[Passed] NuPool 8 ALPv2

[zoro]

0,016
I wonder who will keep a tighter spread <0.1% in Polo.

[masterOfDisaster]

The tighter you make it, the less gain for Nu, if your bot trades funds

[zoro]

I just don’t want to scare away the NBT traders due to the larger spread.

[masterOfDisaster]

Are you speaking of thoseNBT traders who often successfully hedge with NBT and drain money from Nu?
They don’t need to have a tight spread.
The guys who just want to buy and sell some NBT need a tight spread, not the whales.
Parametric order book was made for that.

In the future there might be a very tight ALP with not very much order volume, which can be provided cheaply and bots run by Nu, which offer bigger volume at much higher spreads.
This way the big traders pay some money for the service Nu offers.
I have no intention to move the wealth of Nu to traders by offering big volumes at low spreads.
As I run the NuBot with Nu funds, I will of course follow each order that is given by motion.
I can only recommend to keep the orders close to the mid price small.
The current ALP scheme is not really matching that vision.

[zoro]

You have a point here. But the thing is that i am hearing sometimes that 1 NBT is not 1 USD but 1,01 usd
or 0,99 usd, etc. You know, it is like we are “telling lies” about the peg and i don’t like it when i am reading those things by new users.

[masterOfDisaster]

Nu never promised to offer NBT as a pegged product to USD(expressed in BTC), but to USD.
It’s very tightly pegged to USD!

Sadly the “advertising phase”, in which a “peg” to USD(BTC) is offered, is still going on and costs a lot of money.
It’s really about time to get US-NBT focussed on USD:

[Passed] Promoting Nubits to internet payment processors, exchanges, and gateways

Nubit has lost one round to Tether in being traded at one of the major internet e-currency exchange http://www.rchange.net/ , where now Tether can be bought with or sold for 7 e-currencies such as PerfectMoney, PayPal, and btc-e USD. Support this motion and https://discuss.nubits.com/t/discussion-contract-to-create-web-interface-code-that-one-can-use-to-sell-buy-nubits-with-fiat-online/3567

[Discussion] Contract to create web interface code that one can use to sell/buy Nubits with fiat online

I propose to pay for a contract to enable opening up a new space of possiblities to buy/sell Nubits. This will have several benefits and features: Now if people wants to buy Nubits they have to register at an exchange. This discourages people from trying out with minimum hassle, and increases centralisation. With web sites set up using the software proposed people can easily buy or sell back Nubits. This software can be used to provide liquidity in NBT/FIAT pairs similar to the ALP software …

[Nagalim]

We arent offering to buy and sell at $1. We are simply offering the best product on the market. As long as that’s true, we don’t have to make any promises. You don’t hear the sun promising to rise every morning, but I’m still pretty convinced it will again tomorrow.

[woolly_sammoth]

Evening.

Apologies, the 0.015 is a misprint, it was intended to be 0.0105 to mirror the current tolerance of NuPool and keep the spread-after-fees consistent. I will update the Op now and the daology post shortly after.

[zoro]

OMG! So much debate about spread and it was a misprint!

[woolly_sammoth]

I’m still open to debate on it, just thought it important to correctly show my initial intentions.

[masterOfDisaster]

Debating liquidity and parameters is debating one of the most important parts of Nu.
This can never be wrong

[Sentinelrv]

Liquidity providers will be able to run the NuBot software now with ALP v2, so that means they’ll all have access to NuBot’s redesigned interface/gui…

NuBot releases

19-11-2015 NuBot development, update #22 NuBot 0.3.2a has been released and contains just a simple hotfix that corrects a bug in pricing that only affected sell-side mode. Upgrade recommended for current 0.3.2 bot users : no need to change anything in your config, replacing NuBot.jar is enough . https://bitbucket.org/JordanLeePeershares/nubottrading/downloads/nubot-v0.3.2a.zip

Is this the point where liquidity providing becomes so easy to do that we can advertise pools to normal people (no technical experience) to get more providers on board? Reducing the difficulty like this should lower the barrier for entry.

I’m thinking about ads on the Daily Decrypt, Reddit ads and other places, but only when it’s necessary to increase the amount of liquidity provided. Of course I understand we need to go through a testing period first before doing this. What do you think? Is it getting close to the time we should start advertising liquidity providing for Nu?

[mhps]

You don’t hear the sun promising to rise every morning, but I’m still pretty convinced it will again tomorrow.

We don’t pay $10k/month for the Sun to do it, and on top of it we always stay on the losing end in arbitrage – by design – every time BTC pricce swings.

[Cybnate]

I mean gateways have 1% and they are considered the last line of peg “defense”.

I believe this should be lower e.g. around 0.7% allowing for transaction for fees effectively having a tight spread of around 0.5%. ALP should hold a tight peg, but reward relatively high for that, although with a low volume to reduce costs.

I don’t support ALPs continuing with high spreads going forward now we have a decent NuBots infrastructure available supported by FLOT which can support the peg as a second line of defence at high 1%+ spreads.

Also the volume can be lowered to reduce the cost of a tight peg.

[willy]

Also the volume can be lowered to reduce the cost of a tight peg.

Please elaborate?

[masterOfDisaster]

May I?

[Decommissioned] PyBot passive gateway on Poloniex and on Bittrex

At the moment Nu supports tens of thousands of USD value at a tight spread at Poloniex.This needs to end to prevent Nu from bleeding out.Several hundred or even a few thousand USD per side at a tight spread should be enough at the moment. It’s mainly the traders whi use NBT for hedging and not the users who want to buy a cup of coffee.We need to stop making professional traders rich at the expense of Nu.Pro traders might still be happy to buy/sell big amounts of NBT at 2%, 3% or even more percent offset. Increasing the offset for the big volumes means traders who urgently need to buy or sell participate in the costs.

[Nagalim]

There is a motion which states no alp running on poloniex can require an offset lower than 0.7%. If you dont like that, you’ll need to pass a motion nullifying that spread regulation motion. Saying you wont support a motion unless it goes directly against existing motion is a difficult place to put operators in.

[masterOfDisaster]

Are you referring to this motion?

[Passed] Motion to regulate spread values for liquidity operations

For liquidity operations between NBT and BTC, the guaranteed offset shall be at least 0.005 plus the exchange fee rate, and at most 0.05 plus the exchange fee rate. For example, if the exchange fee is 0.2%, then the operator shall ensure that the guaranteed offset is at least 0.007 and at most 0.052.

[dysconnect]

As Polo is going to offer <0.15% fee for market makers the minimum spread is going to be 0.65%. Hopefully the liquidity situation is will be more transparent as more people place open orders rather than dump directly on the walls. Though I suspect some code about matching orders might go against that.

[Cybnate]

There is a motion which states no alp running on poloniex can require an offset lower than 0.7%. If you dont like that, you’ll need to pass a motion nullifying that spread regulation motion. Saying you wont support a motion unless it goes directly against existing motion is a difficult place to put operators in.

Yes, I remember that highly contentious and debated motion. See my response to it here: [Passed] Motion to regulate spread values for liquidity operations. I supported some sort of guidance but this went too far in my opinion and now appears to be unnecessarily constraining as I suggested at the time.

As I’ve shared my position in that thread I’m not going to debate this again or raise motions to nullify. Instead I will call for the minimum offset this motion allows in order to have my support, which I understand is 0.7%.