[Passed] T3 Trusted Custodianship: @Nagalim - Second Attempt

This is attempt number 2 to pass a T3 liquidity proposal. The first grant was an attempt to be as non-controversial as possible, by fully collateralizing operations and providing well defined prices and rewards. It did not pass shareholder consensus. Because I cannot hold my funds in limbo indefinitely, I have crafted this proposal to be much more aggressive and uncollateralized. This gives me the confidence to place this proposal up for voting indefinitely.

Previous (withdrawn) proposal:
[Withdrawn] T3 Trusted Custodianship @Nagalim

Proposal RIPEMD160 hash: aa341d7e915d40b3b2bf1889110a5f59db9ca998

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

Custodial Address: BAoDAU3GwBVyaWC99kfUgJftzgi2FwuXDF
Amount Requested: 2500 NBT

Uncollateralized Custodianship

Upon the passage of this grant, FLOT will provide @Nagalim with $2,500 of BTC as part of the weekly Tier 4 overflow calculation.

T3 Operation

@Nagalim will perform Tier 3 operations defined by the purchasing and selling of NBT at a price at least 0.1% above a justifiable price feed. Only btc and nbt will be accepted, and any chosen prices will be recorded along with day, time, price, exchange of reference, and markup %. Any markup % in excess of 0.1% will be owed to @Nagalim by shareholders. No trade of less than $500 volume will be accepted.

Tier 4 Interactions

Each week, FLOT will refill either side of @Nagalim’s pool that has less than $1,000 total funds to $2,500 using the weekly declared BTC price by Tier 4 signers during the Tier 4 overflow calculation. If @Nagalim holds >$4,000 on either side of the pool for longer than 24 hours, funds will be moved to a Tier 4 address to bring the pool back to $2,500. @Nagalim will be compensated through the markup applied to trades.

Operation’s end

@Nagalim can end this operation at any time, returning funds to Tier 4 and requesting payment for all outstanding shareholder debt.

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

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

I am glad you don’t give up :smile:
This is like a “manual” nulagoon tube service?
What about the selling prices between T4<->T3<->T1?
I don’t understand this “markup” term. An example would be much appriciated.

The markup will lead to a factor of 1.001 for the deal. If @Nagalim makes a deal with markup factor 1.002, 0.001 belong to him.

Say @Nagalim trades 500 USD value of BTC for NBT. Due to the minimum markup the price the trading partner has to pay is at least 500 NBT * 1.001 = 500.5 NBT.
Any NBT above 500.5 NBT will be a gain for @Nagalim.
0.3 or 0.4 percent markup should be normal for such a deal.


Thanks. The first 0.1% belongs to whom?
And what would be the price between T4 and T3 ?

Basically, Nu sells to me at $1.001 and buys from me at $0.999 (on credit). I then act as a middle man from there.

It’s abstract. T4 simply refills me when I’m low, we don’t do an actual trade. I give T4 funds when I overflow.

1 Like

Why not make the trade with T4 exactly at 1$ ?

A tiny spread helps keep the T3 custodian honest. The price feeds tend to have some allowable band of deviation. Using a 0.2% spread for this helps make sure the custodian isn’t bending the prices then doing rapid trades with themselves at a profit. It helps to alleviate the required trust in the custodian.

OK. Then you are going to compete against nulagoon tube’s spread. I think now it is at 0.6% total.
Then T1 custodian will have to use a spread 0.9% at least in order to cover also exchanges’ fees?

1 Like

Most ALP’s have a 0.7% offset. NuLagoonTube is using an offset = Txn fee of 0.2% based on their website (http://nulagoon.com/). I will have a markup = offset = txn fee between 0.1% and 0.5% most likely. If NuLagoonTube is really only charging 0.2%, I will be having a hard time competing with that. Still, there’s a finite amount of liquidity in NuLagoonTube and they charge T4 to rebalance (as far as I understand). My proposal effectively gives T4 money (0.1% of the trading volume) rather than charging it.

Oh, nulagoontube uses txn fees and an offset. Yah, I can compete with that.

Hashed. I used the same address as the first attempt. I’ll leave this one up indefinitely.

If anyone feels moved, I encourage them to maybe try to pass my collateralized version themselves. I think shareholders may be more open to it now, especially coming from another trusted community member.

voted. Lets see how it will work, if it passes :wink:

Will jump into the deep as no competing proposals are available. Adding to my datafeed.

1 Like

Liquidiy provision has been developed from a scheme in which Nu used own funds to a model which pays a compensation for people who use their funds.
Now the flow between tiers needs some development.
I believe that T3 custodians of one kind or another are a step into the right direction.
The development will not end here.

1 Like

I’ll be honest…I want to see what @Nagalim comes up with in terms of work flow because he’s smart. And if I set up as T3 I want to cheat off the smart guy (though I don’t know if you are a guy or a girl and I don’t want to be sexist). :wink:


Sorry for the delay. So this motion has more funds (2.5 times more) from Nu involved than the first proposal with no collateral.
I think Nagalim has no interest in stealing the funds because he is a trusted contributor so no collateral in this paricular case is ok but no collateral will not be acceptable for an unknown potential Trusted custodian in the near future.

Just one thing.

What about accountability: will you provide shareholders with a report of all trades?

1 Like

This will be reported, probably each week when I ask for the refill.

Lol, I wouldn’t vote for this proposal. But then, I would have voted for the original rendition without hesitation. Considering that I am about to be elected executor without any collateral either, I’m reveling that this kind of proposal is getting shareholders to really think about how much trust they’re willing to give, quantitatively.


I think this is one of the very nice aspects of your proposals indeed.

aa341d7e915d40b3b2bf1889110a5f59db9ca998 verified and voted.

It seems you were just a little bit ahead of time :wink:

Finally shareholders seem to have understood that some buffer on T3 is required to make liquidity provision scalable and sustainable.

Some trust is required, if an operation needs to have some agility.
Even BCE will require trust that is embedded in a framework to ensure a high level of security despite the trust.

1 Like

A large number of people are voting for this as a motion rather than as a grant. @Cybnate @CoinGame @cryptog are your data feeds correct?

1 Like