Several Peg mechanism discussion

[mhps]

they would have no choice but to keep their contract

This is pretty cool, by the way. I still think it leaves open the need for tllp that can be withdrawn at will, but I really like that we will have mechanisms for these types of insured liquidity available.

It will come with a cost. These liquid providers see that they would have no way to withdraw, they would demand premium or compensation or insurance from Nu.

[Nagalim]

no way to withdraw

Oh true, this is fundamentally different from NuLagoon.

sell BKC for 1 NBT

Yah, this is what I doubt will happen, but I hope I am pleasantly surprised. It is true that not only are a large number of BKS holders also NSR holders, but also that intersection is the voting body that has experience with the consensus process.

[Sabreiib]

@Nagalim

It depends on B&C exchange business, if trade volume is big, we can use “scalper scheme” to directly peg BKC to USD via BKC/BTC pair.

And Nubits can be pegged by BKC/NBT pair, when NBT liquid providers oeprate on BKC/NBT pair, there is no couterparty risk or exchange default at all.

In fact, the B&C signers can act as NBT LPC easily.

[Nagalim]

Yes, all that is very true. I do like the concept of controlling what BKC pairs are on the exchange to control what it means to scalp a BKC.

Still, I don’t see BKS holders ever voting to use their profits to burn NBT. I mean, I can’t really think of a situation where I myself would think it’s a good idea for B&C to bail out Nu. Maybe if I was really up the creek with how much I invested into NSR and sold most of my BKS, but then my opinion wouldn’t really matter as much as someone who had invested and held BKS.

[Sabreiib]

It’s easier for BKC to maintain peg than NBT because B&C destroy BKC every hour even minute, there are three ways for BKC sale proceed.

1. dividend to BKS holders

2. software development for B&C
   3)help Nu by burning NBT

3. option is possible, if NBT is important for B&C exchange, there are may be BTC based pairs and NBT based pairs on B&C. NBT plays USD role because impossible to use FIAT in decentralized exchange.

The B&C blockchain data is expensive, it’s designed for store transaction infomation not daily general transaction which NBT does well. (@Jordan correct me)

So the NBT pegging for B&C may be as important as bitUSD for bitshare.

Only short sighted BKS holders vote for 100% dividend, my opinion.

[crypto_coiner]

Sry, you’re very right, I meant BKC. Edited.

The BCExchange whitepaper says:

Use case: BlockCredit custodian
BlockCredits are used solely to pay transaction fees on B&C. Community members with
excellent reputations may propose to become BlockCredit custodians subject to shareholder
approval. While the protocol permits shareholders to elect anyone to become a BlockCredit
custodian for any purpose, it is expected that shareholders will elect BKC custodians that will
make the BKC they receive available for sale at a variety of exchanges and venues. A BKC
custodian may be a single entity or a group of entities using a multisig address to jointly control
BKC they receive.

That suggests to me we can use BKC in pairs NBT/BKC - If BKC is stable in value (or if we can track its value or if it is very stable), we can use in place of NBT/cryptos?

[Sabreiib]

I believe this is the most important thread of mine.

A year ago, I’ve predicted that

" the zero reserve cannot give enough confidence to customers,if something bad happens, LPC may refuse to help. We all knowt that when you are rich banks are keen to lend you money but if you become poor, banks shut door to you."

Now, NSR price is plumbing, it seems seldom will help a company in trouble.

Profitability, Anti-infaltion, and loose pegging even BKC/NBT pair also mentioned.

We can even add anti infaltion to BKC if we lift sell price with USD infaltion rate voted by shareholders. In 2020, BKC price is [1.25, 1.3]…