Only if I can prove what address I gave you to deposit the funds to.
I’m just trying to think one or two steps ahead and try to mitigate issues before they arise.
I appreciate that you applied for that role!
Ah, so you’re saying I send the payment to one of my addresses instead of theirs. Yah, that’s possible. The OP_return thing would work for that, as would a public statement of deposit address on the Nu Forum. Good concern, actually. Can I check the OP_Return messages on the block explorer?
I don’t know. http://blockexplorer.nu/ is down at the moment and considering how often it’s down, I wouldn’t want to rely on it for that activity.
I will dig deeper later into this (or simply test it with Cointoolkit). It looks like getrawtransaction can do that:
http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/29554/explanation-of-what-an-op-return-transaction-looks-like
is inferior to a message in the blockchain, but might do for most as well.
It wouldn’t hurt to manage trades publicly in the forum (the involved addresses are public anyway).
Someobody who wants to make a trade can make a post and T3 custodians can battle over it 
Maybe we need another category to separate it slightly from “Liquidity” in general?
To preserve pseudo anonymity and improve shareholder trust, I can post my record publicly before receiving any user funds. This way, the user need not oust themselves publicly but can still verify the pay address and price before doing the transaction. So I can post the following line here whenever I receive a prompt for a sale:
Buy/Sell | UserAddress | Time | Exchange(usuallybifinex) | Price | markup% | finalPrice | VolumeRange
If this forum fails, I can use my github account.
1 Like
1DohemE7Nh8oxBEegomVTtuVurK93F8ssj
I tested it already. FLOT can do whatever they want here, I have no direct say over their consensus process. I won’t be reporting network liquidity until next week, but we can call this a testing week if you want.
1 Like
I don’t know exactly when this motion passed, but I suppose after end of last Friday UTC.
That means the next cycle would be the end of the next week, but I think it wouldn’t hurt to have a T3 custodian as soon as possible ramping up operation.
Although I’d rather calculate the amount of NBT with the current BTC price, I think the rate should be taken from the weekly overflow calculation.
The price per BTC at end of last Friday UTC was $427.66.
$2,500 equals 5.846 BTC based on that rate.
I’m going to prepare a transaction, but delay posting it in the “FLOT Operations - buy side / BTC related” to not create more confusion than necessary.
1 Like
Refilling my T3 address is totally doable mid week, even in the future during normal operations, but i would urge you to use an updated btc price.
That makes so much more sense to use the price from when the refill is calculated.
After all we want to have $2,500 equvalent under your control.
I’m going to use $385 per BTC, which equals roughly 6.5 BTC, for the initial deposit.
I guess for the near future it won’t be possible to schedule the refill/withdrawal to once per week.
We might need to do that on demand to keep that T3 buffer refilled.
My withdrawal happens after 24 hours of being over-full. Refills happen once a week at a minimum. If all T3 custodians run dry on one side, it says we need more T3 custodians, but FLOT can choose to do a midweek refill of all custodians in a single transaction without any real input or confirmation from the custodians (seems to me anyway, just thinking about it logically).
1 Like
Right, I should’ve read the terms more carefully regarding withdrawal.
The suggestion of doing a midweek refill is not bad, but I prefer doing it only after the balance dropped below $1,000, because it saves FLOT and T3 custodians time.
Otherwise FLOT might blindly deposit funds and if 24h hours later the balance is above $4,000, the custodian needs to send funds back to FLOT.
Don’t you agree?
The weekly refill already has this caveat, but to some degree the impetus is on the T3 custodian to tell FLOT that they are under the $1000 mark on friday. For a midweek refill, FLOT is doing something not because of this contract but because of the overarching FLOT contract. Therefore, they will do what they have to to satify a contract that is bigger and more important than this one. However, if they send more than $4000 at any time, you have to assume that I’ll send it back 24 hours later if it doesnt get used.
Alright, to start off, I’ll give my current specifications:
-
If Alix 4hr reads <40% on one side, the markup for that side will be 0.1% while the markup for the other side will be 0.5%. Otherwise, 0.3%. If you can convince me you’re a nupond provider, markup is 0.1%.
-
I will only deal with people I know. i.e. if you don’t have a pseudonym here with a little reputation I’m not going to deal with you right now. I may lax this with time.
-
I will be available to send funds at least once a day. Right now I’m still getting this all setup so no real promises, but we should be able to figure something out. If you don’t care about when you recieve the funds I can lock in your price and you can just send me some btc or nbt and I’ll finish off the trade when I can. Either way we’ll need to find a time that we are both actively messaging so we can decide on a price, whether I have actual access to the funds or not.
-
No trades during high volatility times. If the 15min candle on bitfinex is >1% I might try to wait for a more stable price.
I’m open for business. Please note that I am still concentrating on my new executor duties and this takes a back seat for me this week.
3 Likes
Awesome!
Just tell the FLOT if you start to run dry, or even create a tx via Cointoolkit and post it in the approriate FLOT (BTC, NBT) thread.
A link with the redeem script is in the OP of each thread.
Reading the terms again
I think we need a fix for the reward scheme.
Effectively you won’t get any compensation in times when trading with you is important.
If ALix reads <40% on one side, that side needs support.
Yet you receive no compensation for a trade under those circumstances, which I find bad.
I suggest that for trades if ALix reads <40% on one side, you pocket the 0.1% for supporting that side (which is still not much…).
How do you handle btc volatility risk?
I don’t, Nu does. I make sure not to trade during volatile 15 min intervals, but I can do nothing about day to day bitcoin volatility. What was FSRT or JL or FLOT doing about btc volatility risk when making deals with custodians?
nothing! 
really now, after some transactions i had with FSRT and JL, their first (and only?)
priority was to have a decent liquidity in exchanges (Poloniex) so the peg was safe.
I wasn’t clear. I mean when you hold BTC, how do you avoid, assuming you want to, losing value when BTC prices drops.
He doesn’t, Nu does.
Nagalim is handling the funds on behalf of Nu. It’s Nu property he’s dealing with.
They are just as prone to BTC volatility as T4 funds still are (we need NuSafe!)
If this were a collateralized custodianship, it could change that, if the contract were made regarding $x in BTC.
A collateralized custodianship about x BTC would be different and keep the volatility risk at Nu.
OK. I was confused for a moment. Somehow thought he bought his fund from NU.
That just made me think of another kind of custodian – borrow fund from Nu against collateral and use the fund to earn profit from LP subsidy. Nu get more liquidity out of it.
That would be version 2 (“collateralized custodianship about x BTC”) of what I explained above, right?
If that’s after your fancy, make a proposal!