Grant to provide 50,000 liquidity to Exco.in for 60 days

[cryptog]

Are you sure that the port used by Nu is 9091? In my case, after checking the ports used by the processes (i am on Win), I realized that Win runs Nu on port 7890.
Therefore I had to change nudport and rpcport to 7890.

[sigmike]

Are you sure that the port used by Nu is 9091?

The default protocol port is 7890. The default RPC port is 14001. But this can be changed, like muchogusto did by setting port and rpcport.

Note that this is the RPC port for the NuShares wallet. The NuBit RPC port is at rpcport+1.

[muchogusto]

I’ve worked with desrever, woolly sammoth and sigmike with PM both yesterday and today to resolve the issues I possess. They have been very helpful and there has been measurable progress, but there are still outstanding issues. We will get them resolved. Between now and their resolution, thank you for patience.

[Cybnate]

Moved this thread to Custodial Grant Passed Board.

[cryptog]

Any status update?
Nu needs your liquidity.

[Ben]

Any status update?Nu needs your liquidity.

Regardless of @muchogusto’s readiness, Excoin is not avaialble due to their on-going battle with DD4BC.

Exco.in (ExcoinExchange)

[tomjoad]

Once we are open-source, we will need a liquidity provider for Bittrex, a major US alt-coin exchange. Perhaps if Exco.in is still under attack, @Muchogusto would be open to supporting Bittrex instead?

[Ben]

Perhaps if Exco.in is still under attack[…]

For @Excoin’s sake, I really hope that this isn’t the case. I know that their team is working overtime to shut down all avenues of the on-going DDoS extortion attempt.

[muchogusto]

I have just started working with pennybreaker and woolly_sammoth to try
to get NuBot communicating with Nu software again. Hopefully the
difficulty will be resolved soon.

[excoin_arturo]

Please check the announcement on our site.

Our site has been compromised by a sophisticated botnet. We are currently investigating the source. Any assistance would be greatly appreciated. All of our findings:

https://gist.githubusercontent.com/anonymous/98846e3e3c1ed19ce9e1/raw/a3384ee8000dbe4fac1915813150a2cee95c1390/gistfile1.txt

[mhps]

kudos to exco.in for standing up to the criminals.

[cryptog]

The issue with your configuration saved probably your money.
You should now edit the title of your proposal and change the exchange name used.

[muchogusto]

I still want to provide 50,000 liquidity, even with the bad news at bter and excoin. My pay will be very much earned The primary step is getting NuBot running. Progress is being made as I discuss with the NuBot team. Then, a new decision will need to be made about which exchange or exchanges to support. Where is liquidity needed?

[cryptog]

Tks for your support.
Looking at https://nubits.com/exchanges, poloniex or bitcoin.co.in look appropriate.

[tomjoad]

Hi @muchogusto. Any update for us? Liquidity at Poloniex or Bitcoin.co.id would be useful at this point, and upcoming exchanges like Bittrex as well when the source code is revealed.

[muchogusto]

A few days ago @pennybreaker say he would make a Ubuntu image preconfigured that I could use.

I would be pleased to be first liquidity pool user of @KTm or @jmiller. If we can negotiate a split of my 10,000 pay and it looks like shareholders take the change in contract I can start today. We could split funds between Poloneix and Bitcoin.co.id with most going to Poloniex because they contain more trading. I would advance motion asking shareholder to approve these contract changes. If motion fails, I quit pool.

Any shareholders opposed to such changes? Changes are use pool, not solo and use Poloniex and Bitcoin.co.id, not Exco.in.

I contact @KTm and @jmiller to negotiate possibilities now.

[muchogusto]

A few days ago @pennybreaker say he would make a Ubuntu image preconfigured that I could use.

Sorry, he replied about that 4 days and I did not see until now.

[muchogusto]

Discussion: Creation of the first liquidity group pool by KTm or Jamie

The latest version of NuBot (0.1.5) forces a fixed spread as part of the multi-custodian feature.

Does it force even when “multiple-custodians”:false? This could prevent doing my contract:

I use spread of 0.2% if Exco.in no charge my account fees, and 0.4% if they do charge fees to me. If parametric order books are available, I will use a 0.1% spread and a curve that approximates the level of liquidity in the Bitstamp BTC/USD market.

[cryptog]

Changes are use pool, not solo and use Poloniex and Bitcoin.co.id, not Exco.in.

I am fine with the above but the pool has not been created yet.

[desrever]

Does it force even when “multiple-custodians”:false?

nope.