Here, this is where you’re going wrong. I probably phrased the math wrong in the motion (which is probably why I made a mistake), but the words are on point. Take the standard, multiply it by the flow, and compare it to the threshold.
For last week:
PPCST = F*ST = -$1,556.87
Since PPCST < -$1,000 sell an amount of PPC worth the magnitude of PPCST ($1,556.87) using some acknowledged price feed.
For this week:
There are issues here.
You shouldn’t add the $30k from the stable reserve here, or the PPC value either, just the BTC reserves. This will drastically reduce the standard.
131.743468 BTC stand in the core reserves.
Valued at 441.495 USD, this is equivalent to 58,164.08 US-NBT.
As 107095.93 US-NBT are targeted, we stand at a 48931.85 US-NBT deficit. This is equivalent to ~2446.59 US-NBT below standard.
ST = -$2446.59
F x ST = -$1631.06
Sell $1631.06 PPC
Please fix any mistake and ambiguity in the standard and core motion. I don;t feel comfortable following fixes in follow-up of follow-up posts. I suggest using strike through instead of deleting when editing. No need to revote. I often have a hard time parsing what you say so please make sure the math shown is correct, or interpreting and maintaining of the calculator would be difficult. Nothing personal here. For example didn’t you say
then why the quoted expression at the top of the post wrong?
The motion says 2 contradicting things. What you’re following is the equations. What I’m following is the written word (which literally says ‘times’ instead of ‘divided by’). Anyway, here’s a revised version. As you can see, the only things that change are the equations, which were meant just as an addendum to help clarify anyway.
Sorry to ask a fundamental question.
I still do not quite understand the role of the Standard.
Right now, our reserves are only 12.4% of the outstanding nubits.
So we are way below the minimum 15% threshold.
Why the standard is 5% and not 100%?
Why not 1%? or 50%?
What does this parameter represent?
These three numbers define the behavior of a reserve. The target is the 15%, which you seem to be alright with. The threshold is $2500 which is more practical than anything. The 5% is a velocity. It is a flexible parameter that says how quickly we act on our debt. We used to do it with 10%, but that affected the NSR price very drastically and was somewhat unwise in my opinion. 5% is much safer. Feel free to debate or argue for another number, but I really think it’s better if we just pick something reasonable and go with it for a little while.
PPCST is not positive, so has no effect. It only has meaning for PPC overflow calculations. That said, it is:
PPCST = PPCV x (T4PPC - PPCTR x ON) = 0.1 x (0 - 0.05 x 713972.86) = -$3,569.86
Which is precisely what @mhps got.
There are two ways to sell PPC and only one way to buy it. If we have a lot of BTC, but PPC. If we have either a small amount of BTC or a large amount of PPC, sell PPC.
You are right. The “Tier 4 buy side funds” is meant to show people in its literal meaning: how much fund is at Nu’s desposal at T4 tier… In previous calculations Nusafe was eventually removed from pool calculation by including it in calculating the “excluded Nubits”. The bug in this version was introduced because Nusafe also appeared in the 15% calculation so I removed it from exclusion. In fact it should still be excluded.
To make it conceptually simple, I will exclude Nusafe from “Tier 4 buy side funds” to call it, wait, what do we call it? Someone please remind me why we want to exclude Nusafe from T4 for pool size calculation please.
Same reason to remove ppc and all other reserves but the ‘core btc reserve’. The concept here is that the way we buy nbt is with btc. If we run out of btc all our operations hit really weird territory where FLOT becomes a complete governmental body deciding which operations get paid and which dont. We need to be concerned only with the btc reserve when determining the standard.
Using outstanding is the assumption that we do have NuSafe funds, though they are not liquid. It puts them in as negative debt rather than positive reserve to indicate that illiquidity.