@Mavo do you work for a competitor? It is hard to imagine another motive for your anti-social behavior.
Accounts of the death of Nu, like Bitcoin, have been frequent and consistently wrong.
First there was the death of Nu in February 2015, when we experienced exchange defaults by our 3 largest exchanges all within a week of one another. It was worse than this. Yet, NuBit adoption rose to new highs afterward and the community grew a great deal afterwards.
Then there was the death of Nu in June 2016, when trusted American and Chinese multisig signers refused to perform their primary duty of transferring funds to support the peg. After that death, Nu multiplied its NSR liquidity by a factor of 20 or more, acquired a greater reserve percentage than ever before, and made keeping the peg boring once again. We also grew the market cap more than 400% from its bottom.
Then there was the death of Nu in October 2016 when Augeas created a blockchain and many, if not most, forum participants chose to abandon Nu and support the as yet unsuccessful Augeas.
In December 2016, we had another death of Nu in the form of the Poloniex NuBit delisting.
All these events hurt Nu and set its progress back, but it continued its growth each time after the difficult events. I don’t see what is different about this situation.
Shareholders and others ought to aware of the impact the NSR price has on how we are able to improve and promote the network. In recent days, the team was having discussions about how we could use the increased market cap (which as of yesterday was a 400% gain over the low of January) to push forward marketing initiatives, spend a good deal of money to improve performance, stability and resource utilization of the Nu client, and offer new charts and real time financial statistics.
We had also decided and agreed we would propose to shareholders that most Nu funds be placed in multisig addresses as soon as the necessary process of forming contracts and getting shareholder approval was complete.
We were also quite close to beginning active development of B&C Exchange, due to the B&C development fund increasing in value.
So, all good things in terms of development and progress of the network require funding. When we lose NSR pricing, we lose that needed funding. All the initiatives we were planning will need to be re-examined in light of the NSR price drop in the last day.
With a market cap of 300,000, NSR is an incredible price considering we have an innovative, proven and time tested DAO protocol and liquidity engine that work very well. No one has been able to do what we have done. Our closest competitors, Tether and BitShares, are woefully unable to scale on account of poor economic design. However, the Nu network will scale beautifully in an economic sense, being far more efficient than those designs.
What Nu has been able to accomplish is exceptional in the field of private, stable currency. It is worthy of further cultivation. To suggest otherwise is to suggest there is no market for private, stable currency.
I intend to continue to build Nu until it is either so strong that it doesn’t need me, or until NSR completely loses liquidity at any price. Only that event can bring the end of the network, and there is no reason to think that is occurring.