I think criteria 1 is defined as “immediate”. If buy-side walls dip below 25% of all liquidity, the emergency funds kick in right away. It would be dangerous at that point to let any amount of time pass without acting.
The buying side dipping below 25% happened once, right? It was solve by offering high parking rate supposedly. So that was once a year and solveable without selling reserve NSR.
Note that there is another scenario of low percentage buy side. What if the sell side is 74k and buy side is 26k and daily volume is hvering 1 k, then one day the buy side dips below 25k, causng the buy side to be less than 25%. Are we going to increase buy side or do we realize there is actually too much sell side and we are going to cut liquidity provision interest and reduce sell side (which in the example is a better way)? Reducing sell side is also going to lift the buy side in terms of percentage, and if the volume is constantly low, it is the better action.
We only have so much braintime to go around. I say burn the NSR and get the action done.
by the way this discussion highlights again the similarity between Tier 4 and 5, here.
1 Like
If my bot messes up and posts a million sell side liquidity, does it force the multisig hand to sell nsr? I should hope not.
It’s possible to mess up liquidity information if false information is provided - intentionally or by accident.
For that reason the requirement to grant somebody a custodian address is trust in the reliability and integrity of that person. It would be good if that person does all to make errors unlikely, keep the involved systems safe and use tested software.
If something happens despite all the efforts, it needs to be treated by clever exception handling - checking the buy and sell side via API is one option to improve the reliability; plausibility checks are another option.
-
if you don’t want to rely on the broadcast liquidity information, you need to gather information from exchanges through API.
That combined with broadcast liquidity could be much more reliable than relying solely on broadcast liquidity information. -
plausibility check: the first thing to look after if a million sell side liquidity were reported would be the final balance of BhCnQrYrA5LZm871dtMQEXeU93gmqbhdrC, because that much funds could only be on sell side if the FSRT had put them there.
I think a better strategy is making decision based on averages which weighs down spikes and irregularities.
Done. Here are the transaction IDs for burns totaling 39,999,999 NSR:
- bd4520ae2e0a93f696c63c8673612da415cee482a417fe62caa4c9b8fed1affb
- 0cb268650a6d3d8aaf768db6240d499c86dc03ba3deeba9baebd73a52a83a30f
- f8830c699a97289ae833b3da7a72d2138ec61c646a82e16ee1ba9da748b7cc28
- f9c5682c009271e75e9b4b80a06c55445bbe96bf2cd1861a7535b53fb6d0cb9c
There are no more undistributed NSR in existence and the initial distribution is completely finalised. When the project began, 1 billion NSR were expected to be distributed, but in fact only about 815 million were. I am glad we have been able to exceed shareholder expectations by making NSR more scarce than expected.
The burns contain a small number of minted NSR. There is a minor bug in the software that causes minting when a wallet is momentarily unlocked in the process of creating a normal NSR transaction. There were also a small number of blocks accidentally minted when the wallet was unlocked to import and export private keys, although this is generally done in a disconnected environment. Voting was never configured in these wallets, so in no case was undistributed NSR ever used to vote for any grants or motions.
Going forward, the NSR supply will depend on the level of demand for Nu’s currency products. Increased currency demand will likely result in NSR buybacks and burns, while decreases in demand will likely result in the sale of new NSR created directly by shareholders.
This also means the network has no capacity to bring tier 6 liquidity (NSR sales combined with NBT burns) quickly should buy support suddenly and dramatically diminish. A custodial grant of NSR must be passed by shareholders first. We ought to select a group of shareholders to hold NSR in a multisig address that can be used within hours of when our liquidity drops below 25% of total liquidity in tiers 1, 2 and 3. We may never need to use tier 6 liquidity quickly, but our ability to do so will strengthen the peg and public confidence in the peg.
10 Likes
Hi @cryptog
The current total liquidity in the Nu network is:
Bid: 102485.7516 NBT
Ask: 79291.19 NBT
It is broken down in the following manner:
Tier 1:
Bid: 38969.549 NBT
Ask: 62340.6619 NBT
Tier 2:
Bid: 3067.75 NBT
Ask: 6343.4557 NBT
Tier 3:
Bid: 27152.439 NBT
Ask: 28569.0 NBT
right now we are at 40%.
Excellent.
Raising park rate is like generating NBT grant to help remove NBT from sell wall and generate buy demand. The time scale to pass a custodial NSR grant and to raise park rate to super high is about the same. So for short term fire-fighting, a custodial NSR grant is not a must, but an option. For the long term removal of NBT, custodial NSR grantis is the way to go. They are two specialized tools Nu gradually acquires.
2 Likes
I sent a request to coinmarketcap.com to set the available NSR supply equal to the total supply. Since the burn our market cap appears about 5% lower than it is because the available supply is erroneously calculated at around 795 million.
4 Likes
4.511 BTC of the frozen Bter funds was recently released into the main account balance. These funds have been transferred to @JordanLee, to be added to Tier 4 liquidity, at the request of @JordanLee.
6 Likes
allcoin.com is allowing withdrawing until Jan 26. However the withdrawing site at btcset.com doesn’t have nubits and nushares listed 
I have contacted @mark_allcoin and get no reply. Any one has his contact address other than the one of @allcoin.com ?
Does allcoin owe Nu funds? @jmiller
2 Likes