I must acknowledge that after 2 months since the peg failure, I am rather convinced by the liquidity engine model of @Phoenix .
The recovery of the peg with no reserves at all is a good example of it.
The avenues for revenues …there are infinite models once we have a good peg.
I think @Phoenix is right in saying that we can dilute nushares to raise money.
Look at all these crypto projects that have no real value proposition whatsoever (I still believe that the crypto projects that are the real deals are only Nu and B&C)…and yet they raise like 4000 btc…with nothing but vapoware…
It is clear that we cannot apply the traditional view of business to the crypto world.
So let us stop arguing on who was the cause of the peg failure in May.
Shareholders are responsible, period, including FLOT, @JordanLee , @Phoenix (i suppose he was a shareholder before the failure) and the rest.
And let us move on.
It is a waste of time to argue on that.
We must acknowledge that @Phoenix (and @jooize) is doing a great job in restoring the peg and @Phoenix must recognize that shareholders who entrusted FLOT are responsible for the peg failure.
It seems Phoenix’s reputation support on B&C decreases these days, and RSOT motion is about to pass. Near 49% ratio now. If it is passed, phoenix has to hand over the dev fund(in NSR/NBT) to reputed signers as a group.
If JL’s shares get removed and there’s an updated white paper I’d be willing to chip in something in return for extra BKS. As I understand there’s some deviation from the original design. @phoenix if you don’t want to get kicked out you should at least answer some questions.
Is this actually possible to do? If so, then Augeas can be the stable currency and B&C shareholders can burn Jordan’s shares and completely remove his influence from the network. It is too late to do that with Nu, which is why a new blockchain was necessary. As long as his shares are part of this network, I consider it dead on arrival, which is one of the reasons why I was advocating for Augeas to become a replacement for B&C.
He obviously doesn’t have over 51% though, since this motion passed. What was the minimum percentage of shares @sigmike said was needed for a hard fork?
I added my 2,000 shares to this motion last night, which is probably why it passed so quickly.
We need to get this moving. Who will be part of the multisig team? We can’t take the dev funds from Phoenix without a multisig group. Once these people are voted in, we can really see if Phoenix cares about laws passed by motion.
Having the 2nd highest reputation according to the B&C client, I like to also volunteer as long as signing occurs less than once a week. Fine to discuss operations on a daily bases if needed though.
50+% of the minting shares (and some development) are required to make you the sole block creator in the main chain (by ignoring other’s blocks). Then you can do anything that would require more than 50% since you now have 100%. But there are not many things that require more than 50%. And since this is based on the minting shares there’s the possibility that some dormant shares awake and make the other chain takeover. But I’m not sure this has anything to do with your question.