178.67 BTC is still locked up on Bter. These funds will be converted to NBT and burned when they are finally released. For now, they will not be included in this 50% burn calculation.
All Bter points and securities were used to buy 22.9 BTC on April 22nd, which was sent to Poloniex to support the buy side.
Bitspark.io has been removed from supported exchanges and those funds were sent to Poloniex or to offline storage.
Currently managed funds:
Allcoin BTC: 0.58 (136.22 NBT) NBT: 929.27
Poloniex BTC: 17.72 (4161.8964 NBT) NBT: 34459.02
Off Exchange BTC: 0 NBT: 137393.9 NSR: 667282 (1894 NBT)
We should see the final burns from @jmiller and @KTm in the next 4 days. That’s very exciting. We have almost completed the transition to decentralized liquidity that has no counterparty risk from the point of view of the network. Never again will Nu be plagued with the loss of shareholder funds as a result of an exchange default, as happened with BTER, CCEDK and Excoin.
Jamie has funds on BTER that can’t be withdrawn and Kiara has funds on CCEDK that can’t be withdrawn as a result of the hacks on those exchanges, so they will continue to manage those as shareholder funds until they are released or defaulted on.
Providing decentralized liquidity is a success story that is at not yet in full bloom. But Nu already begins to have positive effects from it.
A lot of money is being operated by @henry in NuLagoon and even more in the 3 TLLP pools operated by @Cybnate, @Nagalim, @willy & @woolly_sammoth (in alphabetical order).
Now Nu needs to care for the robustness of the liquidity providing as it would be a big blow for the ability to keep the peg if the decentralized liquidity providing would be impacted by human or software failure.
The counterparty risk has been shifted from the Nu network to the liquidity providers. They need to be provided with proper tools and need fairly compensated for the risk they take. The competition will sort out what can be considered fair
I don’t wanna spoil the party (which I feel the Nu network should have considering these achievements) and I think the success of Nu is on very solid ground; I just wanted to say that Nu still is responsible for the liquidity (albeit not directly) and that the money is well spent on the pools - to provide liquidity and to provide an entry for people into Nu!
I’m looking forward to see @henry’s multi-signature pools and I’m looking forward to see improved versions of TLLP pool software and so much more TLLP pools on so much more exchanges!
This represents the full amount of funds held (grant NBT and NSR from the settlement) that are not currently on exchange in the form of “buy-side” EUR, on CCEDK, or funds that were lost during the Exco.in and CCEDK exchange attacks in February. I am still seeking resolution to recover those funds, and I’ll put together a new post in the coming days detailing the remaining amounts that I’m seeking to recover.
At the same time I’ll try to see if it’s possible to consolidate as many of my operational logs as possible to make them available to the community for data analysis. I’ll start to review the different operating accounts that have logs to confirm that I have the bulk of them in a place that is accessible* and then evaluate what it would take to put them together in a collection.
Thank you for allowing me to act as a custodian for your funds. We encountered a significant number of unexpected challenges along the way, but even with the difficulties I’m proud to have been able to contribute to the network’s early days. Many of the conversations and proposals that I’ve read here on the forums would not have been possible to have without the large number of different events and situations that we’ve come across.
//Kiara
* I know for sure that the tranasctional from BTER during the early to middle of September are not available. BTER did not have a way of accessing this information beyond 24 hours after the trade occurred and I did not know about this until it was too late. I did not operate long on BTER before @jmiller started her operations, so the missing trade records only represent a tiny fraction of my total operations.
Please accept my apologies for the delay in processing this round of burns. I’m working through an issue with Allcoin where the final withdraw of 1929.27 NBT failed to be transferred and was not returned to account balance. Also, the Poloniex withdraw process is taking a few days longer than originally expected due to their recent withdraw limit changes. I will provide a detailed update very soon. Thank you for your patience.
I suspect Allcoin of insolvency. If anyone has funds there, I would strongly suggest attempting to withdraw them. For several weeks, I have been attempting to withdraw the final chunk (1929.2719 NBT) of shareholder funds that are still held on Allcoin. This started as a couple of failed withdraw attempts, where I was given an error, the funds were returned to balance, and I was instructed to reattempt the withdraw. This failed withdraw error has happened again, but now I am no longer receiving replies to my inquiries from Allcoin support. This leaves me with nothing to suspect other than pending exchange default for Allcoin.
My NBT test deposit to allcoin.com didn’t show up (blockexplorer showed successful tx). My support ticket for the issue hasn;t been answered for almost a week. I think the Nu exchanges page should put up a warning of allcoin.com
Shareholders seemed to suggest that we should not be in the business of preemptively warning our users about potentially dangerous exchanges. From the recent motion to list all exchange resources:
This motion is to express the desire of NuShares holders to list all NuBits and NuShares exchange resources in all current and future marketing materials which are under the control of the Nu team. […] The exchanges listed are not endorsed by the NuShareholders by any means. The NuShareholders cannot be held liable for any funds lost by using these exchanges. This listing only intends to be an overview where NuShares and NuBits can be traded. Users of these exchanges need to do their own due diligence before using these exchanges. This can be done by searching the discuss.nubits.com forums for any previous events or asking questions in the community.
I would like to avoid acting unilaterally in the area of exchange listings, given my previous stance on CCEDK. If any NuShareholder would like to introduce a motion to remove AllCoin from the Exchanges page, I would be happy to comply if it passes. I would assume such a motion would include evidence of the risk the exchange poses to the public.
I feel that trying to track the reliability of exchanges is beyond the capabilities of Nu. Issuing warnings shouldn’t save people from doing their own due diligence, but it might lead to exactly that: they rely on the information about exchanges, believe in them and make Nu accountable for damage that is dealt by that.
I’m not in favour of Nu giving the impression it would vouch for exchanges that carry no individual warnings.
I see a big difference to exchanges with liquidity operations, though (which is not the case for allcoin).
If Nu provides people with incentives to put money at an exchange, it should keep an eye on it.
Practically the liquidity pool operators will be in a good position to track the situation, but still I see some responsibility for Nu not to continue (by funding it) liquidity operations at exchanges that don’t work reliably.
This requires me to burn the remaining 40 million NSR I have custody of in the next few days. I will do so, but it weakens the peg until someone or some group has NSR granted to them that they can use to defend the peg. We still have the ability to sell NSR for NBT, but the network will require a week or two to set that in motion. Temporarily, the network is losing its capacity to use tier 6 liquidity in reaction to a quick and unexpected drop in demand for NuBits.
I know group efforts are underway to regain the capacity to bring tier 6 liquidity within hours if needed. Such efforts are important and urgent. I recommend the criteria for selling NSR to support the peg be specified as either:
Buy side walls in tier 1, 2 and 3 are less than 25% of all liquidity in those tiers.
Parking rates have been offered continuously for more than 30 days.
This NSR burn is required by motion, but it’s very bad timing.
A pity that the community didn’t put more efforts in forming a tier 4 (buy side) fund management - the NSR would be better there than burned only because of the time it takes to create them by grant.
Keeping a part of tier 4 buy side funds in NSR instead of BTC seems wise in terms of BTC volatility and potential BTC default risk (which might be low, but not 0).
