jooize asked for a discussion about how to handle the BCH fork. It is my opinion that Nu should provide liquidity to BCH/US-NBT pair, presuming we can get the pair listed. The announcement would be a chance to get a headline for NuBits and shareholders wouldn’t need to choose a preferred chain. The cost would be practically nothing, due to the nature of blockchain forks, though some NuBot development may be necessary for obvious reasons.
What is most important is that the action we take be the result of a motion. There is absolutely no reason that this decision can only be made by the liquidity team in private.
It would be incredibly insulting if we are expected to believe that shareholders do not deserve the final say in this decision via motion.
There are some costs to development and testing.I’m sure if BCC catches on this will be considered.
Feel free to raise a motion, but it might be a bit premature.
I wouldn’t know what to do right now. BCC is not even listed as a coin, maybe it is just another altcoin? Time might be a better advisor than just jumping into something idealistic and unproven.
My point is that whatever the outcome of our BCC, it should be determined by motion. I agree and I am not going to be putting in a motion right now until we see more.[quote=“Cybnate, post:2, topic:5347”]
Time might be a better advisor than just jumping into something idealistic and unproven.
[/quote]
I agree, that is why I want to make sure action isn’t taken before shareholders have their chance to make opinions heard on our blockchain.
It is the policy of the Liquidity Operations team to always follow directives contained in passed motions, to the extent possible.
In the absence of a passed motion on the matter, the Liquidity Operations team will make decisions. This includes determining how to provide for shareholders’ interests with any funds resulting from the Bitcoin fork. We aren’t rushing to action on the matter. We haven’t made a decision about what to do. It is likely a little time will make the right course of action apparent.
In general, I support NuBits being traded for liquid crypto assets beyond Bitcoin. The first priority is Ether. I would like to see others follow, where the priorities match expected demand for trading NuBits in a particular crypto asset.
Certainly, public discourse such as this can have an impact on what we choose to do, even without a passed motion.
Statements like this are why I am only bringing it up for discussion. Empower shareholders by letting their voice be heard on the blockchain. I don’t know why you are opposed to simply leaving the decision to a motion vote.
In the past you shrug off “public discourse” because you claim that forum members does not equate to shareholders. Let the shareholders decide, is all I am begging for…
@Proteus learned the hard way, @lissajous will learn it the hard way, everyone who hasn’t learned it yet will learn it the hard way good luck @lissajous with your efforts!
Anyone can at any time discuss, draft, and publish a motion for shareholders to vote on. What hasn’t been happening a lot is actual discussion, mostly wishes for it. If people want to be part of the decisions made, they’ll have to give arguments for their ideas to convince those in power. Either the team or the shareholders.
Nu shareholder BCC are worth around $50,000. They’ll conceivably rise in value if Bitcoin Cash takes off, and likely lose value if interest dies. It’s always a gamble. Keeping the BCC seems to carry least risk.
To take on more NuBit pairs, we need liquidity management to be quick and easy. That’s why I have the team focused on getting multisig operating with automated notifications, simple and reasonably secure mobile signing, and automatically generated transactions. We have almost agreed on terms for the multisig team.
Why not keep the BTC raised for B&C development in BTC instead of turning it into NBT? I mean, we know where B&C is at as of today. You know what Bitcoin was worth when all those BTC have been turned into NBT for “security reasons”? Are you trying to tell us that BTC back then was a more dangerous gamble than BCC today? While you suggest to keep the BCC, you seem to never have had any problem with turning all cheap BTC into NBT being subject to insider attacks from @JordanLee / @Phoenix / @jooize. Interesting, you piece of shit!
This is complete bullshit. You are talking about chance. Either you want to gamble, or you want to know what you got in your pockets. The funny thing is that whether or not you decide to gamble, you gamble anyway, since Nu is run by scammers and they can disappear or destroy the network within seconds, as we have seen a year ago. Front-running and suspicious payments are part of the daily business of Nu till today.
Not okay? Do you know that people lost serious money while you are cashing in big payments and deny to answer how much you actually earn? If @Sentinelrv, who put a large amount of money into the project, killed himself because of scammers like @jooize and @Phoenix / @JordanLee, would you care? You piece of shit wouldn’t care. You would keep cashing in at the cost of those who have not yet learned the lesson that @Sentinelrv had to learn. My god, anyone visiting this forum should know that Nu is a huge pile of shitty scammers! @Cybnate included because she behaves like a bribed priest. So funny to read her messages
You say discussion, yet it was a prominent statement from phoenix that discussion is irrelevant and that the people on this forum are the enemies of the shareholders. You alone ask for discussion, then say you will ignore the first person that disagrees with you.
That’s a curious interpretation. Phoenix said we’ll make decisions unless shareholders guide us, and that discussion can have an effect on our decisions. @MaVo didn’t discuss this nor how to handle BCC funds, he only attacked past decisions in unrelated scenarios and the current governance. His posts contain literally no relevant discussion.
Had I suggested selling the BCC, I’d probably have been attacked and accused of taking all funds I can get my hands on to put toward my front-running of the NSR buybacks. Do you not see that @MaVo is by now only here for destruction?
Real discussion doesn’t happen magically by asking for it. Where are all the quality posts from people who know so much better? Outline what we can do, and argue for what we should.
This took me about 15 seconds of searching. I’m sure there are plenty more examples. It is quite clear that the forum community was intentionally disempowered, so it’s not a surprise that “quality posts” are hard to find.
How do you figure that, or what do you really mean? What prevents quality posts? Even trolls are allowed here. Just because we don’t change our minds as soon as someone provides an angle doesn’t mean we’re resisting influence.
Empowering a community can indeed be a complex and multifaceted thing. Charismatic leaders are important, especially in a pseudoanonymous atmosphere like this.
I for one have no desire to contribute any more than I already did.
To me this game is over. Phoenix made his exit move.
What’s left is little funds, payments in the thousands (USD), where no one knows what for and still no revenue worth speaking of.
Have fun with the most transparent business of all.
Tough call and I believe mainly a bet. If it was me I would sell half, just hedging a bit. On the other hand BTC has increased over 15% in last week so there is no real loss even when it goes to zero what I don’t expect. Every BCC is just a bonus anytime. I believe now is the worst time to sell as there is a lot of sell pressure. In a few weeks that will wear off and than it will be clear whether it can stand on its own feet around the $200+ mark.
good luck