[Passed] NuPool 9

huafei · May 22, 2016, 9:04am

different price of main price feed and backup price feed ,

bitfinex is $440 , but Coinbase is $446

zoro · May 22, 2016, 9:06am

Sorry, i don’t understand. The offset shouldn’t be changed by its own!

huafei · May 22, 2016, 9:06am

check the nubot log about price feed

woolly_sammoth · May 22, 2016, 11:32am

Currently there is no feedback between NuBot and the pool. Nothing that the pool does should affect the parameters of NuBot. My best suggestion is to restart the bot. If it carries on, could you get me the logs of NuBot and I’ll take a look.

zoro · May 22, 2016, 11:39am

Thanks. I will sent you the logs soon

Nagalim · May 22, 2016, 1:42pm

Im sorry i cannt help here. I’m happy to shut down my t3 operations, but id have to ask you to get the nbt from FLOT. This isn’t a question of speed, it’s a question of consensus and I would much rather use multisig consusensus than singlesig.

mhps · May 22, 2016, 6:05pm

To try something new, I can lend you nubits for a daily compensation of 1/4 of your daily pool ops fee until you get cheaper fund.

edit: ok that can be pretty expensive considering that you might only need several tens nbt a day. How about the compensation being current 11.2 day park rate? Anyway trying some lending is good for nubits.

zoro · May 22, 2016, 6:07pm

The latest update is that i see this
INFO - Forcing a 0.01$ minimum spread to protect from collisions
in the logs. I don’t know the “how” and the “why” but as a result nubot
sets 0.005 offset for both walls regardless the chosen offset setup.
It seems that if i set the key ‘multipleoperators’ to ‘false’ then i am ok.
but i don’t know what other problems can be arised by this!

@woolly_sammoth, a question:
what is the ‘Mainfeed’ and ‘Backupfeeds’ that you have set to NuPool?
I guess the users should setup exactly the same in order to have the same price calculations and be payed correctly.

masterOfDisaster · May 22, 2016, 6:58pm

It’s against rules, but one can speculate whether the current term was not passed, because shareholders want to stop it or just because the voting started late.
I dare say it’s the latter, but I don’t know.

We need some action, if we want to keep this ALP running.

Hell, we discuss about brand image and a tight spread, but are willing to stop ALP at the most important exchange just because we are afraid of the consequences?
@woolly_sammoth, can you please tell me where to deposit the funds (can BRsLYtJhPhz7QdkKK54HkoizUrNk64wFwf be used, although it’s meant to be a custodial address? Does that create any protocol conflicts?) and how much you expect to need until this grant supposedly passes? At 33 NBT per day, 200 NBT should be a good start, right?

I’ll create a FLOT NBT deposit to your pool address, but won’t sign it immediately.
Let’s see what other FLOT members think about that first,
@dysconnect, @ttutdxh, @jooize, @woodstockmerkle, is it in the favour of Nu to do that?
I dare say yes, but this might once more perceived as FLOT acting as a governacne group and I understand why.
Oh, btw. I’m asking this explicitly in my role as FLOT member and not as forum member. I know that this is not part of my contract, but as FLOT is responsible for liquidity, I feel responsible for NuPool in the current situation as well.

dysconnect · May 22, 2016, 8:01pm

If we want to stay behind the as many lines as possible, I can personally loan interest-free the 200 NBT of the 435 NBT I’m supposed to be getting anyway, until the grant passes. Or if it is still considered a violation that FLOT pays itself, then I don’t really have much to say, except that I believe it is in Nu’s best interests to fund NuPool immediately. Recent events really make we want to cut out some bureaucracy but I’ll persevere.

Sending coins to an address does not preclude it from receiving a custodial grant, according to vote.cpp, where it basically only refuses to grant the coins if an address has received a grant before. The rationale is perhaps to block undesired behavior occurring in the aftermath of a grant passing, i.e. that an address is still continually voted on and it’s confusing to minting clients whether to give another grant again.

woolly_sammoth · May 22, 2016, 8:19pm

Thank you for the last few posts and the offers made. I’m happy to say that a donor was found and the pool has been funded for long enough for the proposal to pass (I hope). Funds from the passing of the proposal will be used to pay back the funds received as soo as it passes. I will start work on the next proposal tomorrow and allow for some debate around the changes that are happening around liquidity provision, which th plenty of time left for a round of voting.

zoro · May 23, 2016, 10:31am

can you please comment?
thanks
i have set offset = 0.005 but sometime my order is at the top of the order list and other times are far away!
i guess the far away ones are not receiving any reward!

edit: i am trying to find a way for synchronization between NuPool’s and user nubots’ rewarding boundaries. Now i understand why sometimes i saw zero rewards in pybot also!

woolly_sammoth · May 23, 2016, 3:38pm

Sorry for the delay. The order of the feeds mirrors the default order found in NuBot

github.com

inuitwallet/ALP-Server/blob/master/src/price_fetcher.py#L170


    )
# Eur is the same but with bitstamp as higher
if unit == 'eur':
    return self.fetch_price(
        'bitstamp_eur', [
            'yahoo',
            'google_official'
        ],
        unit
    )
# Bitcoin
if unit == 'btc':
    return self.fetch_price(
        'bitfinex', [
            'blockchain',
            'bitcoin_average',
            'coinbase',
            'bitstamp',
            'yahoo',
            'google_official'
        ],

If the price streamer were up this would be less of an issue but worth knowing the order for occasions when it isn’t providing the price.
It’s worth mentioning that I haven’t seen a price feed other than bitfinex used although I’m not watching the logs 24/7. Perhaps updating the price output of Eu.nupool.net/status to include the price source would be helpful?

Nagalim · May 23, 2016, 4:08pm

What is preventing this?

zoro · May 25, 2016, 7:46am

I don’t see the data feeders vote for it!
And in orders books i see some good liquidity in a tight spread, i guess it is from NuPool users

masterOfDisaster · May 25, 2016, 7:49am

That’s not correct. At least one is for days:

Cybnate supports it as well:

Check the other data feed providers yourself

zoro · May 25, 2016, 7:51am

Well, something is off!
BRsLYtJhPhz7QdkKK54HkoizUrNk64wFwf 2 votes 12 blocks ago 2,720 NBT
BRsLYtJhPhz7QdkKK54HkoizUrNk64wFwf 39 votes 1 block ago 1,280 NBT

i saw the first line which is very very wrong. Someone is voting with wrong NBT amount!

edit: @woolly_sammoth, what is missing from Nubot ALPv2 in order to be “perfect”, is what was in pybot’s functionality, the ability for the user to see what was his/her exact reward every single minute

masterOfDisaster · May 25, 2016, 8:13am

This amount is from edit version 3 of this OP (from May 16th).

The NSRholder who configured that vote forgot to update it or isn’t aware that an update is required.
Registering a data feed can help here - if the data feed is up-to-date.

And frequency voting wouldn’t be bad either, although I wonder, how misconfigured votes can lead to a trail of misconfigured votes for some time.
@Nagalim can you give me a private lesson, please?

huafei · May 25, 2016, 10:12am

@masterOfDisaster Is there any setting can avoid the nubot eat the other side’s order that pay 0.25% fee?

masterOfDisaster · May 25, 2016, 10:13am

Sure: a sufficiently high spread.
But we all want a tiny little snippy teenie-weeny bittie spread, don’t we?
Oh, just a second: I for one am in favour of a reasonable spread that offers a good quality at acceptable costs.