Current Liquidity

Not sure, but I think you made my point. Arbitrage doesn’t work. Both Bittrex and NuLagoon appear to have adequate funds on the Ask side, but there is clearly not enough incentive to move that.

Have to say that the overall crypto markets are a bit weird at the moment, someone is buying like crazy…

I might know better, but have a hard time proving it without payment data from NuPool, which I requested multiple times, but haven’t even received any reply so far.
@woolly_sammoth, @willy I’d be glad to at least receive a reply regarding the repeated requests for ALP rewards I made.
If you are afraid that could cast a damning light on NuPool, be assured that the failure of ALP has nothing to do with the pool you operate. It runs perfectly stable as far as I can tell. It’s caused by the (current) economical scheme. There’s just no incentive to provide liquidity in turbulent times with a maximum compensation that isn’t sufficient to compensate the risks.

There were times between 2016-01-15 and 2016-01-22 where Poloniex had (almost) no orders from NuPool ALP, nor from NuLagoon MLP, but only those from my NuBots, which I exploited to make them desperately fighting for the peg staying within 1% offset.
The trade volume was up to $200k daily while the trade volume of the NuBots was way below that. Where else did that volume come from?

My assessment is, that these trades happened, because other people, and for sure a lot of arbitragers (who are supposed to have drained the low offset ALP funds repeatedly) put orders there.
Arbitrage works.
You just can’t rely on it to ensure a solid peg.

Why putting efforts (and costs!) in moving funds? ALP have no incentive. They earn the same compensation for leaving funds on a buy side that is below target.
The only ones who still put orders at sell side are other traders and arbitragers.
Again, the trade volume is above what the NuBots trade there. Without ALP making trades and an (at least) uncertain status of NuLagoon there, I assert that arbitrage woks and I think I have given reason why this is at least a plausible assertion.

When will people start thinking outside the box?
The current ALP compensation scheme failed.
The gap this creates is partly filled by traders and arbitragers.
NuBots provide a defense line in case the volume is above what traders an arbitragers can deliver.
Is it, because it’s different from what we want to believe?

So the targets should move down. The trouble with that is that there is no economic model for the ALP operators to do that. I hope ALPv2 support moving targets and enables awareness about the other pools so targets can be adjusted automatically. That way a real market may occur and making LPs work to earn their money.

Do we only try to ease symptoms or work on the root cause as well?

I don’t think CRFC fixes the targets. If they stay high, we might still face a problem as ALP operators don’t compete with each other recognising each other’s ‘market’. Hope the ALP v2 software allows competition on rewards and targets across exchanges and pairs. Although that might not be the complete answer. A liquidity market across exchanges is probably also required.


Can you please explain with your words how you understand CRFC to work?

Thank you for your attention.
If you had looked at the liquidity broadcast of the NuBots (which I just now did), you had found out, that the situation isn’t dire.
If you you still think otherwise, you are free to create a transaction using Cointoolkit to deposit NBT at one of the NuBot exchange accounts and wait until the FLOT has signed it.

Doing all this is no rocket science, but needs a little time to get familiar with it (gathering information - which is hopefully quite well-prepared, getting used to the tools, etc.).

Start getting familiar with it!

Will you, @NSRHolders, rely on some persons working their asses off to increase the value of the property you own, but refuse to assume reponsibility for it?

NuBot status

Wed Jan 27 07:59:09 UTC 2016
status of (former) sell side gateway:
nud getliquidityinfo B | grep BETwD8nSjtj9ADSvej2na34xmsMYwPRymv -A 2
        "BETwD8nSjtj9ADSvej2na34xmsMYwPRymv" : {
            "buy" : 14425.86,
            "sell" : 4002.244
status of (former) buy side gateway:
nud getliquidityinfo B | grep BFGMPykfKxXZ1otrCZcsbnTwJjKHPP9dsP -A 2
        "BFGMPykfKxXZ1otrCZcsbnTwJjKHPP9dsP" : {
            "buy" : 18457.85,
            "sell" : 7251.3586

ALiX NuPool Poloniex status (seems to be out of order; @willy: crashed or disabled intentionally?)

Apologies @masterOfDisaster. I should have responded before now. Getting the information for you has been on my list since you first asked. Just getting a situation where I am somewhere that I can access and process the information and also have the time to do so has proven tough.
I’ll get the logs now and try and parse them out to anonymise what data I can. Just to clarify, you’re after minuite by minute credits for pool liquidity providers? I can provide the daily payouts quite quickly, does that give enough granularity? I can look at parsing out the required info from the other logs but it will take time and I’m currently at work so can;t promise that it will be done in the next few hours.

If you are afraid that could cast a damning light on NuPool, be assured that the failure of ALP has nothing to do with the pool you operate. It runs perfectly stable as far as I can tell. It’s caused by the (current) economical scheme. There’s just no incentive to provide liquidity in turbulent times with a maximum compensation that isn’t sufficient to compensate the risks.

When will people start thinking outside the box?
The current ALP compensation scheme failed.

We all agree with your assessment of the current state of liquidity provision. That is why hard work has been going on for months to change the situation.
It is very much appreciated, all the work you’ve been doing on the front line but please do take a break. I worry about you burning out completely. It’s a hard thing to recover from. Heaven knows the work on the Pool software would have been completed ages ago had I not burned out completely with too many late nights looking after the first generation pools.
I value your input here too much to see you burn out like that and I’m sure others would agree. I would rather see you posting and have a flaky peg for a while than perfect peg and no MoD.


why this is so strange? traditional shareholders vote,elect and pay CEO,boards, specialists to do just that. Not all the shareholders have the time and knowledge to make all the jobs required. We need a peg police to look after liquidity in exchanges :wink:

1 Like

Thank you for your reply. I don’t consider having these reports a priority, but I’m glad to hear they can be provided.
A total reward per minute is sufficient for that. There doesn’t need to be (or even mustn’t be) a single address in it.

I will try to make an evaluation of how important the regular traders and arbitragers were between 2016-01-15 and 2016-01-22 to create trading volume below 1% offset.
That requires data from NuLagoon in that time as well.
But given @henry’s forum statements during that time, I think I can safely assume, that NuLagoon contributed 10 BTC to supporting the buy side. I hope I remember that properly. I won’t dig that post up now.
I think arbitrage might work better than we think, although I can only militat against relying on that.
Then again it might help to include that into the liquidity provision scheme at dual side exchanges with decent volume.
And it might lead to the conclusion, that T1.1 needs a sufficient offset to fight off arbitragers - let them operate at a lower offset!
We shouldn’t compensate ALP to feed arbitragers. Let them eat the leftovers.

I don’t think so. Some do. But far from all.

I will, I just can’t just say bye-bye without trying to motivate others to step up, which has in parts be successful so far considering @Nagalim’s and @zoro’s proposals to operate NuBots on Poloniex.
I realize that I have assumed several roles which I don’t want to let down by abandoning them. I feel responsible for it, but have started to back out, as you might have noticed.

After just asking for help, I started to introduce incentives for participation :wink:
And seriously, I don’t want to make money by that - I’d prefer see others step up and take over.
That’s a lesson I learned from @JordanLee when motivation the creation of FLOT.
I don’t intend to create a list of what I do - it’s all across the forum in more verbosity than some appreciate.

I’m truly sorry to hear that.

Thank you very much for the compliment.
Damage is already done. I will deal with it. Nu will go on - with or without me, although I very much think I will be around for some more time.
In the near future it will rather be less time than in the recent weeks, months or quarters.
It’s necessary to do that, although Nu is nothing short from the most important project I’m involved in - at least to me.
It has so much potential to do good (and earn people money).

The strange thing is that so far NSR holders could rely on people working for free, because of their passion and devotion, spending their time and even endangering their health.
I’ve come to a point where I can’t continue that way.

This will be much easier with the proposal for a paradigm change I created, which most of the community don’t seem to enjoy.
I’m not going to delve into this any deeper here. There’s a thread for it.


for MoD :slight_smile:


What exactly do you mean? The chart looks good from here.

Has been a glitch on my end - parts of it related to me being stupid. I’m sorry for that.
The browser didn’t load it (must have been related to the connection).
A browser on a desktop computer didn’t load it either - javascript was disabled…

Software Bots?


I agree. It is important to stress both

until AI arrives, real people that will be able to take action is enough :wink:


MoD-bot malfunction? :smiley: