It is interesting why Bitcoin network is still going on.
NSR=BTC
Liquidity custodians=miners?
cryptog,
I use your post to convey my understanding of the issues facing Nu, generally. I trust you don’t mind my using your message to agree, mainly, but offer a competing theory with some complementary elements.
That is optimistic. And what novel decentralization are you implying would solve this leadership-dilemma?
This point about developing NBT as a currency is vital; wider use would have prevented her loss-of-peg by scale.
Conclusion, refraining from insulting the acumen of Developer. I can’t agree that the leadership issue is solved with a new Chief because it’s function should be somehow decentralized. Could it be possible to address one issue with the other through creative programming?
With out much use, there is not much point to the peg. The key factor to getting more use (and preventing loss-of-peg) is end-user applications:
- To find a way decentralize the role of Chief to incentive-ize developers to work with Nu
That would by my suggestion.
1 Like
Most cryptos don’t guarantee the price stability, if NBT price is designed to free float, there is no crisis now at all.
As @creon said above, liquidity providers for Nu and miners for Bitcoin are not the same. Bitcoin is diluted in the form of block rewards to pay miners. The block rewards decrease over time, increasing Bitcoin scarcity and value of the coins. As the block reward drops to zero, transaction fees are supposed to take over in sustaining mining operations. If the value per Bitcoin dropped below what it cost miners to sustain their operations, Bitcoin’s network security would be threatened, thus security hinges on the value of Bitcoin.
In Peercoin, security of the network is paid for by diluting Peercoin around 1% a year. People mint with their Peercoin in order to maintain their wealth in the face of this dilution. The cost of maintaining the security of the network is extremely low, therefore Peercoin’s security model is not dependent on the value per coin to the degree that Bitcoin is.
NuShareholders act in a similar way and people mint in order to escape dilution. Since the reward is constant, rather than 1% per year, minters might actually profit from minting. However they also mint to vote in order to have their say on which direction the network is headed.
The liquidity provision of NuBits is entirely different from all of these. All we have is the money people give us when they buy our NuBits. Even if we have 100% reserve, we will slowly spend that entire reserve on liquidity providers who maintain the walls until all the funds run out. The only way to prevent the reserve from running out is to figure out how to earn revenue, such as through transaction fees. There needs to be enough transaction fees in order for Nu to reduce its liabilities under what it costs to maintain the network. That seems to be the only way for Nu to obtain self-sustainability.
3 Likes
I currently have 49.54% support for being elected Chief of Liquidity Operations under grant address ShrB92Q61TiL9ZaQXZQCMB2qszYKqTMkGU, while support is trending at 52.7%. Unfortunately, support for my previous grant to become Chief of Liquidity Operations is trending at 12%. Every block I examined that had a vote for the old grant address did not have a vote for the new grant address, ShrB92Q61TiL9ZaQXZQCMB2qszYKqTMkGU. This means due to confusion votes to make me Chief of Liquidity Operations are being split between two grant address. It means my actual level of support is probably trending around 65% right now.
If you are only voting for SWm1xC4n5jSGjRRdSKfzroUBgTto2zRA8X and not ShrB92Q61TiL9ZaQXZQCMB2qszYKqTMkGU, it is probably a mistake, because the latter is much more restrictive and is the one with an imminent chance of passage. Please add ShrB92Q61TiL9ZaQXZQCMB2qszYKqTMkGU in your custodial grant window if that is the case.
Perhaps shareholders are awaiting a response from you in your post: Statement of Policy (Liquidity Operations)
@Cybnate, @masterOfDisaster, @huafei and @Nagalim:
Do you currently have sole control of any shareholder funds, whether NBT or BTC (from your gateway operations)?
@zoro you have no shareholder funds, correct?
1 Like
I didn’t see any questions or comments that were relevant to the topic defined in the original post.
Ah, my comments were irrelevant. I would be offended, but I at least gave you the respect in trying to explain why your plan is swiss cheese. I’ll take this cop-out tactic as a win for me.
It’s ok to admit if you made some mistakes. It’s not ok to expect strangers on the Internet to believe this soap opera as you tell it.
6 Likes
just perfect
1 Like
correct!
1 Like
I’ve already answered that question recently in the FLOT BTC buy thread and there is also a recent update of my gateways here: [Decommissioned] PyBot passive gateway on Poloniex and on Bittrex.
Good to take instructions according to my motion and the update here: [Passed] Changing Spread for Passive Dual-Side Pybot for Poloniex and Bittrex. Please note that the motion is past its 2 months period, but I’m ok to agree a grace period when this motions has passed if appreciated or else return the funds and dismantle my gateway operations.
Almost forgot about it, but I also have shareholder’s funds to execute a contract for NuDroid. Will need to ask for dispensation for the execution now the peg is broken and I need to raise a motion for that. Fell of the priority list, but I’m onto it. Of the 16,000 NBT, 4000 NBT has been paid for the first term as per grant, leaving me with 12,000 NBT.
this grant has passed
1 Like
still have 2000nbt at bter
2 Likes
I would like this sent to @jooize for burning, please. @jooize can you specify an NBT address please?
I have secured an agreement with @jooize to work with me on the liquidity operations team for the same 90 day term I have with shareholders. For now he will be conducting NSR auctions, NSR sales on Poloniex, NBT purchases on Poloniex and NBT burns. Later he will be running a gateway. He will be paid 600,000 NSR per month out of grants to me for liquidity operations. That is a great value for shareholders.
So, right now, liquidity operations consists of myself, @jooize and the members of FLOT. I am considering a reorganization of FLOT at this time.
1 Like
Nu Burn US-NBT @jooize: BAqV5y3mKoy8NbjP7aeBTE8AVTdUZLhbrX
All funds sent to that address will be burned.
1 Like
done
txid:ba3f37be93cd674a94b8a9801ee7e2af288bc507a9ed74431046ad2c679536c0
@jooize, please burn it with fee
Looking forward to that