Author Topic: BTS-DEX economic model(updated MM contest rule)  (Read 1985 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline binggo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2077
    • View Profile
Re: BTS-DEX economic model(updated MM contest rule)
« Reply #30 on: May 27, 2020, 11:20:51 am »

the "tax" can be considered as the fee for utilizing the DEX infrastructure
We already paying blockchain fees for utilizing the DEX infrastructure, so it is just double taxation for the businesses, It obvious that you don't care about some private tokens like "ZALUPA", you couldn't get any profit from this

Who will manage the taxation fund?
Who will get money for the management of this fund?

It is a rhetorical question because everyone in the community knows that it will be your or members associated with you, so tell me more about how you were against this bsip 

Community well remember the SPRING thing or committee-cnytrader operations, do you have the same brilliant plans for taxation funds?

after the launching of 4.0, the BSIP86 parameter will be determined by voting, I agree that the community need be careful/conservative on this, if finally the voting decided to set the rate to 0, market fee will not be shared.

however in my view, it's good that gateway pay some further fee and the platform provide some further public service, GDEX has bought MM service from providers, it's expensive and not so satisfactory, the MM contest actually provide good service and is potential to be better, when MM contest helps GDEX, GDEX will contribute to community with better depth, more active trading and also more system income, the rules will be continuously updated to make it more easy for voters to estimate how it works well enough.

You are kidding something, if MM so good, why GDEX did not spend own money to do it in such long time? why you want to spend community money so eagerly?

If it was so good, GDEX can spend own money to do MM,then show the result to community and calculate how many new users and how much income,how much cost!!!


QUESTION:

1. The fund of last MM comes from committee account, so who gave the right to committee to spend it?where is the BSIP for vote? if the bts holders agreed the last MM?

2. How much cost?

3. How much income?

4. How many new users?

5. How many daily users?

Please the committee answer these questions!


Where is the fund of the last OMO?what did the committee want to deal with it?

Please the committee answer this questions!

Bitcrab,you are the top committee, the owner of GDEX, the main participator of Gateway,you are the most suitable person to answer these questions.
« Last Edit: May 27, 2020, 11:54:42 am by binggo »

Offline blockchained

Re: BTS-DEX economic model(updated MM contest rule)
« Reply #31 on: May 27, 2020, 02:03:40 pm »

after the launching of 4.0, the BSIP86 parameter will be determined by voting, I agree that the community need be careful/conservative on this, if finally the voting decided to set the rate to 0, market fee will not be shared.

however in my view, it's good that gateway pay some further fee and the platform provide some further public service, GDEX has bought MM service from providers, it's expensive and not so satisfactory, the MM contest actually provide good service and is potential to be better, when MM contest helps GDEX, GDEX will contribute to community with better depth, more active trading and also more system income, the rules will be continuously updated to make it more easy for voters to estimate how it works well enough.

As a gateway that participated and observed previous mm contest, I can say that it is bring nothing, just some money to the bots that trading on gdex

if it so good use it for your own business proof that it's worth something. But NO you prefer to do it by the community money because it looks like to spend money on MM contest from reserve pool it is the only way how you make money on this so-called MM contest.

if finally the voting decided to set the rate to 0, market fee will not be shared
We already paying blockchain fees, so this double taxation looks more like a tribute for the existing businesses this is not acceptable.

I told you and I repeat you not once that taxation is a worse idea that pops up in your head, a community that for the year couldn't imagine/invent anything smarter/better than bring/build taxation in blockchain for a few existing small businesses on top of it are going in a rekt direction


Chinese community, mark my words, with such ideas for the bitshares upgrade you will roll OUT from top-100 till the end of the year No foreigners, no businesses, no money, just some scammed/broken bitassets, empty markets and "workers" dumping the coin. The bright future for the chain, isn't it?
« Last Edit: May 27, 2020, 02:55:33 pm by blockchained »

Offline abit

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4306
    • View Profile
    • Abit's Hive Blog
  • BitShares: abit
  • GitHub: abitmore
Re: BTS-DEX economic model(updated MM contest rule)
« Reply #32 on: May 27, 2020, 04:19:50 pm »
if finally the voting decided to set the rate to 0, market fee will not be shared
We already paying blockchain fees, so this double taxation looks more like a tribute for the existing businesses this is not acceptable.

Rather than rejecting this and that, can we start a discussion about what is acceptable? E.G. what fee percent is acceptable for you? 1%? 5%? 10%? 20%? 30%?

It's clear that there is a conflict of interest on your side. As a gateway you want the platform to help you more so you can earn more, and it's better to pay less to the platform, on the other hand, as a BTS holder you probably want the platform to earn more from the gateways.

I am NOT running a gateway so I am mostly on the side of the platform. Yet I seek for win-win situations.

The question is just that, what CAN WE DO to both benefit the platform and the gateways? Don't tell me doing nothing is the answer. In the past there are enough times we did nothing and the situation went worse.

Here are some potential options I can see to increase income:
* the committee increases basic operation fees (zero cost, maybe higher or lower final income)
* the committee makes use of bsip86 (zero cost, maybe higher or lower final income)
* the community use some funds (committee or worker) to encourage trading, in hope of gaining more income (some costs, maybe higher or lower final income)

What do you think?

Quote
I told you and I repeat you not once that taxation is a worse idea that pops up in your head, a community that for the year couldn't imagine/invent anything smarter/better than bring/build taxation in blockchain for a few existing small businesses on top of it are going in a rekt direction

Chinese community, mark my words, with such ideas for the bitshares upgrade you will roll OUT from top-100 till the end of the year No foreigners, no businesses, no money, just some scammed/broken bitassets, empty markets and "workers" dumping the coin. The bright future for the chain, isn't it?
What's your SOLUTION then?

You know which gateways scammed the community. Not Chinese.

You know who (workers or not) dumped the hardest. Not Chinese.

Yes, Chinese pushed the de-peg of bitassets, but without the great support of Thule, your friend, it shouldn't have been done.
BTS account: abit
BTS committee member: abit
BTS witness: in.abit

Offline blockchained

Re: BTS-DEX economic model(updated MM contest rule)
« Reply #33 on: May 27, 2020, 04:40:13 pm »
It's clear that there is a conflict of interest on your side. As a gateway you want the platform to help you more so you can earn more, and it's better to pay less to the platform, on the other hand, as a BTS holder you probably want the platform to earn more from the gateways.

so now gateways are not members of the community? not bts holders that by the activities spending more on the blockchain fees than average holder that just sit on the bag and pay no fees to the platform?
why we have blockchain fees then?

Before talking "conflict of interest" and "earnings" just take a calculator and calculate so-called profit of the gateways it is public on the blockchain. Bitshares as a blockchain for gateway business already failed that's why gateways run away and stop their services, did you noticed that? Because no fish there, nobody uses it really, nor ICOs nor traders. So from the point of view of the business after this changes it better to migrate service, less spends. Why do I need to use bts engine with double taxation as a gateway service/cex on top of it if I could use other dex engines on other blockchains with no fees at all?. Our customers mainly our community that come to rudex and trade our UIA mostly, but still paying blockchain fees. Why do we need to stay here with our community? 
And as a bts holder, I understand if the businesses will continue to migrate from bitshares, BTS would be worthless very soon.

This bsip make borders for the new gateways and push out those that exist, what value in it? tell me

Why the community must pay for this development instead of something valuable that bring something to bitshares and not push out and force to dump this coin. Do you understand how ridiculous this situation is?

Yes, Chinese pushed the de-peg of bitassets, but without the great support of Thule, your friend, it shouldn't have been done.

it was your and bitcrab idea no one to blame besides you two

Rather than rejecting this and that, can we start a discussion about what is acceptable? E.G. what fee percent is acceptable for you? 1%? 5%? 10%? 20%? 30%?

You don't understand that this tribute not acceptable at all

It's clear that there is a conflict of interest on your side
From my point of view "conflict of interest" it is you who seating as a witness, committee and worker at the same time. Чья бы корова мычала.
« Last Edit: May 27, 2020, 06:35:29 pm by blockchained »

Offline Thul3

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 505
    • View Profile
Re: BTS-DEX economic model(updated MM contest rule)
« Reply #34 on: May 27, 2020, 04:42:14 pm »
Quote
Rather than rejecting this and that, can we start a discussion about what is acceptable? E.G. what fee percent is acceptable for you? 1%? 5%? 10%? 20%? 30%?

Rather than being ignorant ,muting people who doesn't agree on your opinion killing telegram groups ,supporting inside deals ,scam workers,workers which are against community will like legal
and ignoring requests made not from bitcrab or jademont ,it would make sense to listen to the community.

How come so many people are unhappy with your actions even chinese ones ?
You played long enough one men dictator who is executing what bitcrab and jademont is telling you in closed groups?

How many bitshares Admin's and members have you muted and made leaving bitshares ?
You think you have any special rights to do so ?

Here again acting like you want to find a solution but only accepting inside a frame which you and bitcrab would accept and nothing else.


You are asking for solution ?
Easy

fix governance
fix committee
announce fixing price feeds when x happens (as it clearly seems you guys have no real intention in removing threshold)
non custodial wallets and trading (thats something two major chinese committee members don't like for a known reason)
TnT which is mainly for free from Nathan
etc.....

Thats called real progress and not the shit you guys fabricate the last years with your BSIP42,BAIP2,BAIP endless etc ........

You guys are so fixed in parameters that you totaly forgat about progress.All you do is playing parameters and nothing else,trying to get funds from reserve pool in name of marketing,exchanges,mm etc with no positive effect at all.

Trying to get support everywhere even at your worst enemies supporting their witnesses and if they refuse to support your crap taking your support instantly away trying to punish them.
Basicly misusing the voting system.
An invention of some people to use voting system not what is best for bitshares but for punishment and inside deals.
Like yourself not voting for blckchaned because he was loud refusing BSIP76.
Not important if he is big supporter of bitshares and a good witness or not what you care is he disagreed with your opinion/action so you had to punish him.


You created a very toxic bitshares.
You mainly discuss and plan in a closed group without letting other participate for a known reason.
You support inside deals which are crappy for bitshares.
You even justify them openly which foreigners are massivly against.

We don't support inside deals,money grab,abuse and stagnation anymore.

Your solution is crap.We only accept now real progress.
You forced us enough stagnation where diffrent people from diffrent groups asked you hundred times politly to change something which you each time refused acting like a one men show who decides about everything.

You want a solution ?
First soltution will be to limit your power and abuse.

Bitshares members are still muted by you
You still support minority crap and don't execute voters will.

The last committee voting was a good example that nothing changed that as soon as you get the possibility you will enforce your own point of view even majority was clearly against it as it fit in the point of view of 3 known people.

« Last Edit: May 27, 2020, 05:06:56 pm by Thul3 »

Offline bitcrab

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1844
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: bitcrab
  • GitHub: bitcrab
Re: BTS-DEX economic model(updated MM contest rule)
« Reply #35 on: May 28, 2020, 02:07:34 am »

We already paying blockchain fees, so this double taxation looks more like a tribute for the existing businesses this is not acceptable.

I told you and I repeat you not once that taxation is a worse idea that pops up in your head, a community that for the year couldn't imagine/invent anything smarter/better than bring/build taxation in blockchain for a few existing small businesses on top of it are going in a rekt direction


Chinese community, mark my words, with such ideas for the bitshares upgrade you will roll OUT from top-100 till the end of the year No foreigners, no businesses, no money, just some scammed/broken bitassets, empty markets and "workers" dumping the coin. The bright future for the chain, isn't it?

anyone do not like to pay further fees, easy to understand.

what is ongoing is the core prelude worker, subsequent core worker is on plan.

China community would like to communicate with members/communities from other countries, I am sure that BTS will stay in top-80 at the end of this year, we'll try to make it return to top-50.
Email:bitcrab@qq.com

Offline chigbolu

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 102
    • View Profile
Re: BTS-DEX economic model(updated MM contest rule)
« Reply #36 on: May 28, 2020, 02:49:24 am »
... the gateway assets which are included in the ordering mining will beforced to pay part of the market fee to system before BTS 4.0 launching as a must for being listed... This term forced to pay is wrong to use in a blockchain system like BTS, you can't and should not force anyone to pay for anything, it should be voluntary, besides none of the exchanges has agitated or asked for this new MM system they were participating because their customers stood to gain from it, not even them so why force them and give them stringent conditions.

Offline bitcrab

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1844
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: bitcrab
  • GitHub: bitcrab
Re: BTS-DEX economic model(updated MM contest rule)
« Reply #37 on: May 28, 2020, 03:40:41 am »
Yes, Chinese pushed the de-peg of bitassets, but without the great support of Thule, your friend, it shouldn't have been done.
it was your and bitcrab idea no one to blame besides you two

even now I don't think it's wrong to apply BSIP76, de-peg of bitCNY and bitUSD is much better than death spiral leading BTS price to 0.

we need some robust thing to resist the death spiral, BAIP2 may be what we need. I still prefer to keep the feed price rule unchanged before the BTS price be stable above the threshold, what I think need to do first is to find a chance to lower the bitUSD-feed price threshold to be equal with that of bitCNY.

we can let bitEUR and bitRUBLE there without BAIP76 or BAIP2 and let users choose which to use, as their supply is much lower than that of bitCNY there will be little chance to trigger death spiral.
Email:bitcrab@qq.com

Offline binggo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2077
    • View Profile
Re: BTS-DEX economic model(updated MM contest rule)
« Reply #38 on: May 28, 2020, 04:17:26 am »
Yes, Chinese pushed the de-peg of bitassets, but without the great support of Thule, your friend, it shouldn't have been done.
it was your and bitcrab idea no one to blame besides you two

even now I don't think it's wrong to apply BSIP76, de-peg of bitCNY and bitUSD is much better than death spiral leading BTS price to 0.

we need some robust thing to resist the death spiral, BAIP2 may be what we need. I still prefer to keep the feed price rule unchanged before the BTS price be stable above the threshold, what I think need to do first is to find a chance to lower the bitUSD-feed price threshold to be equal with that of bitCNY.

we can let bitEUR and bitRUBLE there without BAIP76 or BAIP2 and let users choose which to use, as their supply is much lower than that of bitCNY there will be little chance to trigger death spiral.

Let BTS become bitcrab/abit/CN-VOTE chain, you can do it!

If you didn't have logic,please don't sound like you have logic!

Quote
death spiral

If you didn't understand it,please don't sound you know it,so many years,you still didn't undertand the ”death spiral“.

Quote
death spiral leading BTS price to 0

How you know it? or, i get how you know it, it's somebody told you, then you believe it so deeply.

A group of such short-sighted people, just think freeze the feed price, then the market will admit the price,who pay the loss of bitasset holders?if the debtor can't bear the risk,why did they still make a debt?
« Last Edit: May 28, 2020, 04:30:04 am by binggo »

Offline bitcrab

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1844
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: bitcrab
  • GitHub: bitcrab
Re: BTS-DEX economic model(updated MM contest rule)
« Reply #39 on: May 28, 2020, 04:37:03 am »
keep shouting and biting if you enjoy, no time to reply that.
Email:bitcrab@qq.com

Offline binggo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2077
    • View Profile
Re: BTS-DEX economic model(updated MM contest rule)
« Reply #40 on: May 28, 2020, 05:08:50 am »
keep shouting and biting if you enjoy, no time to reply that.

别的项目都在努力的往正规道路上走,巨蟹你却还在孜孜不倦的搞这些小伎俩,可以的,巨蟹!

"不要去劝一个执意吃屎的人。不然,他不但不会感谢你。他还以为你会和他抢着吃。"

这么多人都劝不住,拉不住,那就去吧!

最好到时候再来一个事后总结,让我们也好看看结果!

话说我的几个问题还没有理事会成员回答:

QUESTION:

1. The fund of last MM comes from committee account, so who gave the right to committee to spend it?where is the BSIP for vote? if the bts holders agreed the last MM?

2. How much cost?

3. How much income?

4. How many new users?

5. How many daily users?

Please the committee answer these questions!


Where is the fund of the last OMO?what did the committee want to deal with it?

Please the committee answer this questions!

Bitcrab,you are the top committee, the owner of GDEX, the main participator of Gateway,you are the most suitable person to answer these questions.


Offline bitcrab

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1844
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: bitcrab
  • GitHub: bitcrab
Re: BTS-DEX economic model(updated MM contest rule)
« Reply #41 on: May 28, 2020, 07:21:06 am »
This discussion is useless and more important outdated.
You are hitting a dead horse.


We need non custodial wallets.Everything else will come from itself once you give people what they demand.

Real price feed and security for bitassets owner would be the next step to get back attention to bitassets.

You however want based on the chat logs centralization,full AML and KYC,worst country location for bitshares company slovenia/thailand and stick to gateways (your own business)which lost majority of trust from members.

Once you have these done update dexbot for mirrored offers and create a team like every other big exchange is doing it to tap liquidity from other big exchanges to their own.
A nice example is poloniex on BTS/BTC.
They basicly have no own liquidity but you always have 2-4 BTC buy and sell orders near price.Once somebody sells or buys something poloniex redistributes instantly the order through multiple exchanges.

not only one way work, if you believe your way work well, just try it.
custodial wallet is good, it's possible that sometime in the future the MM logic be put on chain.
Email:bitcrab@qq.com

Offline Thul3

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 505
    • View Profile
Re: BTS-DEX economic model(updated MM contest rule)
« Reply #42 on: May 28, 2020, 08:57:51 am »
Why you care about marketing fee so much ?


To push other gateways to be gone ?

You are pushing legal worker of digital lucifer which is the biggest crap ?

First i thought you have no clue what you are supporting but later seeing digital lucifer in action i understood why you are supporting him.

He already started demanding from gateways papers and if they won't deliver till may to kick them out of bitshares.

Is that your plan ?Supporting his crap so you stay as sole gateway on bitshares in hope more and more users will use only your gateway ?

That's why you conficed CN-Vote to vote for it even big part was against it and at foreigners side not a single supporter you can find other than beneficiants ?

What is the purpose of market fee sharing when at the other side you are working hard on it to kick all other gateways out of bitshares?

I reject this MM as it sole purpose is to push a private business GDEX with community funds and nothing else.
« Last Edit: May 28, 2020, 09:28:29 am by Thul3 »

Offline bitcrab

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1844
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: bitcrab
  • GitHub: bitcrab
Re: BTS-DEX economic model(updated MM contest rule)
« Reply #43 on: May 28, 2020, 09:50:57 am »
Why you care about marketing fee so much ?


To push other gateways to be gone ?

You are pushing legal worker of digital lucifer which is the biggest crap ?

First i thought you have no clue what you are supporting but later seeing digital lucifer in action i understood why you are supporting him.

He already started demanding from gateways papers and if they won't deliver till may to kick them out of bitshares.

Is that your plan ?Supporting his crap so you stay as sole gateway on bitshares in hope more and more users will use only your gateway ?

That's why you conficed CN-Vote to vote for it even big part was against it and at foreigners side not a single supporter you can find other than beneficiants ?

What is the purpose of market fee sharing when at the other side you are working hard on it to kick all other gateways out of bitshares?

I reject this MM as it sole purpose is to push a private business GDEX with community funds and nothing else.

I do not have any idea of kicking other gateways out of bitshares.
but in the MM contest updated rules, the market fee sharing is what gateways pay for the MM service, rudex and xbtsx rejected to participate the MM contest, maybe partly because of this.
no relation with what Digital Lucifer is doing.
Email:bitcrab@qq.com

Offline Thul3

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 505
    • View Profile
Re: BTS-DEX economic model(updated MM contest rule)
« Reply #44 on: May 28, 2020, 09:59:41 am »
Why you care about marketing fee so much ?


To push other gateways to be gone ?

You are pushing legal worker of digital lucifer which is the biggest crap ?

First i thought you have no clue what you are supporting but later seeing digital lucifer in action i understood why you are supporting him.

He already started demanding from gateways papers and if they won't deliver till may to kick them out of bitshares.

Is that your plan ?Supporting his crap so you stay as sole gateway on bitshares in hope more and more users will use only your gateway ?

That's why you conficed CN-Vote to vote for it even big part was against it and at foreigners side not a single supporter you can find other than beneficiants ?

What is the purpose of market fee sharing when at the other side you are working hard on it to kick all other gateways out of bitshares?

I reject this MM as it sole purpose is to push a private business GDEX with community funds and nothing else.

I do not have any idea of kicking other gateways out of bitshares.
but in the MM contest updated rules, the market fee sharing is what gateways pay for the MM service, rudex and xbtsx rejected to participate the MM contest, maybe partly because of this.
no relation with what Digital Lucifer is doing.


Really not ?So you are talking with digital lucifer often on wechat supporting his legal worker and pushing it at cn-vote where he is attacking gateway owners acting like the new owner of bitshares demanding papers from all gateways as he had any authority to do it calling them animals and telling them that he is going to kick them out of bitshares as legal and brand owner and you don't know anything about it ?

Funny cause when you saw i read your messages on wechat you kicked me out to be unable to keep reading your talk with digital lucifer how people are idiots who don't like KYC or that people who are against it are criminals hiding behind anonymous names and that DL will get all their Data and clean the shit.

You don't know anything about it when you talk staff like that with him in a closed wechat group ?And still you are supporting it ?
Looks for me like a clear agenda behind it.
« Last Edit: May 28, 2020, 10:02:51 am by Thul3 »