I hope you are not offended by the questions that often circle around one of the biggest of Nu’s current liquidity expenses that might even beat development expenses.
Some questions might be tongue-in-cheek, but I can ensure you that the road to disrespectful posts has a lot more milestones.
I hope we will never have to face disrespectful posts here, as that would show a shift of the mindset in this community (adjustment of current memberd or influence of new members).
That being said, I sense no lack of respect asking others whether they find it strange to
pay money for liquidity and
find a part of that money in books at a spread that makes the LP money
possibly being in conflict with terms of the contract (although I have not searched for the maximum spread for which NuLagoon receives compensation; I fear that part is not regulated just as the compensation for NuLagoon doesn’t seem to be tied directly to a volume of liquidity on the books - did I miss something?)
This is just about business. Any service provider will find itself being measured from time to time or continuously.
Please vote for the motion that makes that time once a month so that @henry can be prepared to defend and provide much more satisfactory answers. You can totally feel free to present your own report or complaints then, with some time to process. I realize this can squelch those that are not active month to month, but then does NuLagoon have to be super accountable to them? I feel FLOT and data feed providers pay attention enough to bring up the major concerns in the monthly NuLagoon report (10-day public forum).
For @henry, if someone not very active or seen on the forum makes complaints about NuLagoon, they should be addressed immediately and referenced in the report if important enough. These people are often customers. If they are shareholders complaining about NuLagoon compensation, well, hopefully others will respond. The monthly report is where you should be held accountable for the compensation, not constantly.
We should trade another 50 btc back to the tube. If we time it right we can make money. The person we’re reacting to made a 20knbt bet and lost 2 btc doing it. Let’s split that profit with nulagoon. @JordanLee
Alix shows that buy overall is 30%. NuLagoon Tube needs nbt23000 (50BTC). I was going to create a FLOT tx but there has only 52BTC. It didn’t make me comfortable to deplete FLOT reserve.
That’s 4 of 8 in favour of transferring 100 BTC. I will trade 50 BTC with NuLagoon and send 50 BTC to 3HikFkS2Zinab1TJq7dqp6wSPyLu7i7bhe within the hour.
Thank you!
I was on the fence with the decision between using the advantages of a singlesig custodian (you, JordanLee) compared to multisig (FLOT) to balance the sides.
Once more we saw how much faster singlesig is.
Maybe we should consider singlesig custodians with small amounts of funds or another set of multisig for BTC (3-of-5).
When parking rates aren’t working or they’ve gone on for too long. I think technically we are already/quite close to having to sell NSR but the exact execution details and the required precautions aren’t really established.
Things change fast around here. My understanding is that the circumstances under which NSR will be sold has been made quite clear with the passage of Nagalim’s motion a couple of days ago. He articulates the way the motion controls the calculation:
If we keep the these calculations, as detailed in the NSR buyback calculations thread, above -2500 for BTC and above -1000 for PPC, there will be no NSR sales.
Ppc and nsr market actions are basically independent, both being determined by our btc pool. This is done so that the network works just fine with 0 ppc reserve. Ppc is seen as something like an extra airbag that we fill when we have extra btc and use when we’re low. The nsr action is seen as a core process because we cannot run out of nsr to auction like we can ppc. Of course, in reality we have something like the shareholder pledge where our shareholders have to turn the key for each auction.
Anyway, the point is that the standard (-1400 or -1625 this week depending on if you count SDD or not) is the sole determining factor for share auctions. <-2500 triggers an auction with nsr volume such that a reasonable auction price would result in us gaining that number (the one with magnitude >2500) of monies in whatever form. Actual auction price is of course subject to market forces and ultimately unpredictable.
Poloniex is relying heavily on ALP (NuPool), because all other bots are low (or empty) on buy side.
Gateway status at Poloniex (dual side), NuLagoon MLP at Poloniex and several sell side only exchanges
Wed May 11 14:47:49 UTC 2016
status of mOD dual side NuBot at Poloniex:
nud getliquidityinfo B | grep BFGMPykfKxXZ1otrCZcsbnTwJjKHPP9dsP -A 2
"BFGMPykfKxXZ1otrCZcsbnTwJjKHPP9dsP" : {
"buy" : 0.0,
"sell" : 0.0
status of zoro dual side NuBot at Poloniex:
nud getliquidityinfo B | grep BJs4YbtaqCmxeHLiR6zzjnZEotYVFAPfMo -A 2
"BJs4YbtaqCmxeHLiR6zzjnZEotYVFAPfMo" : {
"buy" : 3143.46,
"sell" : 16612.2801
status of Cybnate dual side PyBot at Poloniex:
nud getliquiditydetails B | grep B954pkUEdkeT1G5Lq14Cisij5no3RVxHYe -A 20 | grep poloniex -A 2
"1:NBTBTC:poloniex:LiquidBits" : {
"buy" : 0.0,
"sell" : 0.0
status of NuLagoon dual side NuBot at Poloniex:
nud getliquiditydetails B | grep BTRnV9uLSPVJw4jn1JMV2Ki2cfFqPYip9o -A 1000 | grep poloniex -A 2 | tail -n 1 | awk -F':' ... and some more stuff
"1:NBTBTC:poloniex:0.3.2a_1462914286404_3fdd40" : {
"buy" : 202.9852,
"sell" : 10399.162
--
"2:NBTBTC:poloniex:0.3.2a_1462914286404_3fdd40" : {
"buy" : 0.0,
"sell" : 0.0
This will always return zero for both Poloniex and Bittrex. The address is no longer in use.
As mentioned the bots on Poloniex and Bittrex don’t submit liquidity at all due to tighter server spread limits.
The orders are seen by Alix though as they are within 1.5 limit/tolerance.
