matters which mainly effects them or at least apply the same standards you used for your own company and chinese community.


Remember your feed bsip which should be only applied to bitcny based on consenus and was later added to bitusd by you with no consent making western mad ?

Seems you want to dictate them your point of view instead letting them go the route the western community wants to go.

I voted ZAVOD as I have discussed a lot with DL, I feel the proposal is feasible, and it cost less.

After BSIP76 has been applied to bitCNY and make sure feed price above 0.22CNY, China community find it also necessary to apply it in bitUSD, to resist shorting attack/death spiral, setting USD threshold as 0.0345USD as at that moment the great amount of accumulated margin call orders is at price 0.0345USD, setting threshold as this will make release the margin call orders.

In my mind, the fact is not that bitCNY belong to China community, bitUSD belong to US community, bitEUR belong to Europe community, they all belong to the whole world, bitCNY has the biggest supply, then bitUSD, then bitEUR, bitUSD status also has big impact on BTS ecosystem/BTS price, that's why China community want to make some change on bitUSD but care less on bitEUR.

You are 100% correct, and thanks for support - unfortunately we are far from agreement on general consensus as you see.

Now this is the tricky part: Stablecoin as represents peg/equivalent to its fiat brother (in terms of legal definitions around globe) and is backed by collateral (in our case BTS on-chain); -> To maintain legal around currency with no owner (apart from current committee members), we have to:

a) restore the PEG before me and Stefan make sure CMC is getting back listed
or
b) Exclude both bitCNY and bitUSD from CMC.

Even CMC Phase 2 demands legal paperwork and has plenty of requirement where with current parameters of those 2 stablecoins we are eligible as fraudcoin. Not saying we are fraud/scam - but reason to prevent "short-attack" from currency that doesn't even report currently its volume is a bit off.

Please reconsider future and reputation of entire blockchain. We still don't have:

1) basic development and legal (apart from what Move does in it's own limits)
2) new dapps/service to offer
3) new committee-account issued replacements for bitUSD and bitCNY

but we do have:

1) empty dex
2) empty gateways (no businesses around)
3) broken smartcoins that nobody new will use

We need some agreement and solution fast, now it's been 9 months and its not "temporary" anymore.

Chee®s

Milos (DL) Preocanin
Owner and manager of bitshares.org
Move Institute - RN: 2098555000
Murska Sobota, Slovenia, SI.

Offline bitcrab

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1895
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: bitcrab
  • GitHub: bitcrab
Re: [Poll] BAIP2: Reform on bitEUR feed price mechanism
« Reply #39 on: April 21, 2020, 12:31:43 pm »
You care now because somebody invested 5.000.000 collateral who sucked of other peoples debt kicking out many debt holders from biteur and is now the lowest CR on biteur and who has a clear relationship with you.


Taking other peoples debt and kicking them out of debt is not bringing any supply.

You want more supply for biteur.No problem sell your BTS and you will see how quickly it will get eaten.
But instead you take over the debt positions for pure self benefit and nothing more bringing nothing to biteur.
The only think you do is reducing the amount of debt holders getting biteur debt more centralized.

That's all you can do

aaaa-bb is my account.
I sell GDEX.EOS, GDEX.USDT, and also BTS for bitEUR.
however this is trading, not charity, every trader trades to make benefits.
what have you done?
I am not interested in doing force settlement with bitEUR, it's easy to understand that the bigger your debt position is, the more difficult for you to avoid being force settled.

Offline bitcrab

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1895
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: bitcrab
  • GitHub: bitcrab
Re: [Poll] BAIP2: Reform on bitEUR feed price mechanism
« Reply #40 on: April 21, 2020, 01:59:24 pm »
Now this is the tricky part: Stablecoin as represents peg/equivalent to its fiat brother (in terms of legal definitions around globe) and is backed by collateral (in our case BTS on-chain); -> To maintain legal around currency with no owner (apart from current committee members), we have to:

a) restore the PEG before me and Stefan make sure CMC is getting back listed
or
b) Exclude both bitCNY and bitUSD from CMC.

Even CMC Phase 2 demands legal paperwork and has plenty of requirement where with current parameters of those 2 stablecoins we are eligible as fraudcoin. Not saying we are fraud/scam - but reason to prevent "short-attack" from currency that doesn't even report currently its volume is a bit off.

Please reconsider future and reputation of entire blockchain. We still don't have:

1) basic development and legal (apart from what Move does in it's own limits)
2) new dapps/service to offer
3) new committee-account issued replacements for bitUSD and bitCNY

but we do have:

1) empty dex
2) empty gateways (no businesses around)
3) broken smartcoins that nobody new will use

We need some agreement and solution fast, now it's been 9 months and its not "temporary" anymore.

Chee®s

BSIP76 and BAIP2 are experiments to resist shorting attack/death spiral, and it works.

I agree to remove BSIP76 while some conditions is met, the first step will be that lowering USD price threshold to as equal as CNY threshold (about 0.0307USD?)

the best chance to do this step is while BTS price go above 0.0345USD.

maybe it will be good to firstly see what will happen after the launch of BTS4.0.

and a voting is needed to approve this change.

I don't think we just need to follow the requests from CMC to restore the peg of bitCNY and bitUSD, more factors need to be considered to reach community consensus.

we can take bitEUR as the main stablecoin in BTS community currently.

Offline binggo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2267
    • View Profile
Re: [Poll] BAIP2: Reform on bitEUR feed price mechanism
« Reply #41 on: April 21, 2020, 02:41:06 pm »
Quote
We need some agreement and solution fast, now it's been 9 months and its not "temporary" anymore.

We had the choice several weeks ago, but no one care about it, just want to charge the market fees and force settlement fees which were meaningless.

Now the people want to solve the problem of bitusd, that's good, so, tell me, which tools we have or will have?

We spend about 6000bts everyday in MM, what we got still is empty, if we need to spend so much money in MM continually?

Fixed the problem, yes, that's we should begin to do in the last year, now,we did nothing in such long time, so i don't believe the bts community have the ability to solve these problem, especially bitcrab and cn-vote, they have a
ridiculous logic and thought, they can't fixed any problem, just will make or wait the thing become more worse.

Most of the committees and the wittness didn't care about everything of BTS, even didn't have one word in one year, we are DPOS, NOT POW!

Now, just like someone said: let's beg the price of BTS go above 0.0345USD!

and no one should touch biteur, especially bitcrab, if someone really want a stablecoin of bts, he can use HONEST.bitasset!

 GOD will bless us.
« Last Edit: April 21, 2020, 02:56:18 pm by binggo »

Offline Digital Lucifer

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 367
  • 13 years of being Slackware abUser
    • View Profile
    • BitShares 3.0
  • BitShares: dls.cipher
  • GitHub: dls-cipher
Re: [Poll] BAIP2: Reform on bitEUR feed price mechanism
« Reply #42 on: April 21, 2020, 06:43:49 pm »
You care now because somebody invested 5.000.000 collateral who sucked of other peoples debt kicking out many debt holders from biteur and is now the lowest CR on biteur and who has a clear relationship with you.


Taking other peoples debt and kicking them out of debt is not bringing any supply.

You want more supply for biteur.No problem sell your BTS and you will see how quickly it will get eaten.
But instead you take over the debt positions for pure self benefit and nothing more bringing nothing to biteur.
The only think you do is reducing the amount of debt holders getting biteur debt more centralized.

That's all you can do

aaaa-bb is my account.
I sell GDEX.EOS, GDEX.USDT, and also BTS for bitEUR.
however this is trading, not charity, every trader trades to make benefits.
what have you done?
I am not interested in doing force settlement with bitEUR, it's easy to understand that the bigger your debt position is, the more difficult for you to avoid being force settled.

I'll give you reply to that. We all forgotten Thul3 was not b-dex when he arrived but thul369 and his activity is this:

BitUSD Debt Position with very nasty CR according to fixed price feeds (which he is so against right ?)
Selling BTS for OBITS
Trading BTS against OPEN.ETH which is dead market

and yeah, holding OPEN.BTC that doesn't work. Can we pass and just start ignoring him completely ? Maybe Alt will realize sooner or later he just had wrong pick.

Chee®s
Milos (DL) Preocanin
Owner and manager of bitshares.org
Move Institute - RN: 2098555000
Murska Sobota, Slovenia, SI.

Offline Digital Lucifer

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 367
  • 13 years of being Slackware abUser
    • View Profile
    • BitShares 3.0
  • BitShares: dls.cipher
  • GitHub: dls-cipher
Re: [Poll] BAIP2: Reform on bitEUR feed price mechanism
« Reply #43 on: April 21, 2020, 06:49:55 pm »
Quote
We need some agreement and solution fast, now it's been 9 months and its not "temporary" anymore.

We had the choice several weeks ago, but no one care about it, just want to charge the market fees and force settlement fees which were meaningless.

Now the people want to solve the problem of bitusd, that's good, so, tell me, which tools we have or will have?

We spend about 6000bts everyday in MM, what we got still is empty, if we need to spend so much money in MM continually?

Fixed the problem, yes, that's we should begin to do in the last year, now,we did nothing in such long time, so i don't believe the bts community have the ability to solve these problem, especially bitcrab and cn-vote, they have a
ridiculous logic and thought, they can't fixed any problem, just will make or wait the thing become more worse.

Most of the committees and the wittness didn't care about everything of BTS, even didn't have one word in one year, we are DPOS, NOT POW!

Now, just like someone said: let's beg the price of BTS go above 0.0345USD!

and no one should touch biteur, especially bitcrab, if someone really want a stablecoin of bts, he can use HONEST.bitasset!

 GOD will bless us.

Well, we would be using HONEST.assets if they would be having multisig with committee-account and if someone non-anonymous take over owner authority from litepresence. That way only has sense, because we can't even list them on CMC without these 2 requirements done. Trading internally for <200 active users is not really meaningful in this point, without enabling smartcoin and that trading available to masses. Making those 2 happen = "Mission Impossible: BitShares".

For the same reasoning, BitUSD has already perfect structure and ownership which presents him as native asset of the blockchain, where any other created MPA afterwards isn't.

Nevermind, solution then is that actually after BTC Halving we remove BSIP76 once BTS goes over 5c. Hopefully it will happen and will pray for it.

Chee®s
Milos (DL) Preocanin
Owner and manager of bitshares.org
Move Institute - RN: 2098555000
Murska Sobota, Slovenia, SI.

Offline Thul3

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 574
    • View Profile
Re: [Poll] BAIP2: Reform on bitEUR feed price mechanism
« Reply #44 on: April 21, 2020, 07:47:56 pm »
I guess you discredited your ability to preview market with this statement already

Quote
step 1) that Chinese have X amount of weeks to move/close their positions to CNY under the current fixed feeds.
I won't put your quotes from tg which are even more funny.


Quote
P.S. Yes Thule, on behalf of the West.
You trying to discredit me all the time on TG..Nothing new that BEOS,you and some chinese who do inside deals are trying everything now to discredit me.It's also funny it's always you running away when western community starts questioning your actions together with BEOS when trying to discredit me.So how come you claim you ask in the name of Western when you are always running away from them ?
But remember even i lose voting power it won't change anything.I raised my voice before and will continue to do it even with 1 bts voting power.
Many chinese members from CN-Vote are already starting questioning the voting decissions for your worker.
I can understand you guys don't like me to talk to them asking for a reason to support your worker or BEOS where they have no clear answer and ask in cn-votes group chat for reasoning.It must be a big pain.




Here a nice conversation with the creator of CN-Vote

bitProfessor, [17.04.20 11:16]
I don't know the current situation of CN-vote
bitProfessor, [17.04.20 11:18]
But I'm not surprised that CN-vote and beos destroyed bithares one day
bitProfessor, [17.04.20 11:19]
What did they do?
Thule the Moaning father, [17.04.20 11:19]
making inside deals with beos
bitProfessor, [17.04.20 11:19]
Ha


Quote
I voted ZAVOD as I have discussed a lot with DL, I feel the proposal is feasible, and it cost less.
So you voted for a legal represantative mainly for foreigners based on a talk with one guy .......
Did you checked the country where the represantative will be located ?It's local rules ?Legal Security ?Corruption ?enforcment power ?
Am asking because it seems you don't know Slovenia and that's why i asked ironicly the question why didn't you open your crypto company in mongolia.

Quote
You are 100% correct, and thanks for support - unfortunately we are far from agreement on general consensus as you see.

Now this is the tricky part: Stablecoin as represents peg/equivalent to its fiat brother (in terms of legal definitions around globe) and is backed by collateral (in our case BTS on-chain); -> To maintain legal around currency with no owner (apart from current committee members), we have to:

Why don't you post your statements public but only in closed chats ?
Did foreign community agreed on your centralization dictatur crap ?You run away as always ?
Come on at least post your position very clear what it means for bitshares having you as legal.
Tell openly how you plan to centralize everything ,call people who don't like kyc idiots,how you want to enforce staff on business etc ?Why do you talk about it only behind closed doors ?
How many people have you already threatened to sue or kick out of bitshares as Brand owner ?(also for their voting behavior only) .
What did you requested to social media accounts holders ?To get your approvement if they are allowed to use social media accounts about bitshares ?
You going to dictate who is allowed to promote bitshares and who not ?
Based on what ?
You clearly are mentally not able to hold such a positon with your permanent threats and abuse.


Quote
I'll give you reply to that. We all forgotten Thul3 was not b-dex when he arrived but thul369 and his activity is this:

BitUSD Debt Position with very nasty CR according to fixed price feeds (which he is so against right ?)
Selling BTS for OBITS
Trading BTS against OPEN.ETH which is dead market

and yeah, holding OPEN.BTC that doesn't work. Can we pass and just start ignoring him completely ? Maybe Alt will realize sooner or later he just had wrong pick.

You are just discrediting yourself more and more.
First of all i stated it already multiple times even years ago that i hold majority of my funds on huobi.Now more than ever because i'm a trader and you can't trade bts very activly on dex with current price feed threshold.
I stated also before that i won't put myself major coins to dex because i don't trust gateways and that's why i support ibc like majority of foreigners which you claim to represent.
To your accusation of being a bad trader even i recommend people to read your comments about trading i bought OPEN.ETH and OPEN.BTC yesterday.
It's a clear bet that these gateways will open soon as OPEN.USDT have been opened yesterday.
Of course you have no clue about it.
So buying OPEN.ETH for 1/3 of regular price is a small bet i did.
Maybe mention the amount i was willing to risk which was arround 60-70k bts for open.eth and open.btc together.
About Obits price falled from average 1 BTS to 0.1 BTS.
A clear buying opportunity if you think VPLedger will have some kind of success.

So please tell me were with your limited ability to understand trading where did i made a big mistake which would discredit me which you try permantly till today with no luck.

P.S How come the represant of western community has no support on his legal worker from foreigners?
Maybe start first collecting support from the people you claim to represant.Shouldn't be so difficult if you are implementing their demands like you claim.

And to answer your poor claim that i represent the vote of chinese.
This is incorrect.I represent with the vote my own opinion and don't belong to any group.
I always vote what i think is best for bitshares no matter if chinese,foreigners,dev's,beos or any other group.

Maybe start acting what is best for bitshares community by listening to them and filter what would be business wise a good feature or not and not following blindly instructions to safe your own benefit and position on bitshares.

You see i have no problem to get kicked out of committee or lose voting power.It won't change my actions.
That's the big diffrence between me and you.(In many peoples opinion)You always adopt the opinion from where you get most support for your own benefit or to increase your position on bitshares.

Here a chat with a high ranked chinese committee member

Quote
But on the other hand, he owns the domain and we can see it a license fee, or leasing fee or whatever alike
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
me: hey ......... any idea what chinese are thinking about legal representant ?

me:What is your opinion on that ?

Quote
Some don't know or don't care. Some know so lobbied for that worker in the past



me: digital is going to try to get the legal to his move institute

Quote
One question, if DL asks for more, will you support him?

me:
 my concern a bit is
trademark
domain
core worker
legal

All at one place



Quote
So he will be the new dictator


So even many chinese are aware of that major problem.


And i recommend digging now what DL said in closed groups what he plans to do with his legal mandate should it get approved.
« Last Edit: April 21, 2020, 08:15:25 pm by Thul3 »