The sheer fact that we are getting sybil attacked by our own lead developer is pretty indicative that Nu is a sham.
Do we agree there should be selling/auctioning of NSR this week according to Standard and Core mandate? If yes, keep signing please.
I think whether to pay the contractors NBT or BTC depends on the contractors. Practically they are the same. Selling for nbt will cause those nbt eventually dumped on the buy wall. It’s hardly supporting nubits.
Finally, you admit Nu is a Ponzi.
I hope you can help us making Nu better. If necessary, the lead architect can be replaced by motion so that is ok that jordan uses several accounts. There must be other members using several accounts too.
And it is a good test. So far Nu is robust against Sybil attacks.
I agree. I will sign the tx.
Verified and signed, 2 of 3-5 .
Thought on minimum bid (if any) for next auction?
You have not found some entitis to provide you continuous money to burn, and you have not found decent revenue sources for Nu to live on its own.
Then you started the business in 2014.
Why would Nu suceed at all?
It’s the architect’s fault, Nu is a typical Ponzi.
Nu is working to find revenues models to find a new life.
Hope shareholders bring up decent profit model and backing economics theory, without them, we cannot survive in this tough real world.
Shutting down the primary business happened, because it couldn’t be sustained any longer (spare me with the few days the remaining BTC could’ve bought…).
The lack of capabilities in running a business became transparent, because Nu didn’t have (and still doesn’t have) transparent accounting. The first months or even quarters, which have been very expensive are hidden from the public.
This lack of capabilities caused the fall of Nu.
This still is the main problem.
Liquidity operations used to be centralized in the beginning.
They were made decentralized after exchange hacks.
The true cost of that was never evaluated.
I’ve found an interesting thread from earlier this year regarding what you seem to propose (a thread worth reading in my opinion):
How come this liquidity operator, who seems to have decent knowledge about liquidity operations got chased away?
Was it, because he dared facing the truth, before others did?
Was it inconvenient to see the dream of the Liquidity Engine questioned?
You realize why I called it Ponzi Engine?
I will continue to do so, until a sustainable way of operating it was found.
Good idea, but don’t give the control to the wrong sock puppets. There’s been enough damage relying on the wrong people.
Reserve can’t replace revenue.
The bigger the reserve, the bigger the tank.
This tank still needs refill, if you don’t want to see it run empty.
That refill needs to come from revenue and not only from new money being put into Nu, because that makes it a ponzi scheme and the Liquidity Engine a Ponzi Engine.
There’s no reporting from the first quarters of Nu’s existence (and some months before the official release). They’ve been quite important ones. A lot of money was paid for development and liquidity back then
I think we should reduce debt first at least until a decent proposal to establish a peg is voted in.
Having BTC assets does no harm.
They can be used to fund development and to reduce debt (buy NBT at Poloniex’ BTC/NBT pair).
There’s volatility risk with holding BTC.
The volatility risk of NBT is at the moment even higher, especially if you look at the thin order books and little volume.
Use BTC assets to take advantage of that. Buy NBT cheap, sell them high (or don’t sell them at all).
That’s why we shouldn’t especially right now after the sudden spike in value.
We can buy debts cheaply now. It doesn’t make sense to me to keep or buy BTC to do so.
Let auction participants directly buy the NBT cheap of the market. If you allow BTC, the debts won’t be cleared and BTC speculators would just come in without helping clearing the debts exposing Nu to volatility.
There’s over 25 BTC at 3HikFkS2Zinab1TJq7dqp6wSPyLu7i7bhe.
Placing low buy walls or even buying NBT from the market makes sense.
If the NBT/USD rate stays that low and the BTC/USD rate that high, you can buy tens of thousands of NBT (order of magnitude 50,000 to 80,000) with the 25 BTC.
You just need to buy slow enough to not move the market a lot. With a daily trading volume of up to thousands of USD at Poloniex this can’t be done in a very short time, but won’t take ages either.
We do that with the NSR auctions. We need to keep the sparse BTC to support basic infra operations and any cost to restart the business, e.g. developments on the client or gateways to name a few from my draft proposal.
Not keen to extent buyback operations with existing BTC before a good plan is in place. Agree you could argue for the other way around, but I suppose I’m taking a more conservative approach. A lot of NBT will be freed from the parking in the next few weeks, so the price might go down even further.
Diversification might be a good way for this as well:
keep a part of the BTC for development
use a part of the BTC for buying NBT (no aggressive buybacks of course)
Most of the parking was done by B&C. These NBT shouldn’t hit the market. But as we don’t know at which addresses the NBT are, you can’t track that…
As soon as Nu starts to create a reliable business plan, the opposite will happen.
Buying NBT at a BTC/NBT rate of 0.0004 buys you 2,500 NBT per BTC.
I doubt you will get significantly more NBT per BTC in the future. But of course I can’t know that.
Spending some BTC for that wouldn’t be the worst way to reduce the effects from BTC volatility while reducing debts at the same time.
It’s hitting two birds with one stone.
The NSR sale need to be continued to reduce debt (payment in NBT) or to increase your BTC assets (payment in BTC).
You should neither focus on doing only the one nor only the other. Do a mix of both.
I also think the more we buy back our debts, the more value we ll get out of nsrs.
So buying back nbts now gradually while at the same time finding ways to generate revenues is probably the best we can do.
Let us use a part of our btc reserve for nbt buy backs in combination of nsr sales/auction.
Three days ago it appeared there was consensus to hold an additional auction this week. However, there are no blockchain transactions moving shareholder NSR for this. I was expecting a thread about it like last week. NSR FLOT, was is the status of this week’s auction that is mandated by NuLaw?
We just need one additional signer.
What about @masterOfDisaster ?