Try these parameters for the BTC bot if you like. Make sure you have the latest version of the bot. This will reduce SAF to 0.6%.
I’m not responsible for any money you lose
deviation = 0.0025
offset = 0.005
shift = -0.002
NuPond
Exchanges bter
Monthly interest rates 0%
Max ask rate 0 % per day
Max bid rate 0 % per day
Current ask rate 0 % per day
Current bid rate 0 % per day
Ask order target 0 NBT filled of maximum null NBT ( 0% )
Bid order target 0 NBT filled of maximum null NBT ( 0% )
and
015/10/25-06:41:54 ERROR: submit: socket error (111)
2015/10/25-06:41:55 ERROR: submit: socket error (111)
2015/10/25-06:41:55 ERROR: submit: socket error (111)
2015/10/25-06:41:56 ERROR: submit: socket error (111)
2015/10/25-06:41:56 ERROR: submit: socket error (111)
2015/10/25-06:41:57 ERROR: submit: socket error (111)
BTC POOL DOWN?
Cny server is still up. I’ll find out why btc went down tonight.
Edit: I had an exception caught in main loop, but it didn’t give me an error message, just blank. I don’t think this is the same error as LiquidBits because @Cybnate saw an index out of range. My message had nothing there, just blank.
I started the bot and will perform manual payouts later.
down again
the LiquidBits drama now in bter 
I’ll start troubleshooting tonight.
In case anyone is paying attention, it has nothing to do with midnight and I’m basically at a complete loss as to why my server went down twice. The second time the log didn’t even have an error, it just ends as if I killed the process manually.
"server could not be reached"
but the server seems to be up!
bash: fork: Cannot allocate memory
Now that’s quite worrisome.
I am going to set up a new server tonight with a higher memory (and higher cost in $$). It’s totally possible that this is a memory leak caused by the fixed cost code. However, I am inclined to believe that nud is the issue.
My pool is giving out 1 cent a minute to anyone able to put up even 1 NBT of buy liquidity on the NBT/BTC pool. Tip: use fillfactor=1, or 5 or something.
Ahhh of course, fillfactor doesn’t work on buy side. I might fix that up later.
well, buy side in bter disappears in seconds!
whatever amount of btc i put in buy side (even at max spread) is bought.
edit:
trying to understand why, i checked volume in bter http://coinmarketcap.com/exchanges/bter/
it seems that it is cheaper to go CNY -->NBT–>BTC
than to go CNY–> BTC
very strange!
edit2:
no it isn’t strange at all. ARBITRAGE 
btc in china costs 350$ but in usa costs 325$. thus by buying btc with NBT/usd you can sell it to china guys and make a profit!
Yup, btc/cny is like 3% out of sync with cny/USD. Huge profit to be made for us if we can get it working right.
yes, i just figure it out. how we (the custodians) profit by this mechanism?
forget my question, i guess this is the secret for us to find out.
(whoever finds it, wins )
Basically, by using a bigger spread. We are doing what we should be doing, but we need to “charge” a bigger “fee” for our service by using a wider spread. We want to keep up the trade volume but take out a bigger slice for our custodians. What’s happening on bter is unfortunate because we weren’t prepared. However, it’s not ‘wrong’ per say.
My solution: very high tolerance with automated shift parameter.
yes, but this tolerane will not be accepted by the server. you mean that instead of getting the “fees” by the server, we get them by the high spread
take a 5% profit from 6.342cny/nbt 
You can’t have one wrong in nbt/btc, nbt/cny, and btc/cny at the same time. If one is wrong, another has to be wrong/broken. Since btc/cny is wrong, it was nbt/btc had a broken wall, now it is nbt/cny.
Yah, basically my statement is the thing that’s ‘wrong’ is btc/cny and our walls are getting eaten trying to make it right (like @mhps said)
A wide spread is currently not allowed (you can still use a wide spread, im just not going to pay you for it yet). I’ll be proposing a much wider tolerance in my next grant. That’s what I mean by using spread as a solution: I mean I’m going to change the server parameters soon.
There is a good reason for that. It is called the USD peg. The wider the spread the less we keep the peg. With very wide spreads there is also no need for the shareholders to pay for it. We should only pay for limited tight pegs.
i agree with Cybnate here.
we either try to profit by keeping the peg (paying by NU) or profit by wider spread (paying by speculation)
i am afraid by “using” both is too greedy 
(and destroy the peg eventually)
As described above, it’s impossible to keep both nbt/cny and nbt/btc stablly pegged while having an abnormally high btc/cny (which basically is an result of abnormal cny currency control by the PRC government).
This insight should make us think how cn-nubit is going to work. Nu might never, at least seldom, have a peg for it inside China.