[Passed] NuPool Grant proposal 3

Hello Shareholders,

The second run of NuPool is nearly done and will finish on the 16th of June 2015. We have successfully provided a fairly constant level of 40,000 NBT worth of liquidity on our two supported exchanges, Bittrex and Poloniex.
This is quite a bit short of our target of 70,000 NBT liquidity, which is a shame, but our extra NuBit community outreach has provided some very positive responses.
For the third round of NuPool liquidity provision we propose that we operate on the same exchanges, at the same rates (0.3% per day, 9% per month). The one change will be to reduce the target liquidity to 50,000 instead of the 70,000 currently set. It is hoped that the other TLLPs (LiquidBits and NuPond) will increase their targets in response now that their trial runs have proven the technology and their operators are (hopefully) feeling more confident in the operation of the pool software.

If the amount of liquidity provided through NuPool remains the same over the next few days (a confident bet given the pool history over the last thrree weeks) we will have ~3500 NBT remaining from the last custodial grant. If we could operate at full target of 50,000 NBT, that would fund the pool for 23 days (a good portion of the proposed 30 day operation). We therefore intend to continue operation with only a small break in service to upgrade the server operating system and the pool software.

We therefore seek a new custodial grant to cover the last week of the next operation as well as covering the pool fee. This comes in at a total of 1550 NBT. The custodial proposal follows

We intend to expand the community outreach to cover other communities such as Dogecoin and Litecoin. It is expected that we won’t have such a good reception due to the currency pairs that NuPool operates on, meaning that altcoin holders would need to change currency to NuBit or Bitcoin in order to participate. That said, the extra exposure of Nu’s liquidity operation is surely a positive thing.

We will provide more detail around the liquidity that was provided during the second NuPool operation when it comes to an end on the 16th.

Proposal RIPEMD160 hash: 15ac6923210d902bf1dab0775e92ef9a71debe6b

=##=##=##=##=##=## Custodian Hash starts with this line ##=##=##=##=##=##=

Custodial Address: BNUPooLfaBVhQz5CmFF1XFqkQ6dfoiFwvp
Amount Requested: 1550 NBT

NuPool will operate for 30 days on both Bittrex and Poloniex.
The targeted liquidity over that period will be 50,000 NBT.
The rate of compensation offered by NuPool will be 0.3% daily which scales to 9% over the course of the operation.
Custodial funds remaining at the end of the operation will be rolled over to fund the next operation of burned in the case that the operation ceases.
The total amount sought in this grant is 1550 NBT

The tolerance paramter for this operation will remain the same at 0.0085

Duration: 30 Days
Target: 50,000 NBT
Daily Rate: 0.3%
Total Rate: 9%
Tolerance: 0.0085
Pool Fee: 500 NBT
Grant for Compensation: 1050 NBT
Total Custodial Grant: 1550 NBT

=##=##=##=##=##=## Custodian Hash ends with this line ##=##=##=##=##=##=

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


What’s your intended tolerance? Will it change if this motion passes?

Any explicit info on the intended spread or the tolerated spread range mentioned by @dysconnect here. ?

Good morning,

First off, apologies for not being explicit around the description of the NuPool operating parameters. That was in no way intended to be a slight towards the important conversation that has been taking place around such matters. It was an honest, accidental ommision followed by an inability to spend much time by a computer over the weekend.

I must admit to still being on the fence over whether large allowable spreads are a good thing. They certainly are from a pool participant perspective but, from a Nu perspective, they could be damaging to the braand at this early stage.

I intend to keep the pool operating parameters the same as they have been for the last two operational periods.
That corresponds to a tolerance value of 0.0085 which would allow for the range of spreads available currently.
The default spread in the inuitwallet/nu-pool client will remain the same but I did recently add @Nagalim s change to allow for the deviation parameter to be specified in the config file.

I haven’t been as active in the conversation around the future pool operations as I perhaps should have been. The bulk of my spare time has been spent on upkeep of the server software and the further integration of NuBot. That is going well and should be ready for the next NuPool operation. As part of that I have exposed all the configurable parammters available in NuBot to the client config file. That will allow for much mor configurability from the client perspective so will mean that pools potentially need to re-examine their configurations. There is the added complexity that servers and NuBots may be getting their prices from the new price streaming server so it could be expected that there would be no need for a server tolerance as all bots will be operating at the same price. That remains to be seen as there is still work to be done in incorporating that streaming service ino the server and client scripts.

I will shortly update the OP with the tolerance value as well as another edit to specify the pool fee as a distinct number. The address and amount will remain the same but the hash will change.
Apologies again fior not responding before this.



15ac6923210d902bf1dab0775e92ef9a71debe6b verified and voted.

My apologies if you found my criticism too harsh in the spread motion thread. Thank you for your keen attention, I appreciate your diligence and am definitely voting for this proposal.

1 Like

If there was any criticism I didn’t pick up on it, harsh or not, so no worries there.
The conversation around spreads is definitely an important one to be having, I’m just concerned that the upcoming changes to the pools (NuBot and parametric order book) will change the landscape beyondthe scope of the current motions and will lead to them needing a rethink. Cross that bridge when we come to it I think.

I’m about to halt the NuPool server in order to update and start for the third operation. Clients will report a disconnect but I don’t plan on being too long so they should reconect automatically once the server is accepting connections again.
I’ll do a manual payout for any remaining balances which will be the last payout from the existing address. All future payouts will come from the address in the OP.

Wish me luck.

Edit. First stumbling block. I can’t set the new address as the liquidity reporting address as it isn’t yet a valid custodian address. I will continue to use the current one for reporting of liquidity

1 Like

This grant proposal has passed.
Thank you all for voting.