It’s more likely that BTC goes up in the next months,
therefore it would be wise not to concentrate too much on Nubit.
Better invest these funds now into BTC or Nushares until BTC
and Nushare market is saturated.
Soon after market saturation, sell BTC and Nushares and shift
these funds into Nubit.
This would be the strategic better procedure, what likely bring
Nubit back to 1 U$.
Probably this method is more time-consuming but in the end
much more effective.
Also try to get major investors involved for a common strategy.
It’s more likely that BTC goes up in the next months,
I have to disagree with you on this,it’s already been a year now and there is no point in waiting months again.And BTC might fall back to 3k zones and only after that correction it will go up.The team has a good opportunity here to fix the peg shortly and Bittrex might avoid the delisting.
As mentioned above I think it’s actually a good thing that Bittrex delists NBT before attempting to fix the peg. Have a conversation later on after the peg is restored with Bittrex to relist nbt AND add nsr then after it’s been proven to be stable again. At that time it should also be requested to add usdt,tusd,pax,usds and usdc pairs as well.
Once you get delisted it’s really hard to get relisted in Bittrex.It’s best to get this sorted out before it get’s delisted.The sell book is currently not much big and if they act now to fix the peg,it will really work.
I don’t see anything wrong with a gradual buying program to restore the peg. It does no good to restore the peg for one day only to have it collapse the next. I might quibble with 0.1% per day (approximately a three-year spend-out rate), but that’s probably not so important, assuming that the funds don’t end up somehow disappearing over the course of three years.
Who are these four people holding the keys to the multisig? I’m going to assume they are all existing members of the ‘liquidity team’, which happens to be the exact same actors for which there is a significant trust deficit (whether deserved or not).
Confidence (and therefore prospects for outside investment and recovery) would be improved significantly by recruiting some better-trusted key holders, at least in addition to the existing team if not in place of.
@XRomeoX, @Ghaleon . Part of the deal with BarterTrade was to request a de-listing from Bittrex (as mentioned here. They do not feel that they would be able to compete with a strong pair at Bittrex during their first few months of operation. Their model is to try and attract USNBT holders to the BarterTrade exchange from Bittrex.
The announcement from Bittrex was double edged sword. It meant we lost the Bittrex pair but it meant that we fulfill the criteria for the deal.
The upshot of this portion of the deal is that to get the funds from BarterTrade, we won’t be chasing the listing at Bittrex now or in the foreseeable future.
@smooth. The 4 holders of the multisig keys for the original address posted were myself, @Phoenix, @Cybnate and @jooize. I posted a message to the Liquidity Team chat room on Matrix last night regarding generating a new Multisig address. I have yet to have any response. This is a pattern that has become fairly common in recent months as team members (myself included) have other draws on their time. The team is widely distributed so disparate timezones also play a part in that.
I for one would welcome new members to the team and especially the multisig key holders. If it meant that the team became more dynamic I don’t think it could hurt Nu at all. The issues for multisig key holders has always been that they should be reachable and able to quickly debate and agree on an outcome for funds. We have suffered in the past from a multisig teams inability to decide on a course of action and that is something that should be avoided if possible. Would you put yourself forward for such a key holder position?
The concern in all of this is that it takes time to organise. BarterTrade are working to fairly short timescales with the launch of their exchange and would ideally like to have the NSR and USNBT in place for the launch. Given that, are there any objections to me utilising a single signature address for this Grant if the other Nu team members remain unreachable for the next 24 hours or so?
@woolly_sammoth I won’t be able to serve as a key holder at this time as I’m already fully committed to other projects, and my ability to consistently respond to issues in a timely manner may be inferior even to what you describe to be the status quo.
While it may have looked that way, my comments were not at all intended to be positioning for personal involvement. My interest here is as an observer and long-time crypto enthusiast who would very much like to see a decentralized stable cryptocurrency succeed. So far they have all stumbled in various ways, so I would submit that despite its own obvious stumbles, Nu still has a shot (albeit a long shot) at this potentially enormous market.
But to do that requires restoring trust, and restoring trust requires not only words, but substantive changes. I take it from reading some of the past forum posts that these issues have been discussed many times before with no real action ever taken, so perhaps it is a lost cause. If you want it not to be, then I still strongly suggest recruiting some reputable outsiders and vesting them with real power and authority to serve as a check on the existing team (as well as reforming the governing rules and transparency processes such that the situation of a poorly-trusted team can not recur).
Just take the deal guys, it’s the only shot you have. I’d suggest just immediately restoring the peg though because if people know you intend to gradually restore the peg then nobody will sell NBT for anything less than $1 and you then won’t be able to buy it back to burn. If the peg is functioning then you can gradually buy NBT to burn from the normal pegbot operations over time and reduce supply. But the points about trust in the team REALLY need to be addressed with substantial governance changes otherwise Nu will not attract any new buyers.
I agree with @Ghaleon ,the longer u go without restoring the peg the harder it will get.Imagine people knowing this through various telegram channel’s,everyone will accumulate slowly and it will be impossible to fix the peg after that.After the deal goes through,it will be best to immediately fix the peg.
The idea of it being impossible to restore the peg if people won’t sell below $1 is silly. If people won’t sell below $1 then the peg is restored!
Anyway, it is highly debatable and an open question what the best strategy for restoring the peg given limited resources (this amount is far below what would be needed for a truly credible reserve) or alternately the best use of the limited resources toward restoring the peg even if it can’t get all the way there. Getting trust issues addressed is more critical.
I have heard from Cybnate but not with any details of an address to use for MultiSig. As voting really needs to start on this custodial grant I have entered a single sig address that I control as the grant address. Please could voting shareholders put the details from the Original Post into their clients to begin voting for this proposal please.
@Ghaleon. Thank you for you offer of joining the team. More team members able to be available for such decisions will be of a huge help when the peg is regained and Nu needs operational maintenance.
As @smooth says I’m not totally convinced that a fast buy back is necessarily the right approach to restoring the peg but I also feel that this is a larger debate and we should probably create a new post to discuss it, then open it to a vote. We should start to use the machinery that Nu has in place once more.
I think similar should be done with regards the issues raised around governance and trust. I am a Nu team member but I don’t control Nu. All I have ever done is try to carry out tasks in line with the wishes of NuShare holders. Votes have been won that gave executive power to make day to day decisions about the running of Nu to the liquidity/Nu team but if something different is wanted then the power to raise these issues and gain support for something different is available to everyone. Convince NuShare holders that your idea is worth voting for and it will become NuLaw if passed.
It does seem that there are issues around trusting the current Nu team so we shold start looking at ways to adddress that. I would hope that some members of the BarterTrade team would become more involved in the running of Nu as they will have a keen interest in Nu’s success. I think that would be a conversation to have after this deal is complete though. I would welcome other suggestions from others too though.
@woolly_sammoth It is maybe outside the scope of this thread but my intuition is that current team members hold an enormous share of the voting power, possibly an absolute majority. As such it isn’t likely that proposing to vote to impose changes upon the team would turn out to be an effective course of action.
Therefore (and even if the above supposition merely might be accurate), I’m making these comments with the hope that the team will see the value in voluntarily enacting changes upon itself (creating greater transparency, accountability, and trust) in order to restore the value to the project. If my suspicion is correct then the team has more to gain than anyone else from doing so, but of course, it would also be fully capable of ignoring my suggestions and carrying on as before.
I guess we shall see.
Is there a tutorial somewhere on how to enter a vote with your nsr shares? I’ve never actually voted before. This UI is confusing.
The button on the bottom left marked ‘Custodian Vote’ is what you need. That will open up a new window containing a table with 2 columns. Click the ‘+’ button at the bottom to add a row. Double click the first column in the first row and paste the Address
SUB431FXaoYg1vKjpEUGd8gmmDgipRaCAb. Double click the second column in the first row and paste the amount
700000000. Click ‘OK’ and your vote will be registered in any blocks you mint.
Love you all! Lets all work together and get this ball rolling.
I recall hearing at one point that there was some optimized way to mint nsr by splitting your nsr into 10k chunks. Is that still a thing? How would I do that if so?
There is a
splitshareoutputs command that can be passed as a flag to the Nu daemon or set in the config file. Setting that to
10000 would ensure your NuShare trasnasctions were split into outputs of 10k. I believe that is the default though as detailed here https://docs.nubits.com/nu-client-commands/.
You can check this by activating “coin control” in your wallet (Settings > Options > Display) and then viewing the inputs available to you on the “send” pane.