[Passed] Motion to end LPC operations of KTm, Jamie and NSR sales of Jordan

[crypto_coiner]

I am quoting here, but to me it constitutes the gist of one of the pictures here:

• The more LPCs, the more decentralized

“Running NuBot isn’t harder than running a miner, and many people are able to do that. Targeting many people with low to moderate funds will provide a stable liquidity floor which won’t fluctuate as much as with a few very rich custodians.”

• “Ideally each NSR holder should be willing and able to run a NuBot”
• “Exchanges can be great LPCs even without asking of any reward. just
  the fees would be enough”

[cryptog]

Do we have to suppose that (the execution of) (certain) motions can be amended/nullified/modified (at any time) once passed?

You can pass motions that cancel previous motions.

[cryptog]

@assistant motion vote ed7b9fc65dc4e9d9acad61e528420c2690f599d2

[assistant]

Hi @cryptog

Here are the details for the Motion Vote on ed7b9fc65dc4e9d9acad61e528420c2690f599d2:

---

##[ed7b9fc65dc4e9d9acad61e528420c2690f599d2][1]
[1]: https://discuss.nubits.com/t/voting-motion-to-end-lpc-operations-of-ktm-jamie-and-nsr-sales-of-jordan
Blocks: 1910 (19.100000%)
Share Days: 582265211 (17.901982%)

---

Motion hash to place in your Nu client:

ed7b9fc65dc4e9d9acad61e528420c2690f599d2

When our network began, we had a way to increase the NuBit supply at the will of shareholders. We then decided to add a way to decrease the NuBit supply at the expense of increasing the NuShare supply (due in the 0.6.0 release). It should not be surprising then, that a mechanism for reducing the NuShare supply would also be introduced, to complete our flexible supply of both share

Read More

[JordanLee]

Compared to the expected time of this motion’s passage, when the protocol is expected to be altered?Before or after this motion’s passage?

The protocol switch date is unknown. I would be surprised if it happened in less than two months.

What is the purpose of this burning? To increase the unit price of NSR?

To remove any question about what I will do with them. The increased certainty and the control that shareholders will have over the creation of NSR should increase the network’s value.

How many NBTs are held currently by Jordan Lee?

536,000 + 5,000 currently at BTER

would some shareholder’s fund (non NBT) in custody of Jordan Lee remain (I suppose at Tier4) that could be used to help maintain the peg just in case or this motion’s passage would also imply the end of any use of Tier4 to maintain the peg as it is written below:

Yes, non NBT funds would remain for tier 4 liquidity. Medium term, this should held jointly using multi-sig. If enough liquidity could be developed in the NSR market, tier 4 might only consist of NSR.

[JordanLee]

I moved 3 posts to an existing topic: Park Rate Voting

[cryptog]

@assistant motion vote ed7b9fc65dc4e9d9acad61e528420c2690f599d2

[assistant]

Hi @cryptog

Here are the details for the Motion Vote on ed7b9fc65dc4e9d9acad61e528420c2690f599d2:

---

##[ed7b9fc65dc4e9d9acad61e528420c2690f599d2][1]
[1]: https://discuss.nubits.com/t/voting-motion-to-end-lpc-operations-of-ktm-jamie-and-nsr-sales-of-jordan
Blocks: 4787 (47.870000%)
Share Days: 1430582899 (44.710345%)

---

Motion hash to place in your Nu client:

ed7b9fc65dc4e9d9acad61e528420c2690f599d2

When our network began, we had a way to increase the NuBit supply at the will of shareholders. We then decided to add a way to decrease the NuBit supply at the expense of increasing the NuShare supply (due in the 0.6.0 release). It should not be surprising then, that a mechanism for reducing the NuShare supply would also be introduced, to complete our flexible supply of both share

Read More

[cryptog]

I am late but I wanted to make sure that even with the passage of this motion, we would still have some time margin to increase the number of lpcs.
The end of operations of KTm and Jamie will be a gradual process.
So their buy liquidity support will fade away gradually.
In the worst case in which Nu has not increased the buy liquidity via private custodians, we would still have some liquidity present in some of the reserves held by JL at Tier4.
Voted.

[JordanLee]

This has passed. I will have more to say about steps that need to be taken for a smooth transition in liquidity operations over the next several months. In three months time we will be certain there will be no more exchange defaults on shareholder deposits, because there won’t be any.

For now I would encourage shareholders to quickly transition away from using Jamie and KTm’s services. We can do that even faster than the motion stipulates if there are enough LPC proposals and shareholders pass them. It could take as little as two weeks if people stepped up quickly to provide alternatives. Such an outcome is worth a lot. I would be especially pleased to see liquidity pools form and LPC proposals that make use of off exchange funds in tier 3, even though that means movements between tier 3 and tier 2 would be handled manually for now. It is worth the trouble to protect from exchange defaults, as we have learned. As I have said elsewhere, it may make sense to have 5% in tier 1, 5% in tier 2 and 90% in tier 3 to provide excellent protection from exchange default.

[cryptog]

it may make sense to have 5% in tier 1, 5% in tier 2 and 90%

I think this is must.
Otherwise it is gonna be difficult to find new LPCs I believe.
The new LPCs new to protect themselves. Hedging by purchasing derivatives is probably too complicated for the average LPC.
Spreading the liquidity over Tiers1-2-3 is much simpler

[JordanLee]

Within 5 days of passage of this motion, 25% of the shareholder funds in their (@KTm And @jmiller) possession should be burned as NuBits.

It has been 7 days since the passage of this motion. It would be appropriate for @KTm and @jmiller to give a report on their implementation of the above terms.

To accomplish burning at the present time raw transactions must be used. Information in how to contruct them is available. Nu specific documentation also outlines how to use raw transactions for multi sig addresses, which may be helpful. If you have questions about how to proceed, please as @sigmike, @erasmospunk or myself for assistance. I would advise burning a NuBit or two as a test before attempting to burn the entire amount. Please let everyone know what address(es) you will burn from in advance.

[jmiller]

It has been 7 days since the passage of this motion. It would be appropriate for @KTm and @jmiller to give a report on their implementation of the above terms.

Sorry about the delay. I’m working on this today. @JordanLee I sent you a BM with a couple of questions about this process.

Jamie

[jmiller]

A test burn of 5 NBT was sent to address BGzfoZHwjKXgbX7R5oPdG12QgFZV6tjpcB. By examining the txid, you can see that 4.99 NBT was burned as fee.

Funds that are still locked up on Bter will not be factored into this first 25% burn, as they are currently out of my control. Below is a breakdown of the funds that are currently under control:

Allcoin
BTC: 20.0033 (5822.1605 NBT)
NBT: 6896.3579

Bitspark
BTC: 10.8693 (3163.6184 NBT)
NBT: 2175.8859

Poloniex
BTC: 87.5209 (25473.8331 NBT)
NBT: 25447.9761

Off Exchange
BTC: 32.0023 (9314.5894 NBT)
NBT: 150503.9

The exchange rate used is $291.06, which came from Bitcoinaverage.com on March 9, 2015 21:04 UTC.

Total funds in NBT:
228798.3213

25% = 57199.5803

If someone could please look at this breakdown and verify that there are no obvious errors in calculation, I will proceed with the burn of 57199.5803 NBT to this address: BMdEGVo9oSmsFHDKiL39CYhaSD3AmCv4s4

Jamie

Edit 3/9/15 21:22 UTC: I found an error in the amounts reported for Bitspark, so I recalculated everything using the current BTC exchange rate.

[jmiller]

Bump.

Note that an error was found in the numbers posted above which has been corrected and updated to reflect the current BTC exchange rate.

This is quite a lot of NBT to burn. I would appreciate a nod of approval from at least one shareholder before I proceed.

[woolly_sammoth]

I’ve just run the numbers and they come out agreeing with your calculations. I’ve also verified that the transaction you mentioned has a 4.99NBT tx fee.
As far as I’m concerned, the burn can go ahead

[Joe]

Double checked your math and all my figures match.

[creon]

AllcoinBTC: 20.0033 (5822.1605 NBT)NBT: 6896.3579

BitsparkBTC: 10.8693 (3163.6184 NBT)NBT: 2175.8859

PoloniexBTC: 87.5209 (25473.8331 NBT)NBT: 25447.9761

Off ExchangeBTC: 32.0023 (9314.5894 NBT)NBT: 150503.9

The exchange rate used is $291.06, which came from Bitcoinaverage.com on March 9, 2015 21:04 UTC.

Total funds in NBT:228798.3213

Sorry for the delay, I can confirm these numbers. If you don’t truncate the exchanged BTC values after the 4th position you get 0.0001 NBT more in the final balance

Mind to share how exactly you are burning? Are you using ‘nud’ and if so, what exactly do you use as command?

[jmiller]

Thank all of you for your help. The burn is complete. You may examine the transaction here: 6390f9015efc66adf423a80eb81ea43d13a1d4d0e52e11f020985f998bbb5353

@creon I will answer your question in a moment. I just wanted to get this posted first.

[Marshall]

It would appear it’s in the transaction fee?..