[Passed] Reimbursing shareholder

Cybnate 2017-12-16 03:34:56 UTC #83

Why do the same not help the insane in you view of the world?
You are advocating to help the small shareholder and with your self confessed strong Poloniex connection you have a real chance to help the little man and be part of a revolution. Or are you stirring again? Only the insane do that, don’t they?

MaVo 2017-12-16 09:20:18 UTC #84

I don’t get your point. If someone is able to quickly blackball some addresses, launch a motion and get a quarter billion newly printed NSR into his account, why should that not work for people with pennies? Why is that? What is Nu in your eyes? How much does it resemble the real world and in which aspects would you like it to make a difference? @jooize asks @ConfusedObserver for help. You ask me for help. You poor little faggots. And when small people come and ask for your help, you are not strong enough and miss the integrity to do so. You hide behind a POS system and you argue you didn’t vote for @Phoenix grant. But what about your voice? Is it gone since POS exists? Same counts for @woolly_sammoth. These small shareholders would like their NSR released. Go @woolly_sammoth and build a new client, blackball the addresses and support their motion. Instead you ignore them and ask them to do what they have been trying for months. Thanks @woolly_sammoth, these people should feel better now right, since they got genuine advice from you. It’s not fair. And now you will attack me with economic principles and that the world is not fair. @Phoenix argued that the network is still small enough to push such decisions through while later on it won’t be as easy. The network is still small in terms of shareholders with most likely @Phoenix alone holding the voting majority. Why not help these small fishes the same way as long as it is possible? Because they don’t matter. @Cybnate what do you do in your real life to help those who are weaker than you? You will ask me the same question and I will remain silent about it, but I know that I can afford to ask that question. I feel you can’t afford the answer.

Nagalim 2017-12-16 11:47:15 UTC #85

Remember that time Nu broke immutability and thought it wouldnt open the floodgates?

MaVo 2017-12-16 13:58:55 UTC #86

payroll people don’t remember/care. Non-payroll people wish payroll people would remember/care.

woolly_sammoth 2017-12-16 23:03:11 UTC #87

Payroll people both remember and care but perhaps have other things on their minds. I apologise if anyone has felt “ignored”. I welcomed my new Son into the world last Saturday so my focus has been elsewhere.

I did give the advice to create grant proposals as that is how the Nu network operates. Anyone can create a grant proposal for any reason and Shareholders can vote on them. I also made it very clear when giving that advise that it was unlikely, to my mind, that a proposal requesting reimbursement of funds held by Poloniex would pass due to the nature of the lost funds. Poloniex holds these funds and have the capability to, at any time, reactivate the Nu wallet and allow users to withdraw their funds.
In order to reimburse the funds, Nu would need to be completely sure that the held funds couldn’t be accessed should Poloniex decide to do the right thing and reactivate the wallet. Due to the nature of their off-chain accounting I think it would be very difficult to black-list any addresses that they have used to date and expect the funds they holds to not be accessible from a different address should the wallet come back online.
Blacklisting addresses previously caused a lot of trouble with the wallet client. These issues were, to my mind, a major contributor to Nu being de-listed from several exchanges. It is a hugely risky action which, with the benefit of hindsight, I don’t think was the correct one to take and shouldn’t be seriously considered again. It causes more problems than it solves.

I really do sympathise with everyone who currently has funds locked by Poloniex and I would like to see those funds returned. I don’t believe that the right course of action is for Nu to grant NuShares to anyone who can provide a screenshot of a Poloniex balances page. A Screenshot is very easy to fake, for example here is a screenshot of my Poloniex account page:

I’m not suggesting in any way that anyone who has posted a screenshot to date has falsified it in any way. My point is that if NuShareholders were to grant the funds requested based on such evidence, it would open the way for many many more such requests, real and fake.
I still maintain that the best way to tackle this is to somehow get Poloniex to reactivate the wallet and withdraw the funds when they do. I would like to devote some time to opening a conversation with Poloniex on behalf of those who have funds still with them as it is obvious that they are not responding to individual requests. I hope to report back with good news.

bebo 2017-12-16 23:21:39 UTC #88

first congratulations for your new son
now for poloniex there are three posibilties . correct me if you think there is others
first : they will never answer use and they will never fix their wallet
second : poloniex will turn into a scam and will sell the nushares we have
third : they will actually repair their wallets ( i dont believe this but i will just put it)
in the first case i think we both agree that printing new nushares is the solution
in the second case we have nothing to do thats why i suggest taking legal actions from now and sue them maybe ?
in the third case if they will contact us we can just burn the coins they had ( after printing new ones for poloniex users)
so in the three cases the best thing to do is the grant proposal
now about faking the screen shots you are absolutely right but i am not a lier so i am not afraid of proving it . i accept to show any of the nuteam (or any of the shareholders voting for the grant proposal ) my balance and history on poloniex (live!) using teamviewer . i can’t fake it live right ?

Cybnate 2017-12-17 00:02:46 UTC #89

You can’t as you are anonymous, so boasting about anything is just empty, I refrain from that. Thanks.

Like your approach and willingness to provide full transparency. My issue is that Poloniex still owns the shares. Blackballing the addresses, if known, is not great as we have learned as @woolly_sammoth describes above. Maybe now they don’t care, but when increasing in value, they will eventually care or someone with the private keys will take care of it.
I know @Jooize have made many efforts to contact them (see other threads) and Woolly_sammoth is going to try again from another angle. We can only hope he succeeds and I believe he will need the support of all the account holders with NSR funds on Poloniex to increase his chance of success.

MaVo 2017-12-17 00:31:22 UTC #90

You are ignoring that there was already an insane grant passed by the network that you work for. How in the world, when you have seen with your own eyes how a grant for a quarter billion Nushares gets passed, can you tell those other people that it’s unlikely for their proposals to get passed?

Did you make it very clear that @Phoenix’ proposal was unlikely to pass, too?

lissajous 2017-12-17 04:49:45 UTC #91

You are ignoring that those shares were provably destroyed before hand. With that said, I still have unanswered questions and didn’t vote for it. But they do not matter because it passed. So I could leave or stay and try to change it. You seem to have chosen to waste much of your precious time trying to exaggerate on situations to rile up dissent. That is dishonest and is a pretty poor use of time in crypto these days…

MaVo 2017-12-17 06:30:39 UTC #92

Your tone sounds more and more familiar. You sound like a member of good ol’ Nu family! That’s what happens when you take on a big gamble huh?

cryptog 2017-12-17 12:11:31 UTC #93

i can try to contact polo too and use my network to spread the word.