There are 449k circulating.
Right now there is 250k on the sell side though it fluctuates.
Is sell side/circulating < 50% a good indicator of high demand? I would say yes.
Maybe we can start instead with a grant of 250k nbt to go safer.
Since posting, the sell side has returned to above half of circulating supply. There is no rule I was referencing. When they’re held in multisig, the risks concerning sell-side reserves should be similar. The best would be integration with e.g. B&C Exchange to create and destroy NuBits on demand.
Hopefully, but I have no news. They’ll be the same as before the loss if Nu shareholders approve the grant I plan to request once the losses are determined. There has been progress on that point, but it’s not done.
All NuShare addresses that were sent to from the B&C Exchange development fund address that we had confirmed did not belong to an exchange are blocked by a Nu release which majority of shareholders began using.
To reimburse B&C Exchange we need to know the balance of SSajkovCPXwdw46nyJ7vpTDkwtRZJzyY2z before the thefts. The NSR in the address now are inaccessible. Until Nu shareholders pass a grant, the B&C Exchange development fund is zero if there are no other funds I’m unaware of, in say NuBits.
Phoenix lost control of those funds. Nu shareholders have the power to deny a grant to recover the loss of his private funds such as the bonus address. He’s since chosen not to get paid for a recent period.
I know it’s frustrating, and that you think I’m not doing enough. You want him to repay the losses in full with his own money. If he actually stole the funds, then he should pay for the loss, but won’t of course. If he unintentionally lost control of the funds, I’m not in as obvious agreement. He’s been of high value to Nu, it’s to my knowledge uncommon to confiscate someone’s past payouts after a mistake they made, and I see no good way to force him anyway.
I requested to have my title visible because it’s useful, not because I’m on some power trip. I’ve bought NuShares for private money, not even the money earned through Nu effectively, and I’m still in net negative but in a better position for sure. My bonus was made quite irrelevant unfortunately, but the low price was attractive.
@jooize this is bullshit. Talking about a “mistake” in this context is pure sarcasm. You can’t compare it to a carpenter having destroyed a single table by accident. All this had a structure that @Phoenix is responsible for. Killing FLOT was one of his major accomplishments and losing funds was another one. Taken those two things together, it is very well conceivable that @Phoenix should pay for the damage he caused. “mistake”… I can’t believe that you use that word. Criminal action or complete failure. You are always talking about the value he produced. Where is that value? B&C is dead and left with zero funds. Where is that value to B&C? And Nu? Well, not worth talking about either when we compare it to Pinkcoin.
Another important question that I would like you to answer: Are you currently earning money with Nu? I know this is a two-sided question because there is the option of front running on a daily basis with your liquidity operations and the official payment you get for those liquidity operations. Feel free to answer only one of those items if you like, but please answer at least one.
This project is so centralized that it can’t even be more centralized. And you @jooize like it for very good personal economic reasons. And that is really really sad. Instead of making a system where all your “mistakes” can’t happen, you keep it going. What if there were two people quickly checking the exchange price during buybacks? Would your “mistake” of buying at 200% the actual price have happened? What if there was multisig for all those important assets that were recently stolen by @Phoenix? And please don’t tell me he didn’t steal it. Let us start to think differently or more realistically given the environment we operate in. It is @Phoenix’ duty as a single sig holder of a large amount of assets to prove he didn’t steal it. He had options to prevent it from happening, easy options. This forum does not have to prove anything. It is him who has to prove he didn’t steal it and then we can talk about a mistake.
Yes, I’m getting paid. No, I’m not front-running the buybacks. I do occasionally place private orders while trying to be fair by leaving time until buybacks are executed. A way to improve is automating the buybacks and spreading them out.
I’m not responding to the rehashed remainder as it’s a waste of time to argue with you.
It should be more ethical to refrain from that as has been done in the past. However that can’t be verified anyway.
I’m against both. Not the odd profanity, but the continuous stream of it is just ridiculous
I would support the grant, but like to make the relation with restoring the B&C funds to support it. The funds have been stolen due to neglect and incompetence. I believe that at least a part of the funds earned with the benefits of this grant should be placed into a B&C fund held in multi-sig by B&C shareholders to make good.