[Passed] Motion to introduce new NuBits products

[tomjoad]

The Nu block explorer is down at the moment, but this motion has received votes in 41 of the past 100 blocks.

[cryptog]

5febe97664ed02c8d24dbb444b6a9f43f7a8dea9 verified and voted.

[sportscliche]

I would like to vote no for reasons stated in another thread, but no longer have the necessary computer hardware to run the nu client.

[zoro]

if you don’t vote at all is the same as you vote ‘no’.
this motion vote is only if you like to vote ‘yes’

[Nagalim]

Not if @sportscliche doesn’t have the computer power to simply mint. To vote ‘no’ you have to keep minting.

@sportscliche can you please link to where you expressed your reservations for this motion?

[sportscliche]

Here’s what I posted in another thread:

[Poll] Which Currency Should Nu Support?

I completely agree with @Sentinelrv. Nubits should be singularly focused on the $1 peg until it proves to the financial and crypto world that it can handle anything thrown at it. Current volumes do not allow it to make that claim. This will take time. Yes there is reason for optimism, but the community should not become overconfident when the experiment is still in its infancy. Further, adding new pegged assets dilutes the message…when people think of NuBits, they should think 1 USD. At …

[masterOfDisaster]

Further, adding new pegged assets dilutes the message…when people think of NuBits, they should think 1 USD. At least for now.

I hear your concerns.
But it’s not that new assets will be here with the successful vote of this motion.
It will take some time - a lot of time - until the pegged assets go live. The development team is busy with BCE. For the time being NBT is the only pegged asset Nu offers.
As introducing new pegged assets takes that much time, it’s no bad idea to lay the foundation for the introduction now.

[sportscliche]

I’m sorry to be in disagreement here. One can look at other blockchain projects and see the consequences of taking on too much, diluting the effort, diluting the message, and then suffering the consequences. Heck, I’m currently suffering the consequences of BCE development, as I anxiously await the release of Nu 2.1 to allow me to resume minting. Please understand that I don’t fault the devs for not prioritizing this. I know I’m in the minority. My point here is the community must be pragmatic about what can be accomplished with the available resources. I’m advocating being cautious and conservative.

I strongly prefer that nu do one thing really, really well — establish itself as the premiere dollar pegged crypto. The community may think that milestone has already been achieved and by some metrics it has. But unless there is a substantially increased, sustained trading volume, it may be dismissed by some as little more than an experiment or curiosity. By “increased” I’m thinking at least an order of magnitude or more.

When I read the motion, the message I get is “full speed ahead with more pegged assets”.

[masterOfDisaster]

I’m sorry to be in disagreement here.

It’s healthy to have different opinions, different views that are being voiced. This is what made Nu as strong as it is.

My point here is the community must be pragmatic about what can be accomplished with the available resources.

My assessment might be wrong, but I feel the community is playing a bigger role every day.
Organizing the liquidity providing is and will be important for the success of Nu - with one or more pegged assets. Shareholders might consider posting drafts for NuBot grants; running NuBot is not that hard.
Tier 4 and 6 management is being prepared for handing over to multi signature custodians.
This community rises to meet the challenges!

I strongly prefer that nu do one thing really, really well — establish itself as the premiere dollar pegged crypto.

NBT has been stable for over one year. How many more years to go?
The liquidity is high, the software runs stable. This might not be completely true for ALP, but NuBot is awesome! The wallet software works great.

But unless there is a substantially increased, sustained trading volume, it may be dismissed by some as little more than an experiment or curiosity. By “increased” I’m thinking at least an order of magnitude or more.

Don’t you think that additional pegged assets might help increasing trading volume?
That would be good for Nu.
Nu is the experiment, NBT merely one of its facets - in my opinion.

When I read the motion, the message I get is “full speed ahead with more pegged assets”.

If I got that message, I’d be on your side.
The message I get is: let’s create a framework; prepare the next steps to allow some movement as soon as Nu is ready to go.
Nu needs a better distributed liquidity providing, more custodians, more NuBots, more automation, more metrics, seeded auctions, more experience, etc. to go full speed ahead.

What Nu already achieved is promising. I don’t fear for its future, not at the moment.
I think one key to Nu’s success is to enlarge the community.
I guess announcing new pegged assets can help there; to have a bigger community supporting the new assets on the market.

[Sentinelrv]

I agree with MoD. I believe it’s not the time right yet to introduce new pegged assets due to all the reasons mentioned above, but that’s not what this motion is about. It’s about preparing for when NuShareholders are ready to pull the trigger. My main concern is whether Nu will be able to handle the demand B&C will bring. B&C will be finished and operational before we ever get to introducing these new pegged assets, so we’ll have plenty of time to see how the peg handles the increased demand before committing to sell new ones. So I support this motion to help get things started.

[mhps]

When I read the motion, the message I get is “full speed ahead with more pegged assets”.

I was wondering teh same thing -

I hope it won’t start to request much man power until B&C is stably operational, tiered NBT peg liquidity is setup and kept rationally, and BTC volatility risk of NBT/BTC pair is effectively mitigated. Or I feel our resources will be spreaded too thin.

to which Tom assured -

The nice thing about this motion is it allows us to plant our flag in the ground, without having to venture into the jungle so to speak. We can create the beginnings of several new products, even if it will take months before shareholders authorize full-scale operations.

I think there will be quite a few months.

[zoro]

i believe all custodians with common sence agree with sportscliche. But this motion is not introducing new NU assets.
i think is a matter of interpretation here

edit: i see only 2 votes!
one is me and the other cryptog?

[masterOfDisaster]

edit: i see only 2 votes!

The blockexplorer is frozen - look at the block height…

nud getmotions | grep 5febe97664ed02c8d24dbb444b6a9f43f7a8dea9 -A 5
    "5febe97664ed02c8d24dbb444b6a9f43f7a8dea9" : {
        "blocks" : 1954,
        "block_percentage" : 19.54,
        "sharedays" : 563931534,
        "shareday_percentage" : 17.9691363
    },

[cryptog]

@assistant motion vote 5febe97664ed02c8d24dbb444b6a9f43f7a8dea9

[zoro]

assistant is on vacation! try NU wallet and block height

[cryptog]

yes it is currently at 38% on both measures (block and sharedays)

[zoro]

then it has the momentum to pass!

[cryptog]

absolutely.

[masterOfDisaster]

@assistant motion vote 5febe97664ed02c8d24dbb444b6a9f43f7a8dea9

Allow me to be your assistant

nud getmotions | grep 5febe97664ed02c8d24dbb444b6a9f43f7a8dea9 -A 5
    "5febe97664ed02c8d24dbb444b6a9f43f7a8dea9" : {
        "blocks" : 4052,
        "block_percentage" : 40.52,
        "sharedays" : 1255031331,
        "shareday_percentage" : 40.55221009
    },

[tomjoad]

This motion has received 79 block votes out of the past 100 and is on its way to passing in the next 24-48 hours.