I agree the firing post was inflammatory, but not unwarranted. I suggest everyone read the motion again after gaining better understanding over the last months.
Calmly? The price couldn’t have stayed there long without liquidity being offered from Nu (or speculators).
6.9 BTC was gained from NuShare sales. Those were put at 90% offset ($0.10, 180% spread). While that is more than I gave credit for, it didn’t support the peg to any meaningful degree.
Whether the NuShare price could have fallen differently is debatable. It would with little doubt have crashed, but taking these consistent actions (auctions and sales) to support our product seems to me like it would have been much better to do in preparation of running out of Tier 4 reserves (assuming we had, but in any case effectively did after NuBit holders put up a sell wall larger than our reserve), or at least immediately when that happened.
After all this time, there’s still no alternative idea brewing that I’m aware of. Where would the NuShare price be today if we hadn’t done anything? Higher than today? In which case to what benefit?
Looking at how much the auctions and exchange sales have generated for Nu at low NuShare prices, imagine the proceeds having conducted them before a crisis.
Isn’t that what our business is essentially, and what we’re currently doing?
It first felt to me as though releasing a new product in the state we’re currently in would be dishonest, but considering the economics and 100% reserve, I don’t think it is. Read my post in that thread. If you see a flaw, post it there.
The new product may not give us revenue directly to support US NuBits, but a successfully working CN‑NBT may raise demand for NuShares and also the confidence of US NuBit holders.
