[Passed] Motion to introduce new NuBits products

Motion RIPEMD160 hash: 5febe97664ed02c8d24dbb444b6a9f43f7a8dea9

=##=##=##=##=##=## Motion hash starts with this line ##=##=##=##=##=##=

The network should create three new currency products: Chinese NuBits (CH-NBT), European NuBits (EU-NBT), and Special Drawing Rights NuBits (X-NBT). They should use these precise names and not NuYuan, NuEuro or NuSDR. New Nu logos should be created – CH-NBT (dark red), EU-NBT (dark blue) and X-NBT (dark green) – using the existing Nu logo design. If possible, each currency should use the same singular-letter prefix as above for creating addresses on the blockchain, such as CXXXXXXXXXXXX for CH-NBT.

One unit of each currency should be created immediately to be held by @JordanLee. Mass public creation and sale of these new currencies should not begin until a subsequent motion is passed authorizing one or all currencies to begin trading. Unless new criteria is passed through motion, a currency must have two liquidity pools confirmed, one exchange aside from B&C Exchange confirmed, and 25,000 NBT worth of liquidity confirmed prior to launching. Should shareholders wish to instead use a bootstrapping method of a centralized dual-side liquidity provider (similar to KTm or jmiller in 2014) prior to liquidity pools being established, a set term of sixty days must be enforced, at the conclusion of which all revenues would be returned to shareholders as dividends.

The current US Dollar pegged NuBits should be renamed US NuBits (US-NBT).

NuBits.com phrasing, wording, and pages should be updated to reflect a unifying NuBits brand at the discretion of @TomJoad. “The world’s first stable digital currency” tagline should be replaced with “The world’s best stable digital currencies”, with the original phrase being retained to describe US-NBT.

These new products should be introduced in the same client release as the recent successful motion to reduce the total displayed supply of NSR by 10,000.

=##=##=##=##=##=## Motion hash ends with this line ##=##=##=##=##=##=

Verify. Use everything between and including the <motionhash></motionhash> tags.

Relevant discussions:
On currency baskets On Currency Baskets
Support another currency besides NuBits Support another currency besides NuBits?
Draft motion to create 1 unit of multiple pegged currencies Draft - Motion to create 1 unit of multiple pegged currencies

I would like to present a vision for our network that can be accomplished during our second year of operations. It defines what products should be offered and how they should be branded. I believe the following plan integrates multiple discussions that have happened on our forums over the past few months in a way that will cost-effectively enhance our network.

Before I elaborate on each point, here are the three key actions that comprise this motion:

  1. We should create Chinese NuBits (CH-NBT), European NuBits (EU-NBT), and SDR NuBits (X-NBT). They should not be offered for sale until a set of operational criteria are in place.
  2. We should rename NuBits to US NuBits (US-NBT).
  3. NuBits.com should be updated to reflect these changes.

1) We should create Chinese NuBits (CH-NBT), European NuBits (EU-NBT),and SDR NuBits (X-NBT). They should not be offered for sale until a set of operational criteria are in place.

With this decision, we declare that just as a “Dollar” is a unit of fiat currency in the real world that takes multiple forms (US Dollars, Australian Dollars, Canadian Dollars, etc.), a “NuBit” is a unit of a stable digital currency that will take multiple forms (Chinese NuBits, European NuBits, SDR NuBits, and US NuBits).

One unit of each new currency should be created as a ceremonial token. Our network will thus be able to honestly claim that we pioneered each pegged digital currency. However, custodial grants of the new digital currencies for the purposes of trade should not be approved until:

  • At least two liquidity pools are willing to support it
  • At least one exchange, not including B&C Exchange, is willing to support it
  • At least 25,000 US in initial liquidity is pledged. One alternative would be to authorize dual-side liquidity providers – similar to @KTm and @Jmiller’s roles in 2014 – to bootstrap the new currency for a set defined period of time, perhaps 60 days, until liquidity pools are ready to take over. At the conclusion of their operations all funds would be converted to dividends. This may be preferable if we expect a large surge of interest initially from new users, followed by a sell-off and reduction back to normal demand levels.

The naming convention chosen is very deliberate and offers our network several advantages. To illustrate this, let’s consider one main alternative convention first. Calling these new products “NuYuan”, “NuEuro”, or “NuSDR” would open our shareholders up to regulatory scrutiny. Our network’s goal is to create digital tokens that approximate the value of real-world currencies; we never claim our products are backed by the support of real-world governments. NuYuan or NuEuro would also require users to learn new brand names, and they would need to ask why NuBits is not NuUSD. As well, there would be significantly higher development costs in re-designing the website to transform into a broad Nu portal that displayed NuYuan, NuEuro, and NuBits products.

In short, we should want “NuBits” to simply be synonymous with stable digital currencies.

While Yuan- and Euro-pegged NuBits products are unlikely to be controversial among shareholders, SDR might. I believe @desrever has identified a very important opportunity for our network. The reasons for introducing an SDR-pegged product provided in his thread are compelling. The design of our blockchain technology network can solve the primary restrictions that prevent SDR’s widespread real-world usage. Offering this product would also send a message to the world that Nu is innovative, creative, and willing to redefine what digital currencies are capable of.

I realize there might be support for an “inflation-resistant” US dollar product. I am unclear what benefits it would provide to users or why someone would purchase it. It would be unlikely to ever be used as a mass transactional tool due to its deflationary design, and it wouldn’t offer much ROI for investors. I am also unsure of how to market it with fiat-pegged currencies or baskets of currencies. At the same time, I acknowledge my view might be biased, so I would encourage someone who is better-versed in the potential benefits of this product to introduce a complementary motion that would require the addition of such a product to the implementation of this motion.

2) We should rename NuBits to US NuBits (US-NBT).

This is an easy change to make that will be well understood by the market when announced in combination with the new products above. All change can feel uncomfortable, but we should be aware that this change is likely to cause users to ask themselves “wait, are there other NuBits currencies now?” This is beneficial for our brand awareness. For those who are uncomfortable with adding the US- prefix, please consider it within the context of the additional currencies above. Failing to add the US- prefix on our existing currency would create confusion around what “NuBits” means in combination with a phrase like “Chinese NuBits”.

3) NuBits.com should be updated to reflect these changes.

My proposed plan makes the changes to nubits.com simple and inexpensive. The main changes that should occur would be:

  • “The world’s first stable digital currency” phrasing would be moved to US-NBT pages. In its place the phrase “The world’s best stable digital currencies” would be used.
  • The gold NuBits logo would remain, but an automatic image switcher would be in place to show the other products.
  • Chinese NuBits should have a dark red (maroon) Nu logo, European NuBits should have a dark blue (navy) Nu logo, and SDR NuBits should have a dark green Nu logo.
  • All other front page hero block elements will remain, including “Decentralized. Free. Secure.” as our primary tagline and “Introducing NuBits”.
  • Wording on the website would be adjusted to move from “NuBits” as a US dollar concept to “NuBits” as a stable currency concept.
  • Several sections would be updated. The Exchanges page would display NBT product-specific exchanges, the Liquidity Pools page would display NBT product-specific pools, etc.
  • A new “Products” menu header should be added, with links to each individual NuBits product in the subheaders.


So, what will happen if this motion is successful? Our network will offer more products that rely on the same proven pegging mechanisms. The network will take advantage of the historical development already complete on NuBits and introduce products that have a low marginal development cost. We will unify our branding around “NuBits” and establish that term as synonymous with “stable digital currency”, just like “Dollar” is synonymous with “fiat currency”. We will expand our network’s influence in a measured, responsible way and better compete with ambitious larger projects. We will strengthen the value of our NuShares. And, we will continue to introduce innovative financial products that have never been attempted before.

Relevant information:

I welcome all feedback and/or competing motions.


which exchange will accept this new products?
B&CEXCHANGE will be one , but where is B&C

Very exciting motion overall!

25k might be a bit too high though.

1 Like

Indeed, very exciting! You’ve done an excellent job of turning the previous discussions into a workable motion. I’m glad you went with the naming conventions we talked about before. I can see the C-NBT color seems to be inspired by the fiat Yuan and the E-NBT by the European Union flag, which is also printed on fiat Euros. It’s just a shame that the US-NBT couldn’t have originally used green (rather than yellow) to look more like the green US dollar.

If for some reason we had to go with the 60 day option of centralized dual-side liquidity to bootstrap the new products, would @jmiller and @KTm be interested in participating?


i also like it!
But, my feeling is to wait first for B&C to be ready. The new currencies would need more people and more work. B&C will give us a “hand” a big hand :slight_smile:

Like the unifying NuBits brand, definitely support that. Not keen on the inflation adjusted dollar either, the SDR is more promising.

There is certainly a consideration to change the USD-NuBits logo to green as Sentinelrv proposes. Timing and transition should be rather done sooner than later. We can still leave the Yellow logo as the generic site logo so a transition can be made at slow pace if needed at all.

25,000 NBT seems a lot to start with, but maybe just adequate to maintain a peg across two exchanges. Any further reasoning behind that number?

Is there an assumption that we won’t have a second coin until B&C exchange is running, whenever that may be? Given the exchange default risks with centralised dual-side liquidity providers not a bad idea though.


I think our current logos should remain as they are, given their widespread usage across many different websites, exchanges, and news articles. It was a coincidence that the colors I suggested lined up with the Yuan and Euro notes. It’s probably a good idea to avoid making explicit visual comparisons to existing fiat currencies.

It would be ideal to add these new products and update the website simultaneously with our NuShare denomination change. That way, we can contact all partners, services, and exchanges simultaneously to notify them of the comprehensive branding/product changes to NuShares and NuBits that would occur. I will add language to the motion hash specifying this preference. I think that it would be ideal to have B&C Exchange functional first, but I would leave that up to the judgement of the development team to decide.

That figure is a rough estimate of what demand might look like after the initial spike. I’m open to other liquidity level suggestions as I have no better insight than anyone else here.

I do think it is likely that demand will spike in the first month or two as people try out the new NBT products, and then we’ll return to normal demand. This could be a problem if we want to avoid parking rates or NSR auctions. This potential demand spike would be a strong argument for a limited term dual-side liquidity provider, with liquidity pools being set up and fully activated 60 days later once demand normalizes. There is temporary counterparty risk involved, although it would be much lower than NuBits in 2014 because shareholders could require that the dual-side liquidity provider only uses B&C Exchange. It is an inferior long-term solution though, so the dual-side custodian would only be active as long as it takes for liquidity pools to activate and demand to normalize.


Up for discussion, but I think it might need 90 days in total including gradual handover to the liquidity pools and assuming a stabilised demand. Having said that it would be easier for e.g. Euro NuBits than for SDR NuBits to provide liquidity, so maybe a more flexible approach is needed.

Is it possible to split this draft? The package is quite big.
One might want to support euro nubits, but not sdr/cny.


I think this is a valid point.

Supporting the new branding and preparation for additional pegged currencies should find a lot of support.

And I think the support for the general idea wouldn’t be affected from the individual preference regarding the next supported currency/currencies.

So splitting the motion into parts would generate even more motions that need to be discussed, followed and voted on, but it would provide the shareholders with more granularity for the next steps.


@willy I was careful in selecting the language to make sure that this motion only creates a single placeholder unit for each new NBT product. Operations cannot begin until a separate motion is authorized.

This motion would be a large step forward for our network, but it would certainly require a lot of preparation and education to the public. I would prefer adding all new products at once in one sweeping motion, announcing it at the same time as the NSR denomination switch, and then focusing on educating the external community on the improvements. It is also simpler to do the required changes (creating different logos, updating the wallet client) all at once for three new products, rather than duplicating effort at different points in time.

If a shareholder feels strongly that the network should never offer one of the three proposed products (and who knows, maybe someone does), I would encourage them to draft a motion requesting an amendment to this motion.


Thank you for offering such a systemic vision, what you are proposing is a radical change, yet I also see it as a natural step forward from here.

I agree with general lines, just some comments :

On naming and currency codes: many exchanges only allows for alphanumeric chars for the code (so the hyphen won’t do in some places) .

We need an (additional?) naming schema compliant with exchange’s shortcodes .


Also please consider that this might take a non-obvious amount of effort to adapt liquidity provision software which is now USD-centric.

The software became large and complex and many parts require some hardcore refactoring for this to become available, and also many smaller scale (subtle) changes and testing.


i hope we won’t need a different wallet for every NU product!
i mean a different NU client.

considerable effort must be done also for NuDroid (and have our products added on shapeshift) .

This is a crucial motion for NuBits future, I wish to see more action and discussion

1 Like

Good observation. I favor CNBT, ENBT, XNBT, etc. as being similar to USD, AUD, CAD dollar denominations. What do others think?

Agreed. You’ve pointed out a couple important considerations that we should keep in mind. Many of those considerations will impact the details of subsequent motions to launch these products (if this motion succeeds).

1 Like

I like it better as you’ve suggested with the region/location at the beginning and NBT at the end.

I’m still in favour of splitting this motion. I know that this is the first level of the introduction process, but the motion text states

I myself wouldn’t vote for the motion as it is, because, like I expressed a couple of times already, I’m strongly against touching anything that is even remotely linked to Chinese government. This motion is an expression of shareholder interest to pursue those plans further.
Implementing E-NBT and X-NBT appeals to me, but I have no possibility to express this without stating my support for C-NBT at the same time.

I like it, I think we can go the extra mile to five chars and use two letters when possible : EUNBT,USNBT, CNNBT, XNBT is fine

1 Like

I can feel your issue with this. That same government I believe actually prevents NuShareholders from accessing some relevant sites related to NuBits and Bitcoin and I won’t talk human rights…

Maybe softening the motion a bit and replace “should” with “may” and then add on subsequent motions to vote for implementation of each coin. That would require another vote to actually create the product on the market (besides the technical 1 coin creation). That leaves options open, and maybe we want to create a Swiss NuBit instead in the future?


dollar will collapse, yuan is controlled by an “unhuman” goverment, euro is controlled by germany’s corrupted car industry, british pound is controlled by greedy and corrupted banks, etc
what is left for us to implement in NU? :stuck_out_tongue:

edit: don’t mention SDR, it is a mix of all the above.

1 Like