I second that suspicion.
It could explain why an offset of 1% is so helpful in keeping the peg.
And those bots would help filling the buy side in “single side only” exchanges.
But this is, of course, speaking of an unwanted paradigm change in liquidity provision…
So you are proposing to favor NuLagoon over Polo. I think I can vibrate with that. After all, what is important is to protect the peg not the trade volume.
I am sorry to have you frustrated.
I think with some insistence we can get it to pass.[quote=“masterOfDisaster, post:153, topic:3117”]
I will decommission the Poloniex NuBots and withdraw all funds to FLOT before I need to go on a trip in February. I
[/quote]
If the motion does not pass before your trip and you decide to decommission the bots, what choice do we have if the peg is endangered on Polo? I think we will have to reduce drastically the operations of NuPool or use T5.
It was no one in particular and especially not you!
But I think, this didn’t come out of the blue.
Even if the motion passes, it’s the rational choice to decommission them. I can’t maintain them from there.
I would still be glad of receiving a subsequently filed permission for my activity.
From mid November last year on I encouraged people to help at Poloniex.
The time’s running out, but it’s not yet too late.
Support this:
Draft an own proposal. Decentralize the NuBot operations.
While I have not yet reached the $1000 lower limit, I would appreciate it if you involve my T3 address in the upcomming buyback calculation. I calculate based on my last price entry that I could use around 3 BTC at this address if you don’t mind (I currently have 3.34649 BTC):
1DohemE7Nh8oxBEegomVTtuVurK93F8ssj
Do you intend to resume your dual bot operations after coming back from your trip and assuming that the motion passed?
Do we still need this proposal to pass given this?
NSR Buyback week 18
Signed 1 of 5-of-8.
010000000100dcefa26a1fb7a4b3028c9347fa0768cd3d25280aed4f71500e1bdd616276e701000000fda90100483045022100c5deb0b2fdece78a046b1668bea824833c0c50886046577699eff32aef27ad6f02203852d66be2ed1573b214d6f7ffbd42dfcd88914dec545e486b6602eee59cf2d8014830450221008ff58565525c54ba7cb9cfcc4d352b15def7529683fb5d6231d37086721525c302206550c241e83a5f3b1e31126869f8b13acbef56c61f4b85866baa9a02d377a945014d130155210234139729dd413c84a71a0bfd6f236790be861b37311cef3240277c940e4b0c072102435b894b94b4b27dd24436b3f9ad0b9409d855ab4be6e91141d445804e84750b2102e2fcdfe246e9cd4864d9119b8af465487385eccd0ea30a8cb21d44d36818189f210312cd6eb361c9ebb0d90e44946492a237eab4c7a7d88a0db800f2f460937cc22f21034b0bd0f653d4ac0a2e9e81eb1863bb8e5743f6cb1ea40d845b939c225a1a80ff2103661a4370dfcfbcea25d1800057220f4572b6eecab95bb0670e8676a9e34451dc2103a5fc09a5de595e4758bfbc3a932e2c448cc49a557dd6e64788cee530a76225212103da8082062298c40f0b473b74f3c95b57eaaebe3e67ed30ce56347b2e727915fb58aeffffffff0380d99f38000000001976a9147e3fae113d562ba00254154dfca580e865b2259588ac80d99f38000000001976a914f894fc9864ad39af856fab5222386fe91323a03f88ac802161020000000017a914f716edbaa472c1470d36a3e78b17a4c9bb547fcf8700000000
@cryptog, @Dhume, @dysconnect, @masterOfDisaster, @jooize, @mhps, @ttutdxh
Signed 3 of 5-of-8.
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
I might try my hand at crafting a txn next week. y’all forgot the T3, hehe. No big deal, I still have some buy side and plenty of sell side left. Maybe this week will see people buying back all the nbt they sold last week.
Right.
But I forgot only the sell side of your T3 custodianship in the calculation 
After all it shouldn’t have mattered much…
Refilling the BTC can be made separately - forgot that as well…
don’t worry about the T3 stuff, just got a trade.
approx. current reserves: $1714.96 NBT | $3376.16 BTC
My private BTC multisig key was compromized. I am working with @ttutdxh to replace my key.
The probability that someone gets my key is low. Using it to sign something I don’t want to sign and causing harm is even less probable because 4 other FLOT members have to sign it. Still I will explain what happened after a new address is made and the current one is not used.
I have updated my key post by adding comments with the new key and URL to this post.
@ttutdxh has merged my pull request to make the change to cointoolkit.
@masterOfDisaster can you please update OP to change my quoted text from the key post?
edit to add: the transaction in OP will need to be changed although the current one is needed to transfer fund, I suppose.
Shouldn’t we create a new multisig address using your new pubkey and transfer all funds there?
Yes, I think that is the right procedure. Was it @ttutdxh who made the last multisig address? I can make one but Imaybe we should we let @ttutdxh do it ?
Anyone can do it. I might do it later, if nobody beats me to it.
Sorting the pubkeys in lexicographical order is very useful, because you don’t need to remember the sorting and just the “sorting algorithm”.
We should consider creating a 2-of-3 multisig address with very few funds on it, just to be more agile (which sometimes is necessary) than with 5-of-8, although I need to check whether that’s allowed.
I expect to find a motion that states otherwise.
2 groups of 2-of-3 would start to be “strictly” more agile than 5-of-8. Though I think 5-of-8 has been good enough for non-controversial transactions so far, and I’m not inclined to introduce further key management complications.
5-of-8 needs to be used for the vast majority of the funds due to security reasons.
But during recent times of enormous pressure - and although the FLOT was always way faster than 36 hours! - I wished for having more agile transactions.
That subset could refill T3 custodians etc. as well regularly, while being refilled from 5-of-8 from time to time.
It would share load.