[Passed] NuPool Grant Proposal 2

[woolly_sammoth]

Thanks Creon.
With the documentation efforts, there are some plans which were mentioned but a lot will also depend on the issues that arise from the (hopeful) influx of new users. I was cautios about putting too much detail in the proposal text itself as it would be counter productive to be held to produce something which actually gives no value to the users while missing something that is helpful. Rest assured that there will be a lot of movement on this.

Please do play the penny pincher :). Yes. The 138 was the figure calculated a few days ago and assumed that target liquidity would be hit for the remaining duration. That isn’t the case so the remaining Nubits will either be rolled over into the next run or burned.

[cryptog]

9a13182e18122bafb5c21374b3355880ac6291fc verified and custodian grant voted.

[willy]

Regarding fee reductions:

It’s not that easy to implement such a solution in a pooled environment, as many different accounts will have orders running. We could however hand a list displaying the orders which are validated by the pool to the exchanges and hope to get an individual refund / discount for the PLPCs. That wouldn’t necessarily lower costs on shareholder’s side though.

Woolly and I are still discussing the spread topic.

[creon]

Here is an idea:

• Compensate every order with a spread tolerance of < 0.5% with 0.3% per day (as right now). Submit this as Tier 1 liquidity
• Compensate every order with a spread of 0.5% < spread < 1.0% with 0.1% per day, but only up to the remaining target of the original payout (i.e. if the target is 10k, and currently 7k are placed < 0.5% then only 3k will be compensated at 0.1%). Also submit this as Tier 1 liquidity.
• Compensate every order with a spread of 1.0% < spread < 10.0% with 0.01% per day. Note that this is the range where you can make profit anyway, so there should actually not be a large compensation. Submit every order in this area as Tier 2 liquidity
• Allow orders to be placed with a spread of 10.0% < spread < 20.0% These orders don’t get compensated, but each NBT provided here per minute gives you one ticket and every day on ticket is picket randomly and honored with 2 NBT or something. Submit every order in this area as Tier 3 liquidity.

This wouldn’t be so hard to implement. I mean we are already voting for this grant, so here it will be 0.5% anyway as usual. We cannot pay 0.3% for a spread area where you can make profit with a 50 line python arbitrage bot. But you could make a motion to change it.

The user could simply specify the level in the config file so nobody would really need to do math here.

[dysconnect]

Compensate every order with a spread of 1.0% < spread < 10.0% with 0.01% per day. Note that this is the range where you can make profit anyway, so there should actually not be a large compensation. Submit every order in this area as Tier 2 liquidity

Your proposal basically expects people to do this sort of tier 2 liquidity for free. Remember liquidity providers take a lot of risk; this is not a good incentive model, and income from high spreads far from guaranteed. It also concentrates liquidity around very small spreads, which is the opposite of what the above discussion is trying to achieve. An incentive model can be seen as good if it makes the order distribution look like the “parametric order book” mentioned above.

[creon]

I don’t understand. The picture you see in the parametric order book is a cumulative representation, like the buy and sell walls on the exchange. Of course we want to concentrate liquidity around very small spreads, 1 NBT should be 1 USD, and this is also the case in the parametric order book. And above solution will create an order book which looks similar to the right side of the parametric order book picture, where you only have three points on the curve and can adjust the expected slope by setting corresponding interest rates.

That 0.01% is too small for Tier 2 may be true, these numbers serve as example here and surely need some more thought. But in general the parametric order book and this here are equivalent models.

[Nagalim]

Remember liquidity providers take a lot of risk

That is mostly because of the small spread. That’s why we should be paying more for a smaller spread and less for a wider one. Let those willing to take risks for higher reward move their spread closer.

[cryptog]

I understand that in your view the farther away from perfect peg (no spread) the sell/buy spread is the less real liquidity it produces. That is why a higher spread liquidity would be in a lower Tier. I think it would sense.
We should encourage lpcs to adjust their spread and let them know that they are likely to get less rewards in case they put a large spread. Right now, it seems it is not clear at all if you can easily modify the spread in the config file.
Then the market should find a balance in which most of the liquidity should be concentrated on a compromise: decent reward for a tolerable volatility risk.

I do believe tha the current spread 0.2% (it seems in most cases?) is too small.
Even in forex, when you change from usd to jpy you pay more like 1%.
In fact i think traders should have no problems paying more than 0.2%.
Stable crypto is not a normal crypto. This should justify a higher trade commission, not charged by the exchange but by the lpc.

Edit: of course, right now traders would rather hedge with usd in case the spread is too strong but once nbt is spread accross several exchanges hedging with nbt should be more advantageous. Furthermore right now nbt has a strong lead on other pegged crypto. So nothing prevents us from imposing a standard rate at this stage.

[mhps]

Park Rate Voting

@mhps
Roughly starting from here there were discussion about increased spread for 3-4 days. You actually started the discussion from a post somewhere before the one in the link. I would like to hear what you think.

… I think experimentation with spreads is healthy to see how the market reacts. Wider spreads lower the quality of our product, but it also lowers or eliminates the cost of liquidity.

We hear people not trusting Nu because there is no income in sight. How solid is the quality of a financial product if the issuing company has a shaky financial footing?

[Nagalim]

This passed

[woolly_sammoth]

This did pass, thank you all for voting.
The server is up and is submitting liquidity. There are a few users already but all funds still on the sell side.

I’ve made a few tweaks to the server and client. These changes are more for the ease of running than altering the logic of the order submitting or crediting. I have added a new way of starting multiple clients for those who want to run on bittrex and poloniex simultaneously.

I plan to let the server run overnight with these modifications and then post an official start thread in the morning detailing the changes. In the event that something goes pop overnight, I’ll review the changes and make another start. Anyone who submits orders between now and the official start will be compensated but from the pool fee rather than the custodial grant.