Yes, I meant with the intention of becoming a custodian. However, I agree with your later points about the pairing being not as important as others currently.
I think the criteria for allowing a pair to become official are
- Will there be a risk of significant loss f fund (if the custodian candidate cares)
- if the answer to previous question is yes, is the market on the pair is liquid? If it is not, compared with the liquidity proposed to be provided, then there is risk.
- If the custodian candidate asks for a custodian fee, is the liquidity to be provided worth it?
I’m not worried about taking a loss, I’m more interested in learning about the process, participating in the community and bringing more interest to the pair so it can eventually sustain without assisted liquidity.
I wouldn’t need a fee.
4 Likes
Then I will vote for your motion. Spread the love (of nubits).
I have already started providing liquidity for NBT/BLK.
It would be helpful to have more NuBits on the exchange to allow people to enter the market.
Having a BTC pair denominated in NuBits is a big improvement over denominating it in Bitcoin. I applaud your work. It makes sense to use it as a replacement for USD. I am also glad to see other NBT pairs. Right now it is difficult to offer properly priced NBT liquidity on coins with low liquidity such as Blackcoin. However, I have presented a plan to change that here:
It will take us a number of months to implement the plan, but once we do I believe that not only can we replace USD on exchanges, but BTC as well, by offering better liquidity than is currently available on USD and BTC pairs. Please take a look at this liquidity provision plan and vote for it if you feel it is appropriate. I’m quite convinced it is both important and the right way to promote NuBits right now. I will explain in the coming days that it is not so difficult to implement as some have suggested. Currently only about 40% of votes are in favour of the motion.
3 Likes
More than the 20k already provided on the NBT/BTC pair?
Well currently the liquidity is provided on the NBT sell side. So users with Nubits can easily and confidently liquidate their NBT for BTC at 1 USD each. However we only have 117 NBT on the site so people interested in trying out Nubits by buying some are out of luck.
I just added 200 NuBits of personal funds on the sell side. I also asked other custodians and Jordan if there is some NBT liquidity available to help.
1 Like
Thank you, we really appreciate it. I will let people in the BLK IRC channels know there is now some available.
It looks like that has already been bought up. If anyone is interested in providing additional NuBit liquidity we could use it.
That was fast.
I think I will ask for a custodian grant to satisfy the nubits desire on Exco.in. Might take a while but I think it’s time.
1 Like
We added NBT volume to the sidebar and the NBT/NSR market today.
1 Like
There are more NBT on sale now
This is another case that demonstrates the need for someone to take on the role of balancing on a regular basis. @cryptog has expressed some interest in playing this role. However, it only works neatly when balancing like pairs. In that case, NuBits can be held when not actively balancing. When the need for balancing is identified, they are traded for BTC at one exchange, the BTC is transferred tot he other exchange where it is used to buy NuBits.
The complication here is that there is no other Blackcoin pair to use to balance with. A sensible alternative would be to take the Blackcoin, sell it for BTC, and use the BTC to buy NuBits, which can then be placed back on the Blackcoin/NuBits. Until order book mirroring is implemented, this activity is likely to result in small losses for the LPC.
1 Like
I fully support exco.in NBT centric trading. I will bring more liquidity to the BLK/NBT pairing.
1 Like
BLK liquidity? in which form? Do you want start using a bot?
We went ahead and opened the NBT/PPC market today. We will be making some more sidebar modifications, and move NBT to the top. We believe these markets have a lot of potential so we want to put more emphasis on them.
7 Likes
@desrever Logically arbitrage should work with no issue as long as the walls are significant enough. But I always thought that the peg could be destroyed by a very wealthy trader or entity that could put a huge sell wall at a significant discount but economically it would be committing suicide, a bit like attacking peercoin if a rogue trader has a significant stake. I guess the current pegging system is not 100% attack-proof but is realistically good enough.
@jordanlee It is true that I am still considering contributing to that balancing but I first need to close this. 