[Draft] Proposal for Transfer of Liquidity from Existing Grant


Recent discussions amongst the elected Nu custodians have centered on our ability to deploy NBT liquidity strategically. Our best defense against a number of risks is to disperse our funds across a number of actively participating custodians to serve many markets. Given that we (the Custodians) are small in number right now, it is important to strive for continued decentralization.

The following proposal is technically a motion vote for me to ask Nu Shareholders to consider a transfer of liquidity from my grant (B7mmVdVQ1SNNcT9zuQRK1B3Cbvo8vHeoB1) to another custodian. This custodian could be someone who has been previously elected by the Shareholders as a dual-side liquidity provider (such as @jmiller or @JordanLee), or it could be a new custodian who brings enough support in to reach consensus.

The reason it is being entered as a grant proposal is to allow the shareholders to agree to the terms that I’ve set forth at the same time that a new grant address can be created that the transfer of existing NBT from my grant to the new one can be used to provide identifiable liquidity information to the network. The network is not being asked to create 350,000 NBT in addition to the 1,800,000 NBT already created as part of my grant, but instead vote on creating a new grant address that the 350,000 NBT can be manually transferred to if the proposal is passed by vote. Other terms, in addition to what is described below, may be brought to table by the prospective custodian, and will be formally included in the proposal before voting begins.

I expect that this proposal will rightly bring many questions from the community and I’d like to provide a few days long window for community discussion and identification of the Custodian before I put in a finalized proposal that can be vote on. Once a viable candidate has been identified and the community has had the opportunity to comment, voting can begin.



Proposal Summary:

Pseudo-motion by way of a formal grant proposal to approve the immediate and permanent liquidity transfer of 350,000 NBT from the custodial funds previously granted to Kiara Tamm (@KTm) to a second party (“Elected Custodian”) selected from within the Nu community of shareholders and contributors.

Grant Address: [000000000000000000000000000000000]
Grant Amount: [000]

Rationale for Grant Proposal:

Diversification of custodian-held funds is paramount to building a robust and responsive network of available liquidity. At the time that Grant B7mmVdVQ1SNNcT9zuQRK1B3Cbvo8vHeoB1 (“Grant KTM” - 1,800,000 NBT + fees) was approved by the Nu Shareholders, there was a lot of uncertainty around how the actual custodian exchange operations would be conducted and what the market’s demand would be for NuBits immediately after launch. Therefore, a proposal for a single large grant was introduced to ensure enough liquidity was on hand and available.

In the last 100-plus days of Nu operations, we, the Custodians, have learned a lot about what works well, what didn’t work and what could be done better. Originally we had been working under the assumption that we’d be able to deploy multiple bots (each a proxy for an individual custodian) on a single exchange trading pair. This assumption turned out to be wrong; the work required to develop the tools that NuBot needs to do this and the technical complexity of making a decentralized custodian coordination to work in concert has taken longer than expected.

This has meant that our operations, for instance, those under Jamie Miller’s custodianship, have been limited in their ability to respond to individual exchange needs by the amount of NBT created under Grant B9fv9Di2Y4RxUHzrwjtfq5fetAhqULzWKL (“Grant JM” - 200,000 NBT + fees). Jamie’s situation is the main example of this type of need, but as our network grows, distribution of risk and the ability for custodians to be able to quickly bring reserve liquidity to markets that need them - for instance, in the event of a major Nu exchange outage - correspondingly grows.

I propose a motion to permanently transfer a portion of Grant KTM in the amount of 350,000 NBT from reserve holdings[1] to an NBT address under the control of [Elected Custodian], [000000000000000000000000000000000]. The deposit address will be used to provide liquidity information to the Nu network.

The implications of this transfer are that for accounting, reporting, and dividend purposes, Grant KTM’s outstanding NBT liabilities will be reduced in value permanently from 1,800,000 NBT to 1,450,000 NBT.

A successful passage of this motion means that [Elected Custodian] will be granted full authority by the Nu Shareholders to deploy these transferred funds in accordance with [the terms of an existing grant proposal] or [the terms of a grant proposal paired with this one]. At the shareholder approval, Kiara Tamm will no longer be involved in the management of those funds.

[1] “Reserve holdings” in this context mean funds that are stored off-exchange and are not reflected in the Nu client or returned with the ‘getliquidityinfo’ RPC command.



Thanks KTm. If we are voting for this accounting change why not creating several addresses to be transfered to? The advantage would be that these addresses can either be used in a combined way by a custodian (e.g. jmiller) or by new custodians when needs comes up.

1 Like

Would the intent be for the new custodian to be active with a NuBot either immediate or some time (Tier 1 or 2 provider), or could the custodian fulfill a Tier 3/4 role (i.e.: cold storage)?

Definitions from JordanLee’s “Finalized evolution of liquidity operations” post: Finalized evolution of liquidity operations

I could frame a formal proposal for the latter – the points covered would include methods for cold storage address generation, private key custody and reporting, and the contingency plan should I be incapacitated.

1 Like

Thanks KTM, I might be interested but I’m still trying to understand the amount of effort involved based on the experiences from the other custodians. Can this be done in one or 2 hours a day or requires it 24x7 monitoring, 24x7 availability to move these funds including continous configuring, restarting, updating and moving bots across pairs and exchanges?

Or is this more intended similar to previous poster comments, more a passive, low volume account what mostly acts in higher tiers.

@Cybnate : the type of effort that would need to be put into it would be up to the elected custodian and what they decided to do with the grant. I do not expect that the need would be for 24x7 availability for shifting between pairs or exchanges, but instead to be able to offer deeper liquidity on a supported market (existing or new).

NuBot has, for the most part, become stable enough to run with minimal intervention. There are ways to set NuBot up as a service on your server to have it automatically restart when needed, or send you notifications if you would prefer to do it manually.

I would be able to discuss more with you further if you have other questions, send me a PM.