[Passed] LiquidBits term 7 grant (updated) - Automatic Liquidity Pool (ALP)

[Cybnate]

Based on the discussions and the feedback in this thread I came to the conclusion that increasing the fiat liquidity pools and decreasing the reward is the way to go.

The details of the final proposal are posted here:
https://daology.org/proposals/f6349c0339f210f4a26a91acc10b085a03640a9b
Hash: 1e46d216fbc88f7a8348baf46e01095253ab53a9

Please add the following to your client when you support this:

B954pkUEdkeT1G5Lq14Cisij5no3RVxHYe , 650

---

Key changes from term 6 in term7-v2 of proposal (this proposal):

• Increased maximum from 5000 NBT to 7500 NBT on NBT/USD pair
• Increased maximum from 2500 NBT to 3750 NBT on NBT/EUR pair
• Decreased maximum from 1000 NBT to 500 NBT on NBT/BTC pair
• Decreased payout from 0.18% to 0.14% for NBT/USD pair (-/- 33%)
• Decreased payout from 0.20% to 0.15% for NBT/EUR pair (-/- 33%)
• Decreased payout from 0.24% to 0.20% on average for NBT/BTC pair (-/- 20%)

The changes are aimed at increasing liquidity while decreasing the liquidity cost per unit. Except for the NBT/BTC pair as I believe this might be better supported with the gateways and a larger spread.

[mhps]

*Decreased payout from 0.18% to 0.15% for NBT/USD pair (-/- 33%)

• Decreased payout from 0.20% to 0.14% for NBT/EUR pair (-/- 33%)

14% and 15% should br exchanged?
’

[Cybnate]

Well spotted. Just changed it in OP.
The calculation in the detailed proposal is correct though. It is just swapped in the key changes overview. I will leave it as is on Daology otherwise I will have to change the hash, which might create even more confusion. Should have left out those change overviews from Daology.

[cryptog]

I support experimenting this decrease of reward to make traders pay the price because they would be forced to use gateways more often which entails more spread.

B954pkUEdkeT1G5Lq14Cisij5no3RVxHYe , 650 voted.

[zoro]

server is down!

[Cybnate]

Hmm, just had to stop and start server.py to make it work again. It was in some kind of loop, will see if I can get any wiser from the logs.

Edit: encountered the “list index out of range” again. I’m afraid I can’t do much about that. One of the known bugs occurring once in a while.

[Cybnate]

Seeing that my proposal is struggling around 30% of the votes.

@crypto_coiner any reason why you haven’t added this to your datafeed?
Any other shareholders wishing to comment? Is it time to shut down LiquidBits maybe? Did you miss this proposal?

[crypto_coiner]

Apologizes for the delay.
Just thought I would re-study under the hood http://cybnate.github.io/index-liquidbits.html
and:
https://www.ccedk.com/nbt-usd
https://www.ccedk.com/nbt-btc
https://www.ccedk.com/nbt-eur

Could you provide more information about:
Who is using the 3 pairs?
How much profit you made on each pair on the last run with liquidBits?

[Nagalim]

Profit’s a weird word. Eur and usd havent really moved, so every trade times saf plus pool rewards minus opportunity costs.

[mhps]

Who is using the 3 pairs?
How much profit you made on each pair on the last run with liquidBits?

Can any of the pool operators answer these questions?

[Cybnate]

Who is using the 3 pairs?How much profit you made on each pair on the last run with liquidBits?

I would be happy to answer, but…

Can any of the pool operators answer these questions?

No, none of the ALP operators have this information. The information is with anonymous LPs.
The best I can deliver is the amount of liquidity provided by all LPs together by pair during a certain period. Not sure how valuable that is given the amount of work it requires. You can also see this information in real-time on Alix.

[zoro]

As an ALP provider in CCEDK in 3 pairs i can say that i see movements in all of the pairs.
They aren’t very frequesnt but they exist.

[Cybnate]

As an ALP operator in CCEDK in 3 pairs

You probably meant as a Liquidity Provider (LP) ? Some confusion in terminology here maybe?

[zoro]

yes, sorry. i corrected it.

[crypto_coiner]

The current grant has 915 NBT left as of 30 Jan UTC with about 10 days
to go at a current payout rate of 20 NBT on average. 10 * 20 = 200 NBT.
Therefore there will be approx. 915- 200 = 715 NBT left for rollover.

Could we deduce that the current run would have lost (not earned) at least 200NBT?

[Cybnate]

The current period (term 6) I didn’t spend about 200 NBT granted to provide liquidity against the highest rate.

The reasons for this are:

• Due to competition on some pairs the reward rate has actually been lower (Dutch auction)
• The LPs did not provide the maximum amount of liquidity at all times (e.g. due to bot issues or just moving their money)
• LiquidBits had at least two outages for a couple of hours and there was no liquidity rewarded during that period (no logs).

[Nagalim]

How can nbt/usd have fluctuations?

[Cybnate]

How can nbt/usd have fluctuations?

Did I say that? Not sure what context you mean. It can have fluctuations in rewards or whether pool is underutllised. The USD/NBT rate doesn’t fluctuate of course

[Nagalim]

Zoro said he saw movement on all three pairs. I suppose he meant trades though and i misunderstood.

[Cybnate]

It appears to me that the current grant is not going to pass any time soon, still staying way below the 40% mark and technically the previous one has expired by now. I regret that but accept the Shareholders’ wishes.

Proposed road to winding down
I suggest to initiate winding down LiquidBits as follows:

• When in the next few days the number of votes doesn’t exceed 50% on a daily bases I will half the daily rewards by reducing the maximum amounts closely after Saturday, 20 February Noon (UTC). A week afterwards I will stop the ALP services provided by LiquidBits all together.

This allows an orderly wind down of the service which existed for almost a year. The remaining funds will be burnt as per the current grant.

Open to other suggestions.