[Withdrawn] FLOT and T4+6

Motion RIPEMD160 hash: cad85024e62334e3a52e65b70a746d2c94d510c8

=##=##=##=##=##=## Motion hash starts with this line ##=##=##=##=##=##=


If the First Liquidity Operations Team, FLOT, multisig address contains less than 4% of the total NSR supply, a grant should be proposed to refill the address to 5%.

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 for 4 hours or longer, NSR should be sold with the goal of restoring buy side liquidity back to 30%. 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.

⦁ As previous motions for conducting NSR sales conflict with the rules presented in this motion, they will become invalid. However, signers should look to previous auctions as an example of how future sales might be conducted. Specifically, park rates will have no bearing on share dilution.


A grant of 80,000 NBT should be requested using A FLOT multisig address. The First Strategic Reserve Team (FSRT) will continue functioning as a backup to sell side pressure provided by this group. Any funds the FSRT has in excess of 81,000 NBT should be burned within 14 days of when the NBT grant to FLOT is made. No commission or compensation will be paid for funds burned. Of this 81,000 NBT, 1000 is allocated for compensation to members of FSRT in the amount previously agreed to.

Rules for use of NBT and other Nu currency:

If sell side liquidity in tiers 1, 2 and 3 for a specific currency drop below 35% of total liquidity, signers shall sell currency in the open market until the sell side is restored to at least 40% of total liquidity. Proceeds of currency sale shall be added to tier 4 buy side funds, which may be used for share buybacks as specified by existing shareholder motion.


All tier 4 buy side funds shall be transferred to a multisig address shared by this group.

Rules for use of BTC or other tier 4 buy side funds:

FLOT will be bound by the same rules established by shareholder motion to conduct share buybacks in cooperation with @NSRBuyback. BTC will be used to purchase currency when a specific currency’s buy side funds falls below 35% of total liquidity in tiers 1, 2 and 3 for that currency until the buy side is restored to 40%. The currency proceeds will be placed in the multisig currency address controlled by FLOT.

The preceding should be interpreted as guidelines, and FLOT may exercise discretion. Communications between FLOT members regarding decisions on how to use funds must be publicly visible.

In order to form FLOT, at least 3 signers must be selected by motion. Additional signers will be accepted for a period of 14 days after this motion is passed.

=##=##=##=##=##=## Motion hash ends with this line ##=##=##=##=##=##=

Verify. Use everything between and including the <motionhash></motionhash> tags.

First of all thank you for drafting your ideas.

The first thing that comes to mind is about FSRT NBT balances.
Since FSRT is currently providing liquidity these numbers will most likely change. So I propose the text to be changed with “FSRT must burn outstanding funds of 101,000 NBT within 14 days of when the NBT grant to FLOT is made”

1 Like

Differences so far from f99ddf406a32d39be7d614c13dc1ce63c96e4003:

  1. 5% of NSR marketcap instead of 25 mil, also specifications for when to refill. 5% is approximately 40 mil.

  2. NSR buyback has a higher velocity, aiming at 5% over the threshold instead of simply sitting at it.

  3. Dependence of FLOT on park rates is removed.

  4. 70,000 NBT less sell side liquidity will be provisioned. The number chosen (80k) is not arbitrary, but is instead chosen so as to coincide with the buy side liquidity in T4 for a ‘100% reserve’ or ‘50% balance’ on T4 buy and sell side.

  5. 5% reduction in threshold for FLOT involvement in T1-3 operations, but keeping the same market velocity.

1 Like

I have hashed this.

Looking at the current voting status I wonder why NSR holder prefer motion f99ddf406a32d39be7d614c13dc1ce63c96e4003 so much over this one here.
I’d be interested in the reasoning for that.

I see some benefits of this motion - especially for the job of the FLOT.
If I were to be elected as FLOT member, I had much more assistance by the terms of this motion.

e.g. a recommendation to refill of NSR funds is included:

The amount of NSR is dynamic. I’d rather see the dynamic related to the NBT in the wild, but this is much better than having no dynamic. Having a recommendation to refill the NBT would be nice as well, but as both NSR and NBT grants are in the responsibility of the NSR holders and not the FLOT I would neither overrate the presence of a recommendation for NSR not the lack of recommendation for NBT.

What is more important: the rules for using NSR are much more clear in this motion

sparing the FLOT from discussions about the right point of time to sell NSR.

Future versions of a motion that define the terms of FLOT operation should include a “for x hours or longer” passage in the BTC section as well as a threshold at which NSR get sold to refill the BTC funds. Using T6 NSR to refill BTC over time (as soon as BTC funds are below some threshold) is more efficient than dropping NSR at the market only after BTC funds have been depleted. The same thinking is the reason why NSR buybacks are conducted over some time and not at once.
For a start it is great the way it is!

Allow me to ask again: why do NSR holders prefer voting on f99ddf406a32d39be7d614c13dc1ce63c96e4003?
Is it because both data feed providers (https://discuss.nubits.com/t/new-cryptogs-nu-data-feeds-beta/1922 and [Discontinued] Cybnate’s Nu datafeed - BETA) included @JordanLee’s motion and not @Nagalim’s?

I wonder why I find so little related comments of the data feed providers in the discussions except for general agreement to @JordanLee’s version.

I bet most shareholders don’t really understand the difference. It;s good that you speak out from FLOT perspective.

1 Like

I might become a member of the FLOT so it’s not too hard to see it from that perspective :wink:
I’m aware that a lot of development is needed in this field and the current motions are only a start.
I just consider @Nagalim’s version the better start and I hope I could give reasons for that.

I have withdrawn this as JL’s motion has passed.