Is there anything you believe that could be added here to improve it? It seems he’s saying that all the data will be provided, but it’s up to shareholders to analyze it.
That is the easy part. You never know , for example, if someone is front-running the wall movements, and who are benefitting from betting against nu.
1 Like
I have an idea. It will never happen with this plan (in my opinion).
100% reserves on 700k outstanding NBT equals, well, a lot of money. And NSR demand is somewhat anemic at the moment. There is a limit to the total amount of money that people-would-consider-buying-NSR even own, and it may be less than that number.
Maybe the most important part: don’t rely on a single person!
It seems you are hoping that Phoenix could be JordanLee.
After all you know, you should be afraid that Phoenix could be JordanLee!
Don’t rely on single people if you can avoid it at reasonable cost.
JordanLee has successfully targeted FLOT.
FLOT doesn’t work like it did before.
That’s the result of JordanLee’s attacks.
Now you want to rely on a pseudonym that likely is a sock puppet of Jordan?
Don’t let you lure into a trap, just because of having been made desperate.
JordanLee made you desperate! He attacked and then abandonded Nu.
You won’t find salvation in anything that’s related to JordanLee.
Take responsibility. Stop following false leaders. Elect a group of leaders. Don’t let them be attacked. Don’t listen to single evil actors.
4 Likes
I am not a fan of this proposal and most shareholders think the same as well, it seems.
This has only very low support.
The reason I am not a fan is because it gives too much power to a single node.
1 Like
I was initially voting for this, but I stopped because I realize now that NSR sales most likely won’t be enough to raise over $700k. If it somehow was enough, then it would most likely mean unlimited NuShare dilution. I’m ok with limited amounts of dilution, but not unlimited amounts (billions of NuShares for example). The only path forward that I see of having the most chance of success is helping B&C to get finished and then relying on a percentage of their profit to help lift Nu out of debt…
1 Like
I do not think we need to raise that much. Why should we be able to buy every outstanding nubit out there?
We should stick to the standard first.
1 Like
With 10% dilution we can gain a fully reserved buy wall at 0.1. Then we start from there. In that sense i s upport @Phoenix’ 0.1 peg that rises. i’d support 3m share compensation in exchange @Phoenix’ promise to carry out his plan, without giving a blanc check of power. He would have to convince shareholders and flot on te way
2 Likes
Maybe this is a solution indeed after all. let me consider it again.
1 Like
A rising peg is very expensive without any other measures in place than just stopping new NBT creation. Where would the funds to do so come from and what is the incentive?
It doesn’t make sense to me. I believe creon’s option is more viable.
Me too
there are other forces at play when there is a bottom of thr nbt price. it’s not only nu buying btc from selling nsr to fill the reseerve alone. trader could take advatange of nbt/btc market fluctuation to trade between ranges when there is a certain bottom. Nu could use the flow to replenish its reserve while keeping traders happy.
Nu could also set up an asymmetrical offset to do a little spread trading of it’s own. Just like MoD had it.
I think that this needs to be part of any proposal worth looking at. But don’t expect a major stream of revenues from it. Try the calculator and include the BTC risk. It won’t work on its own and will just slowly drain funds.
Single points of failure are bad. Single points of anonymous failure are even worse.
7 Likes
I am new to this forum but I own some NBT, and this part of the proposed contract looks unacceptable to me:
“My payment will be 1 million NuShares per month. The first 90 days will be paid as a part of this custodial grant for 3 million NuShares.”
I don’t see why payment should be made without requiring results. It’s easy to tell if the peg has been achieved. Therefore any payment made to any person who offers to re-achieve the peg should be conditional on actually achieving the promised result.
3 Likes
The price of a NuBit is currently $0.32, up more than 50% over the last couple of days from an established plateau of around $0.20. While it is impossible to know the motives of the market participants that made that happen, may I dare say that the likely reason is that the market has realized over the last couple of days that I actually have a very good chance of being elected Chief of Liquidity Operations with support over the last 1000 blocks trending at more than 34%. I have promised a NuBit pump. It is already starting to work.
Let’s end the scamification of NuBits that has occurred the last month and show some real dedication to our peg and our customers. It is good business. If the NuBit price keeps rising, do you think NuShares will stay where they are at? Unlikely. Getting the peg back may very well be easier than most forum participants think. It won’t work if we adopt the idea often repeated around here that the peg is dead and gone and it isn’t even worth trying to not completely destroy our customers and reputation.
The NuBit market is likely telling us it has confidence in me. Push me over the 50% mark and see what it does to the NuBit and NuShare price. You don’t have much to lose at this point.
We are going to start doing what should have been done all along if I am elected: support our currency with all the strength we have. We will restore the peg. We will rebuild the liquidity engine, along with higher reserves.
One more thing: this isn’t Facebook. I don’t have as many likes as most of you, but that doesn’t matter much, because I have 343 likes on the blockchain in the last 1000 blocks. That matters. It demonstrates a disconnect between what the typical forum participant wants and what shareholders want. Why do shareholders like me so much? Well, I have given credible promises of listening to and obeying their every command in the form of passed motions. Who do you think shareholders like better, someone who says “Fuck NuLaw” or someone who says they will follow every shareholder directive completely? Do you think they like people with defeatist attitudes or someone who reassures them we can get the peg and our honor back after this rebellion against shareholders?
The only likes that really matter around here are the ones on our blockchain. Soon shareholders will have a voice again after the chaos and incompetence of the last month. My voice. I speak for shareholders. That is why they like me. If you want to succeed around here as I am, pay attention to the likes on the blockchain, not the forum. Forum accounts can’t give you money with likes. Shareholders can give you money on the blockchain though. I am about to get 3 million NuShares that way.
Start getting used to the new reality forum participants: the peg destroyers will go down in infamy but I will be celebrated as the tireless defender and restorer of the peg.
The rebels forgot who they worked for. I didn’t. Hint: it isn’t forum participants.
I thought it’s because @Cybnate’s proposal is going to be hashed.
Seriously, handing you 100M share the network will belong to one individual – @JordanLee, @IAmJordanLee @Phoenix and @Superman because he will have 51% mint power.
More seriously, where is the beef? Where is the revenue in your proposal? Don’t say there are more ways than you can count, because under your architectship none of them worked. Disturbing.
1 Like
What’s more confusing, it’s not this grant that’s receiving “support”, but different one mentioned in [Passed] Elect Phoenix as Chief of Liquidity Operations (compromise version)
That grant has no comments and contains hardly any information.
Wtf is going on?
Right. This grant address SWm1… has no support. But the “other” one says
This custodial grant presumes the passage of motion
57ee6c5da13b0c91ca05a4f32e1a7bf9b44811b4, which creates the Chief of
Liquidity Operations position. Phoenix will be the Chief of Liquidity
Operations for 3 months after the grant is passed. The 3 million NSR
being requested is personal compensation for filling the Chief of
Liquidity Operations position for that time period.
and gets ~25% votes. The motion 57ee6c5da13b0c91ca05a4f32e1a7bf9b44811b4 is called "Voting Create Chief of Liquidity Operations Position (no name mentioned), and is getting similar level of votes.