New currencies development proposal


#22

The most straightforward way to get this started is probably to make a custodian grant of the first payment directly to me.

According to this discussion the only selected option is allowing future currencies. So the first payment should be (10300 + 1200) * 30% = 3450 NBT. The grant address is BPGrgTQN1cyVfhBcCS8KESeJP37zEYxnGj.


#23

I love it. Quick and simple. To be clear, here is the custodial grant request:

Custodial Grant Amount: 3450
Custodial Grant Address: BPGrgTQN1cyVfhBcCS8KESeJP37zEYxnGj

I support this custodial grant request by sigmike. Let’s quickly vote it into existence so he can get started with development.


#24

Quick and simple.
No need to discuss how the assets from sold new currency tokens will be kept stable related to the pegged fiat currencies.
No need/time to think about revenue to make Nu sustainable when money is needed for bailing out NBT holders.
See? This is why I call Nu ponzi scheme and you as chief of liquidity operations the head of it :wink:

Out of curiosity: how will the new tokens be brought to market?
Have negotiations with exchanges already started?
Once again low spread BTC pairs?
What will be done with the proceeds after NBT buy side has been bolstered with fresh BTC?
Another round of NSR buybacks?

I’m almost tempted to gather a bunch of money for buying NSR now, a big load of new currency tokens later, sell the NSR in the NSR buyback, dump the new curremcy tokens, get my BTC back and have made a gain on the greater fools that come later.
Wait a second - that already happened!
Will it happen again?

…maybe I should let you, @Phoenix, do it. You already have so much NSR under control (and maybe some experience with what I proposed). It would be quite risky to get a stake in a business where all is decided by the chief of ponzi operations.
How easy could the reserve ratio be changed to suit the needs of the people playing games with NSR and other equity.

It will only be a matter of time until Nu is unveiled as ponzi scheme way outside this forum.
You still have the chance to change that.
Is that part of your plan?
Change it, introduce revenue after you have stashed enough cheap NSR?

I might sound negative (the truth sometimes is hard), but you, @Phoenix, are a dangerous scammer.

@sigmike, just to be clear: I don’t put any blame on you. You are just proposing to provide a tool. It’s @Phoenix’ decision what he does with it - use it for the good or for the bad.
I don’t hold manufacturers of knives responsible if somebody kills with them instead of using them for chopping vegetables.


#25

Jordan Lee is acting now exactly as John Connor (VanillaCoin), dallyshalla (SEC) and James Lee (Komodo / BitcoinDark). For them, the game is to manipulate their own coin, having insider knowledge, and profit on it. Ran out of money? No problem, just create a new ICO. Rinse and repeat. We have entered a new era of scams/ponzis — ICOs. Satoshi Nakamoto never made any ICO to develop Bitcoin. He is the true hero. JL and alike are the filth of the earth. Normally no one would ever trust their money into the hands of an anonymous developer but because Satoshi was anon it somehow falsely justifies it. I hope people learn fast so the named filth would have to find a honest job.


#26

As long as it’s easier to do the inside jobs and accuse critics of being trolls (not directly, rather with help of other aliases) this will continue.
It’s one of the reasons I continue writing posts here, although I consider Nu beyond saving: to warn those who want to know…

Just imagine how easy @Phoenix could fill @JordanLee’s shoes - no reason to give you a pause, no?


#27

But I do when he knows that with this knife someone will be killed.


#28

So you’re going to hold @sigmike responsible if @Phoenix uses the new currencies to scam more people?


#29

Yes, of course. Phoenix (JordanLee) is challenging the morality of Nu developers and managed to corrupt many of them. Their guilt about what happened is not less than his. They first fled when they realized what was going to happen and made no attempt to oppose JordanLee’s decisions and/or propose a solution to turn the project into something other than a Ponzi.


#30

@Mark, @ConfusedObserver and @hyena I am embarrassed for you. These kind of vague, baseless and malicious accusations are an unwelcome distraction from the work we are trying to accomplish here. It is irresponsible. There is a reason I have more than 10 times as much reputation as @Mark. Comments like this will certainly bring down Mark’s already poor reputation. Do you not see that?

Clowns.


#31

Clown is your father’s son.
I’m not worried about my reputation, but you look worried about yours.

Coward.


#32

Thank you for sharing your feelings.
Would you mind dealing with the facts as well or will you complain about having hurt feelings?

Why don’t you require a sale offset when selling NBT? That’s a quite low hanging fruit and you ignore it. Do you need to trade volume to let your ponzi scheme shine?

Why don’t you focus on getting NBT/USD or NBT/USDT pairs at exchanges?

Why don’t you push the development of fiat gateways?

You need to get rid of the asset BTC in Nu’s books (I know, there’s no accounting…); NBT/USD pairs and fiat gateways help, although they create new challenges.
And for heaven’s sake get revenue (spread trading!) and stop this ponzi scheme.

That’s a good summary of your job!

If nobody else does it, I personally will warn anybody I can reach on reddit, bitcointalk, bitsharestalk, exchange trollboxes and all places I can think of.
You won’t have an easy time continuing this ponzi scheme. Future shareholders and customers will be warned.
Improve Nu or kill it. Your choice, chief.

But let me guess: you rather jump the gun on the last paragraph than deal with proposals for substantial improvements.


#33

@Phoenix ( @JordanLee )
you should have just shut up about that and not commented. Why did you change your name? This is so childish and a pathetic attempt to somehow start form a new page. Not only you remain anonymous anyway but you can’t even stick with one pseudonym. If we the accusers are such clowns then why do you even bother to answer? I have seen this many times and it seems to be some sort of typical human psychology scenario that makes the rogue devs always attack in self defence.

I wasted 40 BTC in this project when BTC was about 250$. If I never invested in this failed startup those 40 BTC would have more than doubled their value by now. If you want to call me names call me a fool because that I admit I am for giving any money to you. A clown on the other hand belongs to a bit different context.


#34

I’m sorry for your loss, but fortunately it’s only money.
This startup did not simply fail. It was abused to transfer money by those who pulled strings behind the scenes and in public.

The NSR buybacks are the most popular example for that.
But Nulagoon is another example. Don’t you wonder why there were practically no complaints when Nulagoon was shut down for months?
Don’t you find it likely that Nulagoon was just another vehicle to move money from Nu to [insert appropriate expression here].

All that money wasted in buybacks and the expensive liquidity provision was only wasted, because Nu was changed from dealing with USD to dealing with BTC.
I did my homework including a read of the white paper.
Have a look yourself and start here:
https://www.nubits.com/about/white-paper#custodians

Whose decision was that? Where’s that motion?

I wonder whether Nu has been designed from the start to scam people…


#35

I felt the same way when I saw all of my prescient predictions on how the ‘share buy back’ would play out got shrugged off as accusatory in nature. @Phoenix is the only person who still thinks it is a good idea, and his alternate account (@JordanLee) didn’t even bother commenting on my motion.


#36

Another attempt to hijack a proactive thread to reinforce @ConfusedObserver’s decision to sell.


#37

You’re having visions of me selling NSR, but fail to open your eyes and see what’s going on around you.
Just another unsubstantial post by @serfer to reinforce his belief in the ponzi scheme Nu is at the moment.

@Phoenix, wouldn’t you like to make some comments here?


#38

This is happening quite a bit. I have opened a discussion with @Ben, the forum owner, to see what we can do to fix the problem.

And now, back to the topic at hand:

This proposal has 57% support by block count, but only 47% by share share days. It is a good show of support given the short time ago the grant request was made. However, let’s make sure this passes as soon as possible so he can get started.

Hopefully @sigmike can remove the share days requirement from the protocol fairly soon, as has been requested by shareholders.


#39

No, because everything you have mentioned is off-topic. This is the thread for discussing @sigmike’s proposal to develop a version of our client that supports multiple currencies.


#40

As you say, chief of ponzi operations.
The economical attributes of Nu’s products play no role when discussing about new currencies.
Wait, really?

This discussion is about new currency tokens, that will be sold, but there’s no way to buy them back unless greater fools come later and give you the money you need.
The discussion about revenue is from a business ethical point of view perfectly right here.
The new currencies are just the hunt for new greater fools that bail out NBT owners.

It’s about time to give up on Nu and “advertise” Nu for what it is outside this forum.
Thank you for not doing anything that would make it hard for me to hold the position that Nu is nothing short of a ponzi scheme run by you, @Phoenix.
This finding is based on what you do and what you don’t do.

@Phoenix/@JordanLee, you’re a manipulator, a liar and a scammer.
You understand neither business nor ethics.


#42

Talk about unsubstantial… Calling Nu a Ponzi scheme? Really?? Is that the best FUD you’ve got? No ones ever said that about any coin or currency ever… (sarcasm)