<p></p>
<p>Without knowing, I might have addressed this issue through  proposals <a class="issue-link js-issue-link" data-error-text="Failed to load title" data-id="781207966" data-permission-text="Title is private" data-url="https://github.com/bisq-network/proposals/issues/294" data-hovercard-type="issue" data-hovercard-url="/bisq-network/proposals/issues/294/hovercard" href="https://github.com/bisq-network/proposals/issues/294">#294</a> and <a class="issue-link js-issue-link" data-error-text="Failed to load title" data-id="788046439" data-permission-text="Title is private" data-url="https://github.com/bisq-network/proposals/issues/296" data-hovercard-type="issue" data-hovercard-url="/bisq-network/proposals/issues/296/hovercard" href="https://github.com/bisq-network/proposals/issues/296">#296</a>.<br>
Through <a class="issue-link js-issue-link" data-error-text="Failed to load title" data-id="781207966" data-permission-text="Title is private" data-url="https://github.com/bisq-network/proposals/issues/294" data-hovercard-type="issue" data-hovercard-url="/bisq-network/proposals/issues/294/hovercard" href="https://github.com/bisq-network/proposals/issues/294">#294</a> I don't address the issue of volatility and option trading, but I state that RA and traders to reimburse are in a very similar place and should use the same method. The only difference is that I might be more open to volatility and counterpart risk as I voluntarily advance BTC.<br>
At <a class="issue-link js-issue-link" data-error-text="Failed to load title" data-id="788046439" data-permission-text="Title is private" data-url="https://github.com/bisq-network/proposals/issues/296" data-hovercard-type="issue" data-hovercard-url="/bisq-network/proposals/issues/296/hovercard" href="https://github.com/bisq-network/proposals/issues/296">#296</a> I wanted to reduce the inconveniences and volatility risk for traders to be reimbursed while still limiting the risk I take. As 0.5BTC refunds would be made only at the beginning of the cycle and left at whole if BSQ issuance is close, they'll see drastically how their volatility is reduce.</p>
<p>I don't think there's a perfect solution for this, but the prices to be used need to be well known. Volatility goes in both directions. I think that some reimbursed traders and <a class="user-mention" data-hovercard-type="user" data-hovercard-url="/users/RefundAgent/hovercard" data-octo-click="hovercard-link-click" data-octo-dimensions="link_type:self" href="https://github.com/RefundAgent">@RefundAgent</a> lost some value because of volatility in the past, but that did not bother that much to the DAO.<br>
Maybe we could try that BM rebuys just a part of the BSQ reimbursements (like 80% of them) and the rest was left to be sold at BSQ open market, or just leave it invested/used to pay trading fees.<br>
If this option was used, I think that I should be able to buy a higher % than traders, as BTC is a tool that I need to use to keep doing my job.</p>

<p style="font-size:small;-webkit-text-size-adjust:none;color:#666;">—<br />You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.<br />Reply to this email directly, <a href="https://github.com/bisq-network/proposals/issues/292#issuecomment-771516998">view it on GitHub</a>, or <a href="https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AJFFTNTLNY4CKIEIIHKSFNTS47EIFANCNFSM4VQQP3FA">unsubscribe</a>.<img src="https://github.com/notifications/beacon/AJFFTNXGUO2MCQCQI7OVXH3S47EIFA5CNFSM4VQQP3FKYY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOFX6GURQ.gif" height="1" width="1" alt="" /></p>
<script type="application/ld+json">[
{
"@context": "http://schema.org",
"@type": "EmailMessage",
"potentialAction": {
"@type": "ViewAction",
"target": "https://github.com/bisq-network/proposals/issues/292#issuecomment-771516998",
"url": "https://github.com/bisq-network/proposals/issues/292#issuecomment-771516998",
"name": "View Issue"
},
"description": "View this Issue on GitHub",
"publisher": {
"@type": "Organization",
"name": "GitHub",
"url": "https://github.com"
}
}
]</script>