Technical difficulties transferring FLOT NSR

This OP has been heavily edited to adjust to the report below from woodstockmerkle.

Let’s use this thread to work on resolving the technical difficulty reported below.

Transaction 0d22338db64144d41b37ded5ffe8ac43460fe550a128562a198419eae1cbc31e was signed 3 of 3-of-5 but is failing to be minted into a block due to a bug in Nu.

The 100 MM NSR can’t be moved until this is resolved.

1 Like

That is good to know. So NSR FLOT is not in violation at the moment. I will change the title. We need to resolve the problem. Can we get some dev or QA people on this? @sigmike @woodstockmerkle @coingame?

What do you know about the bug you mentioned? What happens when you use the sendrawtransaction RPC to send the transaction? FLOT has moved NSR before. Why is it different this time?

I see that it appears to work based on what is returned from the sendrawtransaction RPC. @sigmike or @woodstockmerkle can you step through the process of using the sendrawtransaction RPC to see exactly what is occurring in the code?

Also, because NSR FLOT has successfully transferred before, may I suggest FLOT look closely at their exact process of successful signing and try again, being careful to replicate the process exactly. The same address that has already been used successfully could be used again. Try to match signing order and signers, if possible. You may want to match the number of inputs and outputs and so forth. Some difference caused the first to work, while this transaction didn’t. Can FLOT try forming a new transaction in this way?

1 Like
sendrawtransaction 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 returns tx id

getrawmempool then shows this transaction in the pool, but it doesn’t get minted (at least on my station)

I am not familiar enough with the minting logic to see how transactions are pulled from the mem pool into a candidate block for minting, so I have been unable to diagnose this further so far.

1 Like

@woodstockmerkle thanks for that. Do you plan to continue working on it soon?

1 Like

Well the tx to pay for this week’s auction/sales from the 3-of-5 address still hasn’t been signed by the third FLOT member.

You are talking about the 100M one, which is a separate issue. We have been talking about problems related to it in the last 10 days.. I think we should just generate another 100M to a proper address in case this one can never be moved. We can burn 100 M if both can be moved.


The output amount is 999,999,960 whereas the input is 100,000,000.

1 Like

Thank you @mhps for your calm, thoughtful and very informative help on this subject. So NSR FLOT members violating NuLaw by not signing a transfer to fund an auction are @masterOfDisaster, @Dhume and @ttutdxh? Is that correct? If so these three individuals have an obligation to sign as well as explain what they are doing and why. How do you explain your actions in terms of NuLaw @masterOfDisaster, @Dhume and @ttutdxh?

Also, will NSR FLOT create a new transaction with total outputs of 100,000,000 please?

It depends. It seems they haven’t signed the last transaction.
What specific violation do you see?
Quoting the applicable paragraphs would be helpful.
Without more precise accusations there’s little need for an explanation of “actions in terms of NuLaw”.
Do you expect they ask themselves what they could possibly have done wrong if you aren’t able to tell?

But this leads into the wrong direction.
NuLaw and all that’s related to liquidity is from the past.

A discussion regarding the reasons to continue actions to support a peg, which no longer exists would be far more helpful than blaming people.
I see little reason to continue peg support at the moment, but a lot of reasons to rework Nu.
As soon as Nu has found ways to make revenue, peg support can be created.
It only works this way round.

  1. Revenue
  2. Peg support

Will you help creating revenue or will you rather h(a)unt people?
Who are you that you think you can do this?

I’d understand if @masterOfDisaster, @Dhume and @ttutdxh didn’t want to comment.
You are the only one that demands accountability.
You are a not in the least a “Nu official” (e.g. a FLOT member), but a newbie nobody, who is trying to get a lot of power, benefiting from Nu’s current situation.
Why should anybody listen to you?

1 Like

FLOT members promised to follow shareholders’ wish but they also only promised limited availability and reaction time. You can’t say so and so violated a law because he/she happened not to have signed a particular tx.

Statistically there will be long delays for some of the tx. The distribution of delays probably has a bell-shape. If shareholders think there should be a maximum delay allowed, or a maximum percentage of delay greater than, say 1 day, allowed, then the n-of-m and number of groups should be adjusted according to member availability.

I think its a systemic issue. We probably should have a larger m in n-of-m.

It would be nice if we have signing statistic data for every FLOT member but it’s not easy/cheap to collect.

1 Like

We always do things as a result of human’s design, but the better way is the result of human’s action.

Why not make LP a profitable business, and people automatically, individually go to this business?

Has Satoshi control people to mint btc? He/she just induce people to do that, and never manage them hand by hand. Satoshi developed the mining pool software and leave.

FLOT’s experience and software tools are very valuable, we just need to distribute to the public with readme document and let them do by themselves.

A cryptocurrency system hardcore function must be profitable, otherwise unsustainable.