***Draft*** Proposal to provide dual-side liquidity support with my own money

Dear Nu community,

I love Nu. I have done some work to promote Nu in China, I bought some NSR from exchange with high price. I want to participate and contribute. Here is my proposal:

Proposal Begin
I propose that Nushareholders vote on following:

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa , 5000
bbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbb , 1

The content of my service: I deposit a certain amount of BTC equivalent of 20,000 NBT to an exchange which has BTC/NBT trading pair, and operate NuBot to provide dual side liquidity for a period of 30 days. The liquidity support start from the buy side. I offer regular reports about my service. I begin my service either both addresses are elected or the second address is elected.

By voting both addresses, the Nusharehold agree on the my service describled above and its fee.

By voting the second address only, Nushareholders agree on that I provide my service first. If my service is provided as promised, Nushareholder promise pass the first grant at the time no later than 24 hours after my service period ends. Nushareholders also authorize that if my service is provided but the first grant does not pass as promised for any reason, anyone who holds asset on behalf of Nushareholders, including but not limiting to Jordan Lee, KTM and jmiller, are responsible to fulfill Nushareholders’ promise by directly pay me service fee.
*Proposal End

can you please clarify your fee policy?

I see that you’re proposing to emit 5000 NBT in exchange for 20k NBT, which would be a 25% fee.
What would be the fee at the second option?

It looks like the second option can be voted as a motion: if passed, shareholders are bound to pass custodial grant A after services are rendered. Am I understanding correctly?

I think this “motion first, grant afterwards” plan is a very good arrangement to protect shareholders from nonperformance.

Another thought on this proposal: Does Nu have an exchange where more BTC buy support can be added, without conflicting with existing custodians? Perhaps this would be a good time to go exchange-hunting (Cryptsy?) for these new BTC support funds.

I am also quite fond of the motion first, grant afterwards approach. To do that, we would need a RIPEMD-160 hash of your finalized proposal, as you may know. It can be calculated without any special knowledge or software here:

But I need a grant address to report liquidity info.

It’s same

There seem to be two ways to understand your proposal:

  1. You want to provice liquidity for a month with your own money, and when time is up, you want the shareholders to grand you 5000 NBT so that you can use the 5000 NBT public fund to continnue beiing an LPC. If somehow the shareholders can’t grand you the 5000 NBT, you want a fee for the month-long service. Then how much fee are you asking as the fee in the latter case? Can you confirm you are not asking for a fee if at the end of your month-long service the shareholders do grand you the 5000 NBT?

  2. You want to provide liquidity for a month with your own money, and when time is up, you want 5000 NBT as the fee, either by granting up front before your service, or by granting after your service via a grant or from one of the persons listed.

Which one is right ? Or there are other ways to understand it?

The fee is quite high (25% of the liquidity you provide). If it is to compensate for exchange risk, which exchange you are thinking of providing the service at?

1 Like

I think my final proposal may be more clear to answer your questions.
I think I eliminate all the risk on the nushareholder side, that’s the reason for the fee rate.
Thank you.

1 Like