| 26 Aug 2022 |
 alexanderpart | The psilver MM would put up "physical silver", much like a listing but this wouldnt be for retail sale, alongside the equivalent value in PART, to be held in a contract in perpetuity. | 16:36:20 |
| alexanderpart | The contract would then issue psilver tokens that are bound to the silver spot price. Users would be able to use this as a stablecoin in the market. | 16:38:41 |
| alexanderpart | If a user wants to redeem their psilver tokens, they would go one of these contracts and open a MAD escrow with a physical silver holder, and the buyer would put up 100% of the value in part. | 16:40:41 |
| alexanderpart | If the physical silver does not exist then the buyer of the silver would redeem the psilver tokens for part, or if the seller of the silver would lose its part holdings (at the buyers expense as well, as per MAD rules). | 16:42:46 |
| alexanderpart | * If the physical silver does not exist then the buyer of the silver would redeem the psilver tokens for part, or the seller of the silver would lose its part holdings (at the buyers expense as well in PART, as per MAD rules). | 16:43:19 |
| alexanderpart | * If the physical silver does not exist then the buyer of the silver would redeem the psilver tokens for PART, or otherwise the seller of the silver would lose its part holdings (at the buyers expense as well in PART, as per MAD rules). | 16:43:43 |
| alexanderpart | This would place the value of psilver inbetween the value of PART and the value of silver, without requiring a central authority to validate if the silver exists or if it was shipped successfully. | 16:45:37 |
| alexanderpart | * edit in progress... actually let me think about this how this would redeem...... | 16:50:31 |
| alexanderpart | * If the seller of physical silver does not have it then they lose their PART as well, its the same dynamic as with any transaction, there is no incentive to participate as MM if they don't actually have silver. | 16:55:09 |
| alexanderpart | That would be a relative value, or the value that it would be traded for if it were used as a speculative instrument. The absolute value would still be the spot price of silver, so like with any decentralized stablecoin there would be some fluctuation. | 17:00:28 |
| alexanderpart | There is probably some interplay risk with MAD and the fluctuating value of the PART held in the MM escrow and versus the PART the silver is being sold for at the time of sale. | 17:02:15 |
| alexanderpart | * If a user wants to redeem their psilver tokens, they would go to one of these contracts and open a MAD escrow with a physical silver holder, and the buyer would put up 200% of the value in part. | 17:03:17 |
| alexanderpart | * If a user wants to redeem their psilver tokens, they would go to one of these contracts and open a MAD escrow with a physical silver holder, and the buyer would put up 200% of the value in PART. | 17:03:25 |
 rutherford | <!yfgame@discord>:
Well it is all down to making a peg. You could do it, but someone is going to lose a ton of money (as it would have to be maintained)
What is better is just to have perpetual listings, and for the markup margins to be proper to make sense for everyone, but it is hard.
Because no one wants to lose money.
😂 | 17:06:38 |
| alexanderpart | The silver spot is mostly flat and maintained by central banks through fraudulent certificates and the endless supply of physical silver, so theres little chance of losing on the value of it. | 17:10:11 |
| alexanderpart | Being an MM however comes with some element of profit/risk | 17:13:09 |
| alexanderpart | And psilver being a median value between PART and silver, it would most likely be PART that would change this ratio. | 17:15:03 |
| alexanderpart | Thats an interesting dynamic to consider, in such a MAD escrow transaction, what would happen if between the creation of the contract and when it was redeemed, the value of PART, went up 200%, b. went down 90%? Would the MM in either instance decide it was better to sacrifice the escrow and keep the silver? | 17:19:02 |
| 27 Aug 2022 |
| alexanderpart invited  Grop3r. | 14:10:03 |
| rutherford | <Frank11112@discord>:
This is what I meant with, it shouldn't be pegged. The value is 1oz, regardless of dollar value of silver. | 17:29:53 |
| rutherford | <Frank11112@discord>:
I actually like the MAD escrow idea, this would mean that if the central party doesn't actually deliver on the physical silver an equivalent of PART will be lost and burned | 17:32:33 |
| rutherford | <Frank11112@discord>:
This would mean pSilver could be minted as long as the minter has PART to put into escrow. However the business idea was to have pSilver circulate where some actually decide on delivery of the silver but most decide to simply use it to trade on the MP | 17:34:16 |
| rutherford | <Frank11112@discord>:
And if that happens, the minter has to have a way to not lose money in the meantime | 17:34:40 |
| Grop3r joined the room. | 19:16:25 |
| Grop3r | alexanderpart: thanks | 19:17:08 |
| alexanderpart | I think ethereums dao has a similar concept, hold a basket of digital assets to "weigh" the token to. | 21:29:02 |
| alexanderpart | In reply to @rutherford:matrix.org
<Frank11112@discord>:
This is what I meant with, it shouldn't be pegged. The value is 1oz, regardless of dollar value of silver. Whenever you have an asset there is no way to say "this things value is: n", if you could do that then you would have fiat and would need the violence to back it. | 21:32:36 |
| alexanderpart | In this case the only thing holding the value of psilver to silver is the part held against it as a surety bond. But as i mentioned you would have to explore the ramifications of what happens when the values change. Instead of asset1:asset2 commodity pairs, denoted in dollars, you have asset1:asset2:asset3. | 21:37:21 |
| alexanderpart | The game theory of that is a level more complex than what MAD was intentionally designed for. It could work though to a point, i'd have to say there probably exists some vector whereby the value of psilver would go to 0. | 21:38:58 |
| 3 Sep 2022 |
|  usr002 joined the room. | 17:51:42 |
