Park Rate Voting

[MaVo]

Let’s see what you get for 500 NBT in one year and what 2,941 XPEC are worth

LOL

[Cybnate]

Really? Didn’t this project start with more or less full reserve, were each NBT was backed by the equivalent of BTC?

Stand corrected. Highest reserves since we paid dividends indeed.

[excell]

LOL Yes I believe nothing is created out of thin air, but wait, don’t most coins have thin air value? We supposedly have some type of reserve right? This still sounds safer that sh*t coins in my opinion, yes it is religious I am highly religious in investing that is why I always win (not )

[ConfusedObserver]

don’t most coins have thin air value

Most coins don’t operate in the costly business of providing a hedge for BTC.
As Nu has no re-insurance for BTC volatility and successful hedging, it can be expected that trading with a close spread leads to a loss.
A spread would need to be a function of trading volume and volatility to have a chance to make enough money to pay for the costs like costs from hedging, exchange default, opportunity costs.

Other coins just have a blockchain running, which provides incentive for processing transactions. The rewards for processing the tx are more or less created from thin air. But they follow protocol and you can make calculations about the ROI for providing efforts.

This still sounds safer that sh*t coins in my opinion,

Be careful. You can game the market of NSR.

• Buy NSR.
• Buy NBT.
  If the reserve threshold is 50%, buy at least as much NBT as are currently in circulation. Adjust the amount of NBT according to the reserve ratio, if it’s not 50%.
• Trigger NSR buybacks.
• Sell NSR.
• Dump all NBT, empty the reserve and trigger an NSR sale.
• Rinse and repeat.

The problem here is: this doesn’t follow a reliable protocol.
The reserve ratio etc. can be adjusted at the whim of the (Vice) Chief of Liquidity Operation.
If you have an appetite for risk, you may try
It’s less risky if you can take shortcuts.

For example if you can skip the “buy NSR” part, because you received a load of NSR as “angel investor”, although you might never have had to pay a single Dollar for them.
Ah, of course all I say is tinfoil hatter’s craziness. Don’t take it serious
But can you tell me the total amount of Nu’s dev fund? Did the seed investors really pay for the NSR they received? Or was that a farce to provide the base for a double-tracked project, one in which the architect couldn’t lose, but only win this way or another way?
It’s hard to tell, because little information about that is publicly available.

While I need to make an effort to think of such crazy stories it would be little effort to debunk all that, if only there was a public and complete accounting of this most transparent corporations that has ever been created.

[DavidMc0]

Be careful. You can game the market of NSR.

Buy NSR.
Buy NBT.
If the reserve threshold is 50%, buy at least as much NBT as are currently in circulation. Adjust the amount of NBT according to the reserve ratio, if it’s not 50%.
Trigger NSR buybacks.
Sell NSR.
Dump all NBT, empty the reserve and trigger an NSR sale.
Rinse and repeat.

This doesn’t work if others happen to buy NBT at the same time, or the reserve ratio is increased in response to rapid NBT sales.

Given this, the cost of trying it is very high & success a long way from guaranteed, so success would be very difficult and rinsing & repeating even more so.

[ConfusedObserver]

This doesn’t work if others happen to buy NBT at the same time, or the reserve ratio is increased in response to rapid NBT sales.

Right, but look at how stable the amount of NBT in circulation is unless an NSR buyback shall be triggered:

Source: http://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/nubits/ with charts set to 3m

Are you able to ignore how this (post from May 13)

Supply, Reserves, and Equilibrium

and if the trend continues, we will soon be performing NSR buybacks, which will start as soon as the deviation becomes positive.

was a direct consequence of the massive sale of NBT on May 4?

Given this, the cost of trying it is very high & success a long way from guaranteed

The real risk is that you don’t know what happens at Nu with regard to reserve ratio.
That’s why only people who are in control and knowledge can pull off these kinds of attacks:

Supply, Reserves, and Equilibrium

Basic frontrun: Requires Nu to be at or above equilibrium. 1. Buy y NSR 2. Buy x NBT 3. Wait for Nu to equilibrate, pumping NSR by $0.5x 4. Sell y NSR 5. Sell x NBT This attack results in Nu selling more NSR than it buys due to the frontrun, giving the attacker the difference. This is an extremely low difficulty attack, as it can be done with any amount of liquidity. All it requires is Nu to be at equilibrium or in a buyback phase. Collapsing NBT: Assume there are x circulating NBT. 1. …

Both happened before. More than once. You really don’t want to acknowledge the possibility and rather say

This doesn’t work if

while I say “This works if…” and even tell how.

[DavidMc0]

You really don’t want to acknowledge the possibility and rather say

DavidMc0:
This doesn’t work if

while I say “This works if…”

I do acknowledge the possibility, as I have a number of times recently in my calling for reserve ratios to be increased and pointing out this possible attack myself.

In this reply I was pointing out why it’s not as easy to game the system as your post made it appear.

That’s not to say it’s impossible. I think an attempt may have been in progress prior to the discussion about raising reserve ratios, and think we’re still in prime high-risk territory due to the recent dump in NSR following poloniex delisting and low NBT circulation.

So I agree that this is a valid attack vector, and we’re in a very high risk situation regarding it right now. But it is possible to reduce the risk and make the risk not likely to be worthwhile to an attacker.

[ConfusedObserver]

I do acknowledge the possibility, as I have a number of times recently in my calling for reserve ratios to be increased and pointing out this possible attack myself.

I beg your pardon for having ignored that.

So I agree that this is a valid attack vector

It is and Nu would be well advised to keep the reserve rate as close to 100% as possible, while evading risks of holding reserve as good as possible.
If Nu manages to make a profit if these objectives have been achieved, then Nu has a future. If not, then game over.

[DavidMc0]

It is and Nu would be well advised to keep the reserve rate as close to 100% as possible, while evading risks of holding reserve as good as possible.

Agreed. Even 70-80% reserves would make an attack a fair bit more expensive than 50%.

If Nu manages to make a profit if these objectives have been achieved, then Nu has a future. If not, then game over.

Again, agreed. Revenue models must be developed if Nu has a bright future.

[ConfusedObserver]

Even 70-80% reserves would make an attack a fair bit more expensive than 50%

Of course!
If you have 50% reserve an attacker needs to inflate the NBT supply by factor 2 with his buys (buying the amount of NBT in circulation) to be in control of depleting the reserve after the reserve has been wasted on NSR buybacks until it reached 50% again.

At 80% reserve the attacker needs to inflate the NBT supply by factor 5 (buying four times the amount of NBT in circulation).
Way more risky. Way more costly. Basic math. Nu lacks it way too often.

Low reserve ratios are an invitation to attack, especially if the total amount of NBT in circulation is low.

[jooize]

That being said we really need some updates to the website, why is poloniex still on there? Why are some videos broken? Investors will only think that the project has been abandoned if they visit the main site which is not at all what we want.

That’s one of my top priorities, but just as has been all year other more important tasks appear. We have a developer working with us on the website now.

We didn’t had easy access to do updates to the website before

We did have access. I’ve made a few minor changes.

[jooize]

Right, but look at how stable the amount of NBT in circulation is unless an NSR buyback shall be triggered:

You are now directly spreading misinformation. For NuShare buybacks the NuBits in circulation has always been determined independently of what’s displayed at CoinMarketCap. I have contacted them a few times to update their data.

was a direct consequence of the massive sale of NBT on May 4?

You don’t know what you’re talking about.

That rise reflects them simply updating their supply figure. Circulating US NuBits was 133,855 US-NBT on January 27 and have not dipped below that in any supply count since. The 24h volume on May 4 was only $1,050.

Administrators @Cybnate and @woolly_sammoth: Where will the line be drawn?

[DavidMc0]

You don’t know what you’re talking about.

That rise reflects them simply updating their supply figure. Circulating US NuBits was 133,855 US-NBT on January 27 and have not dipped below that in any supply count since. The 24h volume on May 4 was only $1,050.

I know there’s a lot to do, but has any progress been made with any kind of live view of the amount of NBT in circulation, or a historical chart? I seem to remember there was talk of this being considered / worked on, but wanted to ask in case it’s already available.

[jooize]

Yes. @woolly_sammoth will be able to give a more detailed report.

[MaVo]

Administrators @Cybnate and @woolly_sammoth: Where will the line be drawn?

Are you nuts you idiot? You are the Vice Chief of Ponzi Operations. It is your job to explain what’s going on. Do you think that is how being the boss works? Call for censorship whenever you think it’s time? Even worse, it demonstrates how dumb you are. Let’s assume you disproved @ConfusedObserver’claims, wouldn’t you want that stuff to be public? My god…@cybnate and @woolly_sammoth, I think @ConfusedObserver really crossed the line by expressing his personal opinion. Could you please ban @ConfusedObserver? I know he didn’t use bad words like I do, but he is trying to work against @jooize’s economic incentives and that is indictable in Nu world. Ban him!

[ConfusedObserver]

You don’t know what you’re talking about.

Then I let mostly others talk.
Some quotes are not sorted chronologically to enhance readability. I think it’s just one by @DavidMc0, which I put in between .

Backbone Reserve Operations (tier 6)

A large number of US NuBits entered and exited circulation this week. We set higher walls to accommodate the demand.

Backbone Reserve Operations (tier 6)

Indicators of an attack being attempted include rapid purchsse of NBT once buybacks start in an attempt to pump NSR price before dumping. This may be happening, and the best defense is to raise the reserve ratio.

Backbone Reserve Operations (tier 6)

If the aim was to manipulate price, we should expect significant NBT purchases following equilibrium being met.

In the short time since equilibrium has been met, the circulating supply of NBT has increased by 70% (from 180k to 305k in 1 week)

Backbone Reserve Operations (tier 6)

A higher reserve rate or more diverse reserve funds is indeed the best response to these risks imo.

Backbone Reserve Operations (tier 6)

Why is there no such motion?
What are reasons not to increase the reserve ratio?
Who benefits from not increasing the reserve ratio?

Backbone Reserve Operations (tier 6)

Who benefits from not increasing the reserve ratio?

NSR holders who want to sell in the short term, including potential attackers are probably the only ones to gain from not increasing the reserve ratio.

Backbone Reserve Operations (tier 6)

I will repeat what I have said before: the only thing I want to discuss with @ConfusedObserver is the return of the 13 BTC he stole from NuShare holders.

Phoenix will no longer be holding keys to shareholder funds

The theft, which has taken place over a period of time of about the last week, has resulted in a temporary cratering of the NSR price. Stolen funds appear to have been sold at Alcurex at a rapid rate. It appears most have already been sold.

Administrators @Cybnate and @woolly_sammoth: Where will the line be drawn?

[jooize]

Are you nuts you idiot? You are the Vice Chief of Ponzi Operations. It is your job to explain what’s going on.

You two don’t have that card to play.

You two have for a long time been beelining any chance to spread your view of Nu being a scam.

Your posts are often summarized by (while not all applying to both of you):

• “Phoenix is majority shareholder at least counting voting or maybe even circulating NuShares.”
• “A majority-owned project is failed.”
• “Phoenix obviously stole the ‘lost’ NuShares.”
• “Phoenix, jooize, and everyone working for Nu are corrupt scammers because …!”
• “The Nu liquidity model sucks.”
• “Why aren’t you answering all of our questions after I didn’t research properly, made ignorant accusations, and rarely acknowledge being wrong or strengthen my statement but move on to the next circumstance that should be criticized for the interests of those who don’t have the same understanding as I do?”
• “I don’t care about Nu.”
• “I know how to make Nu profitable. I’ve told you how. It’s by not even trying to do what you’re attempting. Why aren’t you implementing my idea instead of what you believe in?”
• “Until you implement my ideas or other ideas this project is a scam.”
• “You will not succeed.”
• “What jooize calls for is censorship because what we post is what we think is relevant.”

This forum has seen respectable critics over the years. You are not, and do not appear wanting to be.

The forum prides itself on allowing dissent, which I absolutely agree with. However! In any fair neutral discussion group there must be a point at which exclusions are made. Otherwise it’s possible to shift exposure of views to any degree.

Fair moderation takes time, energy, and understanding of the topic. When a participant continually breaches the difficult to define reasonable amount of discussion space or the discussion conduct code, moderators must act to protect the ability for the rest of the participants to discourse according to what they believe and observers to discern every position.

I don’t expect opposition on those points.

That’s for a neutral discussion group. Any entity (project, company, individual, …) with their own discussion group can further limit and specify terms for what they allow and act on if the owners accept the risks to credibility.

Moderators can allow repeatedly offending participants to stay, and only remove posts after they’ve been reported and analyzed. I suggest keeping letting them have an impact is not philosophically fair even in a neutral discussion group.

Attention, forum administrators

These people say “there’s a problem”. They keep perpetuating “we have a problem”. What is the problem?

[…]

What is it? What is the narrative of @Phoenix’ reign of terror?

[MaVo]

Listen you little clown, go and provide an explanation why you bought Nushares at a too high price a week ago. You said there is no valid excuse. Did you reimburse shareholders? I can’t prove you bought your own Nushares, but seriously, what the heck did you do when your job is to compare two exchanges and buy Nushares wherever they are cheaper. If you fail at doing that, what do you want me or us to believe? What the heck is it that I should think about you? That you are dumb? That you are a scammer? Or what is it? Two exchanges and you bought Nushares at 16 satoshis while they were available for 10 satoshis at the other exchange. Should we believe that you simply overlooked the fact that Nushares could be bought at 10 sats? @jooize you are stealing money or wasting shareholder money, whatever it is, you suck.

[MaVo]

Your position isn’t “Vice Chief of Liquidity Operations”. It should be called “Vice Thief of Arbitrage Operations”, because that is what you are doing everyday, since there is no single person or board that controls your actions. You are filling your pockets on a frequent basis, asshole. And shareholders who can’t have a look behind the scenes but believe in the project simply swallow that pill, and that makes me angry, really angry.

[MaVo]

my god, I can’t calm down now because you are the ignorant person here, not me. What happens if you present us a story that 30 BTC were stolen from an address that you control? What then? Nobody is going to invest into this project as long as the control structure is as it is. Don’t you understand that? I believe that the idea Nu is pursuing is great. The way Nu tries to accomplish that is extremely disappointing. It MUST be ensured that funds can’t be stolen or lost. You are always saying that “failure is human” and at the same time you attest @Phoenix to be able to pull off an incredibly difficult project. Yes, failure is human. Be transparent right from the start, share the information you have, stop hiding because hiding is bullshit if you are honest. Look at all the projects growing to the moon right now. Do you think any of the developers is afraid to end up in jail? This is so ridiculous. There are reasons for @Phoenix / @JordanLee to hide. It is disappointing that B&CExchange’s Nushares are now gone. And shareholders simply have to swallow that pill. “I apologize for losing your funds”. Bam, that’s it. I am really shocked about your behavior, not mine. I am calling you names, you are stealing my money. And now you ask me to be more polite. This is fucking cynical. @phoenix converted all B&C BTC into NBT and used the proceeds for NSR buybacks. The B&C dev fund was gone within a blink of an eye. @Phoenix then decided to make B&C becoming an NSR shareholder with the funds that were left. Those funds are gone now. Who is to blame? Tell me who is to blame? Am I to blame? I trusted you guys a lot, or not you because you are a serious amateur scammer. But I trusted @JordanLee really really a lot. I threw money at him and said to others that he was a safe bet. @JordanLee turned into a maniac, “lost” funds three times, asked people who raised concerns to write their shit down on a piece of paper and flush it down the toilet. Nu really caught my eye you fucking idiot. But it disappointed me big time. The idea behind it remains compelling. The problem is not the idea, the problem is @jooize and @Phoenix.