While this is off topic, and I do wish we could have good discussion about the issue at hand, I would like to point out that @sigmike has suggested that NuShare holders disillusioned with what the majority of shareholders are doing could burn their NuShares on the main chain and create them in a new and separate chain. While I wouldn’t say I support this action, I will say it is reasonable, fair and would bring some benefits. I doubt it will be done. I don’t plan on doing anything to advance such an effort, but I am not opposed to it. Perhaps reserves could be split proportionately (if 20% of NuShares move to the new chain, the new chain gets 20% of reserves).
Remind me - why should NSR holders burn NSR to get on the fork?
Anybody can create a fork without any requirements.
But if one wants to introduce requirements, don’t you think using a whitelist to distribute shares would be preferred to burning NSR?
I understand that you refer to this version of forking, because it would help you get rid of opponents once they burned their shares.
Alas, I don’t see that happening.
there will be no single side burning of course, we can’t help you get more control in current chain ownership state and possibly on the new project chain too. i prefer mandatory vote for every shareholder that chooses fork not implicated in mhps analysis with address balances from the moment of loss of peg (block 888888 for a good round number). All we need is a new version that can only send shares to one of two burn adresses. A tally is counted after 100k blocks and shares are assigned on two new chains. NBT balances can be carried across to both chains. Remaining shares that didn’t take part in the voting process can be carried across later if we create multisig account with undecided shares. or something like that, i am just brain storming.
I am a substantial holder of nushares at just above 10.7 million and don’t have intentions of selling any off within the year. Nubits’ price has bounced back due to buyback. I think nushares will shortly follow suit.
How exactly do you imagine that to happen - the NSR rate to rise without substantial improvements?
Playing the greater fools game with people who come later and want NSR more desperately than you do?
Selling NSR to recover NBT to some degree will not be able to replace revenue.
Where shall that NSR rate rise come from?
Options I’m aware of are:
- market manipulation
- hopium (part of the greater fools game)
Did I miss something?
I’d feel rather bad if I were an NSR holder right now.
Without revenue there’s no way to evade complete bankruptcy.
Nu needs to make revenue and cut operational expenses.
Trading in the BTC/NBT pair at a tight spread is expensive; widening the spread would hardm volume, but could make revenue.
The NSR sale and NBT rate recovery are necessary, but they aren’t sufficient.
The market prices of NuBits and NuShares are the result of many interactions of unpredictable and unknown actors, so they cannot be forecast with certainty. However, I believe we will see the NuShare price rise as we reduce the rate of NuShare sales, which is a process that began yesterday. Let me explain why.
NuShares are no ordinary crypto asset. Aside from the pioneering model of governance they facilitate, they are designed to be the most volatile crypto asset. This is because NuBits were designed to be the most stable crypto asset. We take the price volatility the market wants to impose on NuBits and we divert it to NuShares. That’s our model. It has proven to work every time it has been tried. The default orchestrated by incompetent decentralized liquidity providers dramatically reduced demand for NuBits. When NuBit demand falls for any reason, the market is trying to lower the price of NuBits. Our model says we counteract that by reducing the NuBits in circulation and increasing the NuShares in circulation. When a very sharp reduction in NuBit demand occurs, a very sharp increase in the issuance of NuShares is necessary. So I created a sharp increase the issuance of NuShares. That’s the model protecting the value of NuShares. It isn’t a fun process for NuShare holders right now, but it is certainly the right way to preserve the long term value of this most volatile asset. We must at this difficult moment in time be careful to bear in mind how our model plays out through the entire cycle of decreased and increased demand. It is a test to see if we have the maturity and discipline to keep our attention on the big picture instead of being swayed by emotional impulses. Decentralized liquidity providers utterly failed this test. I am demonstrating the maturity and foresight that is needed at this moment.
A NuShare is a speculation on the potential to issue NuBits in the future. If we increase demand for NuBits by offering a quality product that is predictable and people have confidence in, everything else will fall into place. NuShare issuance will slow. The NuShare price should rise as a result. Then additional NuBits are issued to meet increased demand, and NuShare buybacks will eventually follow. Then the price of this most volatile asset moves upward for as long as NuBit demand increases.
Some say promoting NuBits is hopeless because of the poor choices of decentralized liquidity providers at the end of May and in June. However, all this is already priced in to the NuShare price (and the NuBit price). All we need to see improvement is to increase NuBit demand from its currently low level. Ironically, destroying so much NuBit demand as has been done in June makes it easier to create additional demand, because it is easy to make major improvements over the terrible way things were run in June.
If we follow the model carefully, the NuShare price will be true to its volatile character and swing back powerfully, because we have already firmly established a dramatic improvement in the NuBit price. Our biggest threat is lack of confidence that we will follow the model. We need to make it clear we will not let anyone who rejects our successful model to have any control in our system.
I wish to emphasize that I intend to gradually reduce the number of NuShares sold per week, which have exceeded a rate of 35 million NuShares per week the last couple weeks. I reserve the right to increase it, but I don’t intend to in dealing with the crisis that was under way when I became Chief of Liquidity Operations.
We are very tentatively stable at $0.85. We need to build a buy wall below that to increase the stability. We can create NuBit demand by stabilizing at $0.85 and increasing the soft peg price slowly… At this point, NuBits are a semi-stable asset that offers the promise of modest appreciation of a little more than 15%. That is something we can sell. Our goal should be to make the restoration of the peg be seen as nearly inevitable, so that the ride from $0.85 to $1.00 seems like an easy gain and as close to a sure thing as we can make it.
What is the motivation?
You are excluding ME!
I apologize, better would be to find exact block when peg broke. Do you have any other objections?)
I am just curious what the peg breaking has to do with the fork block. I guess I thought the objective was remove Jordan’s influence.
That’s my objective as well.
The current version of Nu is doomed.
I suppose it will have a dead-cat bounce, but no future, unless viable revenue streams are found.
As @Phoenix==@JordanLee dosn’t show interest in revenue, I wonder how this can change.
Nu feasts on itself as well as on present and future NSR and NBT buyers.
Nu has to feast on shareholders and customers, because there’s not enough left in Nu to feast on.
Only in a fork with a sound revenue scheme I sense a future for “Nu” and that part of the community that gets ignored by our new dictator and doesn’t want to be involved in this ponzi scheme.
It seems that way. The idea we can print NSR to pay the bills will just continue to be rejected by the market, while we print NSR to pay down debt. I fear that even the shareholders in a hypothetical future version of Nu without Jordan will still not understand that economic reality. NSR used to be voting rights and dividends, predictable in supply, and now it is a pump and hyperinflation cycle coin which is a feature according to the Chief. I doubt it will ever get back to the prices achieved with dividends and scarcity.
We blew through the 1 billion shares stated at ICO like a bat out of hell. (Would that be a Phoenix?) We need another milestone. I think 3,000,000,000 NSR will be in circulation within a year unless fundamental changes that are effecting the NSR market are made.
How many NSRs are outstanding (in circulation) right now?
Do you have an idea?
“moneysupply” : 1098930997.21499991
I believe there is another 150 million NSR about to be printed as well. I do not know the definite “in circulation” number, though. I could be mistaken, and that is already included in the moneysupply.
I wonder what a day at work looks like for the Nu Chief. What actions does he actually take beyond pointing the finger to blame and patting himself on the back for all imagined successes? Is he capable of admitting nobody has confidence in him? Doesn’t the current NSR price prove this?
I feel dumber every time I read these threads with @Phoenix. As if liquidity is the goal, even if you’re just dumping it down the toilet and helping it swirl.
This is still peanuts for the great work he is doing. I still hope @jooize and I will receive a performance bonus from shareholders once we have had a little more time to demonstrate our success in a decisive manner.
In this world we only do performance bonus when performance criteria have actually been met. The last time I looked NBT was not even close to $1. So maybe it is time to define ‘a little more time’?
Due to the recent marked increase in the US-NBT price and the recent drop in the NSR price, it is time to prioritize preserving NSR liquidity by preserving its price over restoring the US-NBT peg immediately.
I am considering a couple of immediate changes to liquidity operations policy to meet the new priority of NuShare price and liquidity preservation. Briefly, perhaps we should apply a minimum NSR price to all auction and large negotiated sales while making an exemption for just 2 million NSR per day that can be sold on the open market below the threshold just to maintain daily buy pressure on US-NBT. I am going to propose we establish a minimum NSR sale price of 70 satoshis. Essentially, until NSR is above 70 satoshis, we strictly limit NSR sales to 2 million per day, or 14 million per week. The large drop in the rate of NSR sales should provide a relatively scarcity that will permit a recovery of the NSR price.
I would like to cancel this week’s auction immediately. Last time I checked with @jooize, there were no bids yet.
Please comment and make suggestions for improvement. I expect to make changes to the policy soon.
Very tough times for NSR price but nice job on NBT.
I agree on your strategy to protect NSR price.
I have received one bid since.