Is it fair to say the B&C Exchange project is officially dead?

[matthewd]

NBT->NSR->NBT merry-go-round

I thought this was how Nu was supposed to operate, a symbiotic relationship:
nubit demand strong = reduce nushare supply (buy backs)
nubit demand weak = increase nushare supply (buy nubits)

[Sabreiib]

@sigmike, can we harness the lightning network to build a high performance B&C platform?

[Sabreiib]

The entire balance has always been held at the highly published custodial grant address SSajkovCPXwdw46nyJ7vpTDkwtRZJzyY2z. Whenever funds are moved from that address, they are being sold. That is a well established pattern. Everything is transparent and proven, to the high standard only possible on blockchains.

However, market actions like this should not be publicized in advance because that puts shareholders at a trading disadvantage. The sale you are referring to was performed in the last 24 hours.

As per the NBT->NSR motion, you don’t have the right to tansfer B&C’s NSR back to NBT, unless you pass another motion of free transfer between them two.

And why you sell NSR at so low price which is almost same as they transafered from NBT?

[GreatScott]

I thought this was how Nu was supposed to operate, a symbiotic relationship:
nubit demand strong = reduce nushare supply (buy backs)
nubit demand weak = increase nushare supply (buy nubits)

I am talking about the B&C development funds which were originally held in US-NBT. @Phoenix proposed we burn all B&C US-NBT for newly created NSR and that motion passed. Soon thereafter he started selling the NSR on the market and exchanged them back into US-NBT without proposing a motion or involving shareholders in the decision at all. This has nothing to do with the current state of NBT demand. It is a separate company and set of shareholders.

[GreatScott]

And why you sell NSR at so low price which is almost same as they transafered from NBT?

I suspect the rationale for this move was purely so he can keep patting himself on the back for ‘saving Nu’. At this moment there is only 17,000 US-NBT buy side support holding the peg, which is not even enough support for B&C contractors to cash out the 37,704 US-NBT held in the B&C development fund. If @Phoenix didn’t use this sleight of hand, the peg would have been lost and he wouldn’t have such an easy time asking for the performance bonus he is chomping at the bit for.

I am sure shareholders not named @Phoenix will somehow manage to get the blame for this, because of his ego and inability to admit to any mistakes.

[ConfusedObserver]

At this moment there is only 17,000 US-NBT buy side support holding the peg, which is not even enough support for B&C contractors to cash out the 37,704 US-NBT held in the B&C development fund.

Yet there’s nobody interested in getting to the bottom of this:

Backbone Reserve Operations (tier 6)

How many assets on buy side (BTC) does Nu have?
How much of the buy side at Poloniex is from Nu?
How much BTC does Nu need to exchange with Nulagoon to allow Nulagoon pay customers their BTC out?

All falls on deaf ears.
@Phoenix needs to keep some things uncertain, because it makes it easier for him to run his game.

With proper accounting, I couldn’t be denounced as just being negative so easy.
With proper accounting (including all numbers, addresses and a transaction log) it would stand out what kind of game @Phoenix plays.

But @Phoenix the savior doesn’t want that transparency.
It’s just strange that the shareholders don’t want it either…

[sigmike]

@sigmike, can we harness the lightning network to build a high performance B&C platform?

Not the lightning network itself, but probably some of its concepts.