True or False?: NuBits are backed by NuShares

[IAmJordanLee]

This is where the body of NuLaw on NuShare sales began:

Finalized evolution of liquidity operations

Tier 6
This liquidity takes the form of custodial grants for sell side and currency burning for buy side (presuming a currency burning motion is passed and implemented as appears likely). It takes a week or more to bring to market but has zero maintenance costs.

[MrBean]

I support this endeavor. We should sort things out as quickly as possible.

[IAmJordanLee]

This NSR auction was approved by shareholders. While the rules were specific to that auction, it does indicate the kind of auction rules shareholders find acceptable. Any custodian selling NSR could and should defend their actions by asserting they are comparable to what shareholders approved in this case:

[Passed] NSR auction motion

Motion RIPEMD160 hash: 876e10611809f3a90f2216fb61f107d3b7c9c469 There has been a modest amount of controversy regarding the planned auction. The passing of this motion will give it the legitimacy it needs and make clear that the majority of shareholders support the auction. I proceeded to announce the auction with the understanding that the time needed to have extensive community discussions and a full voting period was too great for our scenario. Still, there is no reason to not advance a mot…

The rules enumerated are quite exhaustive, yet there is no minimum price set for NuShares. Is specifying a minimum NuShare price 20% above the current market rate legal in the course of a NuShare auction such as this ongoing one, or is it just an excuse not to sell any NSR at all?

Is the reserve price on the current auction legal and acceptable?

[Chronos]

I support this endeavor. We should sort things out as quickly as possible.

This is getting old. I smiled at the @IAmJordanLee account, but a MrBean that is 30 minutes old with this as your first post? AreYouAlsoJordanLee? I can agree with myself, too.

Nu needs a secretary to keep track of all the Jordan Lee alternate forum accounts.

[IAmJordanLee]

We also have this motion by @Nagalim:

[Passed] Standard and Core

Hash 392b89104ac63202baa11df9b4844db5f91532ed Text: Dependencies 65CB60D096508A7FA9ECC2017B38BC3AFEB5663D - Tiered Liquidity Structure 7b4955e91781e0e32f1e0c0c974fd4a7a9f972a3 - NuShare Buybacks b1ef96aed5c7f9dec482467b254b40c82bf66d23 - Circulating NuBits 6311782b5d731cd45dd6873b24bcd6e62846fb2d - Peercoin FLOT Reserve 25d8226a7aeb47370e8db0c2035296fb7e2c4095 - Bitcoin Reserve Background and Definitions The goal of this motion is to provide a Tier 6 (T6) source for recovering…

This set the foundation for the NSR buyback/sales calculations script. It is has been modified by subsequent motions, but the calculations are a strict and perfect interpretation of NuLaw. Anyone disagree with this important assertion? Isn’t the result of this calculation the purest and clearest form of NuLaw?

Isn’t it clear this NuLaw was violated last week when no NSR were sold?

[dysconnect]

At least it’s meant to be funny

(2nd Version - Expanded) My Interpretation of Jordan Lee's Liquidity Engine Model & Why its First Attempt at Pegging Failed

Now you will ask me whether I really believe in some of the stuff I just asked. Well, can you either disprove or prove or answer any of the questions? No, and that is how he loves to operate. Wouldn't be wondering if in the case of Nu's total failure an account called "Mr. Bean" pops up and makes some funny eloquent jokes.

[Chronos]

At least it’s meant to be funny

I didn’t notice that. Thanks for the smile.

I’m not an expert on NuLaw, but sometimes precedent and reasonable expectation are important to law interpretation. Here, it seems to me that it was expected to begin selling NSR, at a certain rate per week, as soon as the peg support was below a threshold.

[MaVo]

Nu needs a secretary to keep track of all the Jordan Lee alternate forum accounts.

Jesus Christ. We have staff available for all kinds of activities. @IAmJordanLee could we ask your secretary Angela to keep track of your accounts? I expect her to require an incredible compensation for that, but who cares?

[IAmJordanLee]

From NSR sale and NBT burn we have:

[Passed] NSR sale and NBT burn

1 million (1,000,000) NSR will be auctioned weekly until the buy side liquidity is equal to or greater than sell side liquidity.

This establishes that we sell NSR regularly until there is balance in our liquidity engine. While it applies most directly to past auctions, it does set precedent. Custodians acting today need to justify their actions in terms of precedent established as NuLaw.

[IAmJordanLee]

There are those suggesting we shouldn’t sell NSR to back NuBits. They can advocate that. However, they haven’t passed a single motion that is even vaguely suggestive that shareholders support their unpopular position. The body of motions is very clear and very consistent that we sell NuShares as needed to support the value of NuBits. Is there any question that the value of NuBits needs supporting today? So where are the NSR sales?

[IAmJordanLee]

The following NuLaw is extremely important, relevant and straight forward. It is being violated by NSR FLOT members right now:

NSR

A custodial grant of 25 million NSR should be requested using the FLOT multisig address.

Rules for use of NSR:

If less than 25% of all liquidity in tiers 1, 2 and 3 across all 

currencies is on the buy side, NSR should be sold with the goal of
restoring buy side liquidity back to 25%. Sale proceeds should be
converted to currency if necessary and burned, with the burn transaction
IDs announced publicly. Additional details about how much to sell, how
much at a time, etc should be determined by the signers in real time,
because much more information will be available at that time than
shareholders have now. We can be confident in any course of action
agreed upon by 4 of the signers.⦁ The rules of NSR sales defined in this shareholder motion3
and other motions apply to these signers. Briefly, if park rates are
offered for more than 30 days consecutively, NSR auctions and currency
burns begin.

Have park rates been offered for more than 30 days?
Is the buy side liquidity below 25%

If the answer to either of these questions is “yes”, then NSR FLOT members are mandated to sell NSR immediately.

We need an NSR FLOT member to use an account at Poloniex and chew on the NSR buy wall a little each day.

[Chronos]

So where are the NSR sales?

There is only one auction at the moment, as you know. Would you like to organize another? If the 100 mio NSR grant passes, we will have a good amount to sell.

[nmei]

Better yet, how about we make a motion to revoke all previous motions and grants.

[IAmJordanLee]

Better yet, how about we make a motion to revoke all previous motions and grants.

You can do that, but until your motion passes all NuLaw has to be respected as is.

[creon]

Firing incompetent share buy back managers should be our highest priority. It should be made clear to @jooize that stepping up and actually doing something will not be tolerated by shareholders.

NuLaw, hehe, who could ever have imagined that a legislative power has no effect if there is no judicial and executive power to associate those laws with real world cases and to enforce them. Joke aside, I just talked to Angela and @Phoenix and we all agreed that you are crazy.

[cryptog]

Have park rates been offered for more than 30 days?

How many days have they been offered?

If the number is more than 30days, then i agree NuLaw has been violated.
In that case, FLOT should be held accountable immediately.

[cryptog]

It s annoying that Jordan Lee might be using several accounts but it does not matter much, i believe.
What matters is NuLaw and motions i feel.

[creon]

Governance 101: You write laws by passing motions. Now answer me two questions:

1. Who decides if a law in a particular situation was broken or not and to which extend?

2. Who will then make sure that the decision made by entity (1) will actually have an effect in the real world?

You have laws, but no court or police. Police is actually the smaller issue by using security deposits on the blockchain, but defining and independent judicial power has not even be considered here in any way, and that although you have the leading innovator in decentralised blockchain governance, hrhrhr.

[ChrisS]

True or false, quite ironic. I am starting to enjoy the humor of our architect.

[Sentinelrv]

Wouldn’t contractors forfeit payment for their services if it is decided that they violated a previous motion? Shareholders would decide if a motion has been violated by simply not paying them and hiring somebody else instead.