[Passed] Proposal to continue LPC operation on CCEDK's NBT/USD for 60 days and with 10k NBT liquidity

Hi everyone.
I would like to keep on providing liquidity on CCEDK’s NBT/USD after my first operation is completed.
This time, I am offering 2 times more liquidity (10k USD) for 2 times longer (60 days).
Also, I am asking for the reward to be transferred after the mission is completed.

Proposal RIPEMD160 hash: 948aaf97d9f31a94904e3fb08ff4f8733f9ff4dc

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

Custodial Address: BCFQHtHjcisGVHY7sY2jERBHTYqZLhSxmM
Amount Requested: 1 NBT

If elected, I will deposit 10,000 USD on CCEDK and operate NuBot on NBT/USD in dual side mode over a period of 60 days. The reward should be paid in NBT and transferred within 7 days upon the successful end of the operations to an address that I will indicate. Every week, I will submit a report of the trades that occurred. At the end of the 60 days operations, I will provide a full report. Since the buy side might be eaten up quickly, I will rebalance from time to time (from buy side to sell side) by:
1- buying some bitcoins on NBT/BTC based on the proceeds of NBT/USD buy side.
2- selling those bitcoins on BTC/USD
3- putting back those USDs for sales on NBT/USD.
The goal is to try to maintain at least 200 USD on the buy side of NBT/USD although it is not for sure since I will cap the maximum total exchange rate loss to 200 USD for the whole 60-days period.
In compensation for the time spent, use of capital, exchange risk, exchange rate loss risk and the AML related risk taken, I am asking for 9.99% return for each 30-days period, corresponding to 1998 NBT overall for the 60-days period.

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

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

I am having a hard time finding a good reason to double the amount of USD liquidity provided to CCEDK. Do you see a demand for this, @cryptog?

Tks for your question.
It is true that there is no strong demand so far but my idea is to create/stimulate demand by offering a larger liquidity.
At the end of the day, the pair that really matters is NBT/USD.
So we need to emphasize the importance of this pair and show the world that Nu’s ultimate goal is to get rid of NBT/pairs.
And as suggested here, if all a larger portion of the whole liquidity was offered on NBT/USD, traders would somehow have to use this pair anyway.

Can’t verify properly the hash…

Copy everything between and including the “custodianhash” tags and paste into http://hash.online-convert.com/ripemd160-generator

1 Like


1 Like

@assistant custodian vote BCFQHtHjcisGVHY7sY2jERBHTYqZLhSxmM

Hi @cryptog

Here are the details for the Custodian Vote on BCFQHtHjcisGVHY7sY2jERBHTYqZLhSxmM:

[1]: https://discuss.nubits.com/t/voting-proposal-to-continue-lpc-operation-on-ccedks-nbt-usd-for-60-days-and-with-10k-nbt-liquidity
###1.00 NBT.
Blocks: 198 (1.980000%)
Share Days: 59267667 (1.784112%)

Hi everyone.
I would like to keep on providing liquidity on CCEDK’s NBT/USD after my first operation is completed.
This time, I am offering 2 times more liquidity (10k USD) for 2 times longer (60 days).
Also, I am asking for the reward to be transferred after the mission is completed.

Proposal RIPEMD160 hash: 948aaf97d9f31a94904e3fb08ff

Read More

I will add this proposal to my “datafeed” soon.
Reason is that I like to see the continuation of providing liquidity on the NBT/USD pair on CCEDK. Although one can argue about the amount, there are no competing proposals.I also support providing liquidity on fiat pairs as crypto/crypto pairs have been proven more risky and therefore more expensive. I also like the 60-day duration and the payment after delivery.

@cryptog Just one note, I will definitely follow-up voting for the final payment for your proposal assuming you raise an custodial grant but I can’t guarantee that it will pass within 7 days. This is a risk you are taking and there is a good chance it will take a bit longer. Hope you have taken that into account.

Edit: I can’t successfully verify your hash. Copying the proposal including both the hash-tags results into : 8ec178266d4ff7d86a9e9591d021e2ea43c2e43d using http://hash.online-convert.com/ripemd160-generator
Will rely on the Assistant as below.


@assistant verify

Hi @Cybnate

Here are the verification results of all the motion and custodian hashes I could find in this thread:

I found the following hashes:
0 Motion | 1 Custodial

custodial hash
Original Hash : 948aaf97d9f31a94904e3fb08ff4f8733f9ff4dc
Calculated Hash : 948aaf97d9f31a94904e3fb08ff4f8733f9ff4dc
The hash is good.

There has not been even one trade since the current CCEDK NBT/USD operation started on Feb 4.

The risks are exchange default, Nu losing peg when the LPC holds NBT and “AML related risk”. So far the LPC holds no NBT. What is this AML related risk exactly?

Compliance to it requires a number of forms and they can stop you from moving your money.

The lack of use of this pair is slightly concerning indeed. I still think it is important to have it visible just as an assurance for user who want out. Would be good to have some balance in NBT though as suggested in the currently active motion.

So I will need to create a follow up custodian grant request of the corresponding amount once the operations are completed. Right. I thought somehow that Jordan Lee or some person in charge will transfer the corresponding reward manually. Tks for reminding me.

Should I edit the proposal that is the object of the hashing or should I just add a footnote that says that I am aware about the fact that the reward transfer may take longer than 7 days.

Well are you sure you copied all the markup content between custodianhash tags including the 2 tags from the text you get after clicking verify?

They could freeze the money for a while in between. I experienced it once last year between kraken and a jp-morgan familly member bank.
They could send back the money when I try to withdraw to my local bank from ccedk bank.
I experienced it once last year.

This is included in this proposal too.

Thanks. Good to know.

Technically it is an expectation you have on the Shareholders, which would be hard to fulfill given the time a custodial grant needs to pass anyway. With this message in the thread you already indicate that you aware of this.

Very sure, will have to trust the Assistant as it doesn’t work for me. I’m ok with that.

All right. I am aware of the possibility that it might take longer than 7 days.
So I ll leave the proposal the way it is currently.

@assistant custodian vote BCFQHtHjcisGVHY7sY2jERBHTYqZLhSxmM