BTC price declined.
Only approximately 3,000 NBT on the NuBots accounts left to support the peg at Polonex beyond the possible support of NuLagoon and ALP.
Fri Jan 29 05:07:15 UTC 2016
status of (former) sell side gateway:
nud getliquidityinfo B | grep BETwD8nSjtj9ADSvej2na34xmsMYwPRymv -A 2
"BETwD8nSjtj9ADSvej2na34xmsMYwPRymv" : {
"buy" : 15713.32,
"sell" : 1523.955
status of (former) buy side gateway:
nud getliquidityinfo B | grep BFGMPykfKxXZ1otrCZcsbnTwJjKHPP9dsP -A 2
"BFGMPykfKxXZ1otrCZcsbnTwJjKHPP9dsP" : {
"buy" : 12647.41,
"sell" : 1499.0902
All necessary information is in the forum.
But sice you asked nicely
The first address will reach the former entry gateway.
The second address will receive donations to me as it will reach my custodial address of the former entry gateway.
The former exit gateway is dual side as well.
A deposit to BJUQAhZxXfiiTbG6eeG11L3fcZ25bf2Bmw can be used to support the sell side as well.
If you plan to create a transaction to deposit funds there, keep in mind that there are currently a lot of funds (on buy side) and I have a withdrawal limit at Poloniex.
I’d feel uncomfortable to be away in February and have funds there.
I recommend to support zoro and Nagalim ramping up their operation at Poloniex.
Here’s the overview of deposit addresses from the FLOT thread. The deposit addresses can be found in the “gateway” threads as well:
Fri Jan 29 15:16:34 UTC 2016
status of (former) sell side gateway:
nud getliquidityinfo B | grep BETwD8nSjtj9ADSvej2na34xmsMYwPRymv -A 2
"BETwD8nSjtj9ADSvej2na34xmsMYwPRymv" : {
"buy" : 13880.56,
"sell" : 3829.8048
status of (former) buy side gateway:
nud getliquidityinfo B | grep BFGMPykfKxXZ1otrCZcsbnTwJjKHPP9dsP -A 2
"BFGMPykfKxXZ1otrCZcsbnTwJjKHPP9dsP" : {
"buy" : 14493.48,
"sell" : 2.3433
Under which circumstances is FLOT to take action in the current state of affairs?
How much is intended to be at your dual-side NuBot?
I still have trouble understanding this by myself, which would be a problem in a situation where I’m available and see a need, but don’t know what to do.
You are welcome.
I’m happy to assist and join discussions as the need arises. But I’m currently not in the condition for a leading role.
I beg your pardon for that.
I don’t know about the status of NuLagoon at Poloniex.
I intend to skip the withdrawal of funds from the NuBot accounts today and check the liquidity situation again in the next days.
A majority of NBT or BTC FLOT members might request a withdrawal to their respective multisig address, of course, which I will follow.
But it made be more wise to rather deposit NBT than request a withdrawal of funds (and if, please BTC…).
This is just a suggestion. I won’t start either process (withdrawal, deposit) on my own.
ALP funds: low on sell side; buy side with a few thousand USD value
masterOfDisaster NuBot funds: low on sell side, but hopefully sufficient; buy side ok
NuLagoon NuBot funds: unknown; @henry can you confirm that NuLagoon broadcasts liquidity using BTRnV9uLSPVJw4jn1JMV2Ki2cfFqPYip9o? It looks like there’s no funds at Poloniex. Is that right?
masterOfDisaster NuBots detailed:
Sat Jan 30 13:18:16 UTC 2016
status of (former) sell side gateway:
nud getliquidityinfo B | grep BETwD8nSjtj9ADSvej2na34xmsMYwPRymv -A 2
"BETwD8nSjtj9ADSvej2na34xmsMYwPRymv" : {
"buy" : 13394.83,
"sell" : 4190.8853
status of (former) buy side gateway:
nud getliquidityinfo B | grep BFGMPykfKxXZ1otrCZcsbnTwJjKHPP9dsP -A 2
"BFGMPykfKxXZ1otrCZcsbnTwJjKHPP9dsP" : {
"buy" : 12697.54,
"sell" : 1679.2886
Is it still not clear how much the NuBots smooth the liquidity operation at Poloniex?
How long since the last emergency deposit of FLOT?
But do you think you can afford to sustain such an operation at each exchange? I doubt it.
Do you think Nu is scalable, can accomplish the release of new products with the current liquidity provision scheme?
Don’t you think it’s time to rework the liquidity provision scheme to make it more reliable and even cheaper?
You are aware that the NuBots are no regular part of the liquidity provision scheme, right?
They are meant for emergencies, but do a great job and are more reliable than ALP.
Would you feel comfortable having almost no ALP support and apparently no NuLagoon support at Poloniex if you couldn’t rely on the NuBots?
Start spending time on this, think about it, discuss it:
Sorry if you’ve already explained this a gazillion times …
BETwD8nSjtj9ADSvej2na34xmsMYwPRymv and BETwD8nSjtj9ADSvej2na34xmsMYwPRymv were initially custodial addresses used for deposits, but are now only used for broadcasting liquidity?
The BTC on buy side get broadcast by NuBot in USD value. It’s the buy orders on Poloniex or the ask side, whatever you prefer.
This is about the NBT on sell side, or the bids, if you like.
I converted each of the gateways to a dual side NuBot. That provides (RaPi) redundancy, allows me to adjust configuration (which requires restart and takes some time until the orders are up again) without cancelling all orders at once and provides a more granular parametric order book. Have a look here in the config part.
Because I try to keep the NuBot accounts as balanced as possible by withdrawing from the account which has BTC or NBT in excess - whatever that is…
I don’t balance between the NuBot accounts, though. It’s just the trades and the withdrawals (and potentially the deposits, which weren’t required for some time), which balance the accounts.
Yeah, one of the custodial addresses that broadcasts liquidity information
If you haven’t already, please look at @zoro’s motion and decide whether to vote for it. I hope it passes soon and we can use their dual-side NuBot instead or as complement to masterOfDisaster’s (he will be less available in February).
I tried ALP + NuLagoon Tube balancing for some time. Balancing via NuLagoon usually eats away 2-3 days of ALP income on the amount balanced, and is still not convenient enough.
The ALP software a bit flaky and I added some try: except: shutdown(True) to make it somewhat stable. The errors are mostly due to mismatch between Poloniex API and how the scripts handle errors; there’s an apparent bug that the script hangs after a “need to update BTC price” error.
Overall I think the next pool to get a custodian grant and renew pool terms should consider increasing the tolerance on BTC/NBT pairs and experiment a mild reduction of rewards.
I’ll have to think more about this to really see it, but thanks!