This motion has been finalized on Daology.
Motion Hash: 94c2541e909b1240ac478571305809cd23295a21
Please note that voting is taking place on both the Nu and B&C blockchains.
Please offer your constructive suggestions and observations. If you have something negative and counterproductive to say, please kindly write it on a piece of paper and flush it down the toilet.
I suggest a foundation or a team to manage the development fund rather than a single person.
BTW, you should post this on bitcointalk thread where you crowdfunding.
I agree completely. The difficulty is in finding a group of qualified and trustworthy signers, as I have detailed here. I had floated the idea of having B&C funds managed by yourself (@Sabreiib), @jooize and myself, but you indicated you weren’t interested. I can’t identify 3 signers who are qualified and willing at the moment. That is likely to change before too long, but that is the situation today.
I dislike holding the fund because it costs time, however, if I am required to do so, I’ll do that, call of duty is hard to refuse as a responsible shareholder.
The way you identify qualifying signers appears to be a bit limited. I’m sure there are at least a few more signers available within the top 8 reputation available including myself. I believe that with the transaction you suggest confidence is very important. One way to increase that is to include other reputable signers and larger shareholders.
Also missing is a statement of providing some bookkeeping on the transactions for development. I believe that is required.
Regarding your proposal in OP;
I don’t agree with your assessment re share value. The chances that NSR goes back to 100 satoshis anytime soon are limited (<25%). To establish the peg I believe it requires at least another 250,000,000 shares need to be printed. Which means at least another reduction of 20% in the value of NSR. When the peg is established we are still in the dark on how operation will be funded other than selling even more NSR.
However being also a NSR shareholder, although heavily diluted, I don’t think there is not much to loose. The risk profile stays roughly the same. Still relying on Nu to establish a peg and regain confidence. I won’t comment on the chances of that happening given the current situation in the next 3 months but I have my thoughts.
Anyway the chances that the NBT funds can be spend by B&C are also minimal and diminishing given the current situation. So weighing both up and for what it is worth, I think I’m ok with your proposal. It will give Nu more chance to recover and establish a peg and with that a chance for B&C to spend some of the funds on ongoing development.
B&C shareholders will need to prepare to be diluted as we will need to raise at least another US$40-50k and print the shares to go with it in order to complete the client and star operations. This assumes that earlier estimates done by the main developer are correct. Without scoping up the remaining work and clarifying the remaining gaps it will be hard to estimate.
Toilets must be clogged by now I believe as not many responses are coming through in the forum 
Summary:
Agree with proposal but signer group needs to be increased and transparency about the use of development funds needs to be added.
Why even bother with this paragraph when you ignore them all anyways? You are running out of ideas and it is pretty obvious.
Wasn’t B&C Exchange starting with like $200k dev fund?
What have the $80k been spent for?
It’s hard to keep the US-NBT rate up by selling NSR, which are worth less and less.
Wanna know how to increase NSR rate?
Get the revenue stuff sorted out instead of playing tricks and trying to hold BKS owners in custody!
I consider the recommendation to introduce revenue to Nu highly constructive.
If you want to stay immune to recommendations that help beyond the effect of tricks, would you please kindly write your thoughts on a piece of paper and flush them down the toilet?
This would help the forum to stay more clean, at the price of being almost completely silent.
If I had a choice, I’d prefer silence.
True, I already have that choice, but I still don’t think all is lost - maybe Nu and B&C Exchange can get rid of malevolent actors and claim control again.
It was just too tempting to get in control after you realized that a lot of shareholders don’t want to participate, right?
Might have worked out, if you knew your job.
Alas, you don’t…
Your main flaw is that you don’t listen and blindly follow your own belief.
how do you know?
To state the obvious: because @Phoenix == @JordanLee.
How else should he know how many US-NBT are left or how many have already been spent on development?
It’s a pity that there’s no reporting about the details.
Bad job, very bad job by the architect.
Bad job by the shareholders not to demand those reports. Why should anybody listen to random people in a forum?
Nu and B&C are not mainly doomed, because there’s somebody who wants to be a leader and pulls the strings to become one.
The main reason is that the shareholders don’t stop him and he frankly says they don’t because they appreciate his job.
I say they are too lazy or not informed.
Anyway, a DAO where the “D” failed has lost the “A” and the “O” as well.
Nu had a “D” in the form of a FLOT that was meaning well, acting as a kind of delegate, but unfortunately without a proper mandate.
It looks like there’s not much left of FLOT, which is a pity. FLOT could have been used as “board of directors” if set up properly.
Interesting idea. @Phoenix, a report on the NBT that has been spent so far would be a good first step for this process.
One thought: the claimed value of the NBT is based on current price, which is so thinly traded that it can easily be manipulated up or down by 10%. It’s quite a leap of faith for both BKS and NSR holders to agree on a valuation.
That’s a lot of NSR. It seems that it would be able to push any motion through. Would it be used to mint?
Guys, be sure to use toilet paper. Regular paper clogged my toilet, too. 
@ConfusedObserver your comments are just exactly the sort of negative, angry and unrelated rants I was hoping would be flushed down toilets instead of infecting this important workspace.
You have addressed quite a few topics, but none are related to the topic at hand.
It is obvious you are determined to see this project fail because you couldn’t play the role you wanted to within the project. You are creating a hostile environment. I would guess you aren’t a shareholder. People who aren’t shareholders, want the project to fail, and work against us by derailing important conversations and creating a hostile environment should not be participating.
Moderators, can we get @ConfusedObserver’s inappropriate comments removed from this thread please?
On a more positive note, thanks to @Cybnate and @Sabreiib for your constructive comments. I will have to respond to @Cybnate’s comments later because I spent this time dealing with a counterproductive distraction.
Absolutely not.
I have always been of the opinion that the level of disclosure and reporting provided by Angela has been suboptimal. I have made repeated requests to her for more reporting. Those reports don’t appear to be coming. So, we have two choices: accept what Angela is doing or set up alternative operations that don’t rely on her. The later has been discussed, but we haven’t arrived at a consensus on how to conduct alternative operations yet. It will happen before too long, I believe.
However, the paranoia in the community has been quite high the last couple of months. I’m confident Angela’s service was pretty much entered into with the attitude that no one else was willing to do the important work, so she would be self-sacrificing and help out. She isn’t scamming us and it is apparent she has no attachment to her work. The problem is people coming in here and demanding someone else provide a solution they want, and for free. I say you want a solution? Go provide it yourself.
Ladies and gentleman, I have been absent for quite some time. But to everyone in the world I always promised that once I find someone who is more funny than me, I will show up, applaud and disappear again! Hats off @Phoenix, I don’t think I have any joke at hand that even has a tiny chance to compete with yours in any way. Even though I am a shareholder, I indeed don’t care anymore about my investment as I had my ROI. How? Well, if I had to pay ticket prices for comedy shows that in aggregation deliver the same amount of amusement as you currently do, I really start appreciating more and more that I found this place in the past, although for quite a high price.
Just because my posts make you angry that doesn’t make them a rant.
What in particular do you have in mind, which you consider negative - besides my assessment of your job and your achievements so far?
The revenue topic is the most important topic. Stop throwing these smoke grenades.
If you want to save Nu, you need revenue.
If you continue your way, you continue to look like running a ponzi scheme.
What do you dislike in particular? Being unveiled as JordanLee once again?
I fear you did that yourself.
Calling it paranoia is an attempt of putting this behaviour on the irrational side.
But it’s far from being irrational having doubts about the well-being of Nu if people see the network run mainly by a single individual, which was once called JordanLee and now wants to be called Phoenix.
The attempt to leave responsibility behind ad continue with borrowed reputation rings alarm bells.
The option to purge you, @JordanLee == @Phoenix from both Nu and B&C Exchange has been discussed.
It looks like this needs to be done, if a business with revenue shall replace your ponzi scheme.
I bet it’s only a matter of time until
First step is to get the B&C funds moved to a multisig team so B&C shareholders can actually asses what funds are left, a motion to do so has already been proposed.
@Phoenix I’m not sure about this proposal I see more merit in a proposal that would require an x% of funds (let’s say 50’% as an example) raised by NSR sales to be dedicated to buying back NBT from B&C dev fund at 1 dollar a piece. That means we’re giving B&C a better price then we can currently get Nubits from the market but then again Nushare holders have a stake in B&C as well. On top of that it was mostly B&C raised BTC that was used for the NSR buybacks so the least Nu could do is buy those Nubits back at the price B&C bought them for.
With this it would mean B&C would get a steady return of funds to be used for development. We can then asses how much funds we have (roughly 120k NBT right?) and make plans with @sigmike if this is enough to fund the remaining development.
One problem is no developer will accept BKS as salary, if even developers don’t have faith in BC, why not we find some other developers who accept BKS?
At least, B&C is better than XPM which has $ 1,100,823 Market Cap. Even the development stops, what would we fear?
We need to get the funds in shareholder control first. Then we can start talking with Sigmike about how much we need to complete B&C exchange.
I will vote your motion joining RSOT. BTW, I suggest all members compromise and step backward a little to accept persons you dislike into RSOT, this is democracy.
We are on same boat, fighting each other isn’t productive.
I think I agree with the main idea of this proposal.