[Withdrawn] Make Firing and Replacing Incompetent Liquidity Providers Our Top Priority

I can live with that statement. @JordanLee can you as well?

It is a possibility but a lot of time has been lost!
Some days ago there were some good NSR buy order in Poloniex at 300-400 satoshis.
Then NSR could be sold aggressively at these levels and be put immediately at buy walls at tight spread. And this process could go on and on until some stability in liquidity had been achieved!
Then who knows :wink:

While this is true, the unknown causality that ultimately led to this situation somewhat keeps me from putting some Bitcoin on the buyside…

High risk, high reward, if Nu survive, you earn a lot. And Nu will improve by these lessons.

I’m not getting into the blame game, too many emotions here. Will try to stick to facts and way going forward.

Clearly we can’t sell NuShares fast enough and at a high enough price to keep up with the demand for BTC which rised in the last fortnight and appear to continue to do so. Putting tight spreads in place right now, would likely result in depleting the BTC reserves within days or sooner.
The only reason to do that is when we have a good idea how much NBT is still in the sell market. The we can compare that with the BTC reserves. We don’t know that information and given the amount of reserves it is a high risk bet.
When running out of reserves there is no peg at all and NBT goes into free float and NSR will likely crash.

As suggested earlier we should look into selling more NSR and faster (lower prices). I doubt the NSR price will withstand that unless some large stakeholder is willing to bet on NBT almost blindly. But I believe it is our best chance to get out of this situation. Any other known potential reserves should be made available now.

Chicken and egg problem[quote=“Sentinelrv, post:55, topic:4036”]
We can’t put all of the Bitcoin we hold right now into a tight spread, because it could be gone quite quickly leaving us with no defense at all

So raise motion with plan to tighten peg and put 80% of BTC on order and increase NSR sales. Let it pass and execute.
I will vote for that for just one reason. It is plan/bet which may obtain confidence.

I don’t see this motion passing and I can’t support it in its current form.

[quote=“JordanLee, post:63, topic:4036”]
Let’s talk about who would be fired as liquidity providers if this motion passes. I haven’t reviewed the evidence on this site, but from memory I understand those affected to be:


Let’s leave it like that for now and come back when there is evidence. There is not much value in debating scenarios in this highly emotional context without facts.

True, and have seen that to, both Sentinel and I have openly admitted to have bought shares to support Nu in last week or so. And with a good plan I would buy even more at these low prices. However this motion is not helping. See my suggestion earlier to what we should do imo. Lacking time to draft such a motion in next 24h though, might do it later if no one beats me.


In fact there are 40% BKS distributed to Nushareholders, it’s weathy of 400,000 USD.

If this money is still in dev team hands, it can be use to solve today’s problem easily.

Nushareholders are far from bankcrupt, be bold and go!

1 Like

Ok, managed to write something down for comments competing with this motion. See my post here: [Draft] Proposal to regain confidence in peg by increasing NSR sells

Thanks for your consideration.


What or who drove you there?

I was unaware of that. Shame on you for abandoning the peg!

Shareholders certainly can do exactly that.

Shame on you for not reading the forum :wink:
We have saved the peg more than once!
Are you the same person 6 months ago? Perhaps this account is hacked?!

1 Like

A soft answer turns away wrath, but a harsh word stirs up anger.
Proverbs 15:1 ESV

I don’t care about who did what. This thread needs to be shut down because we a driving community away. The same community that has been helping and supporting.

This is all the Nu network and Nu specific funds needs to sign up to:
Promise to buy and sell funds at a ~1% spread to USD when and where said funds exist

If Nu doesn’t have funds - in cases of extreme swings or prolonged runs - so be it. Nu is a independent project, not a central reserve. Commit the funds on the other side at the spread for when the market swings the other way.


This is already happening anyway. The sell side offset is very well below 0.5%.
And we are waiting for BTC to “return” :wink:

1 Like

Good! Thank you. Then as a Major LP I am content with how things are going. I will park my NBT and sit and wait.

And I bet if we offer Park Rates high enough…people will come. I know there are cries of dilution - and look at the other huge stake coins - but park rates are only for a limited time.


I am not sure what you mean by emotional. Perhaps you mean irrational. It isn’t that. This one key test isn’t subjective either. It is very straight forward. I’m going to keep talking about it. I don’t think our liquidity model is understood well enough, even among close watchers. So we need an education drive on the topic of liquidity. But I digress.

The key test of the motion is the whether the buy side offset is equal to the sell side offset. These are setting in NuBot. The equality of those two setting or inequality is a straight forward evaluation. There is no room for subjectivity.

1 Like

Jordan, we are waiting for your NuBot on Poloniex, which you run at a tight buyside offset, ideally with one big order (parametric order book is crap, right?).
You want to show us how that restores liquidity provision.
Or is that not necessary, because I ruined all so much even that doesn’t help?
If you need help with the NuBot configuration, I willingly lend you a helping hand :wink:

Yes. We made plans. We had a model. It was all set up via motion over a long period of time. As soon as the danger level rose a notch, those plans were abandoned. That is not the time to abandon our carefully laid out plans. It is the time to carefully adhere to our model that was so carefully planned out. We have a number of liquidity providers that didn’t do that. As a result tier 5 stands nearly completely broken today, and tier 6 is impaired. We needed to act in a way to preserve the overall structure of liquidity operations. That wasn’t done. That is incompetent, and we can’t afford to tolerate it.

@masterOfDisaster keeps talking about what we will do when tier 4 BTC runs out. The model that we have always had is that we pull funds out of tier 5. Today we can’t do that precisely because of the actions of @masterOfDisaster, @cybnate and @zoro. Also, we pull more out of tier 6. @masterOfDisaster also seriously undermined our ability to do this by breaking the peg upfront. The peg doesn’t break if you leave tier 5 and tier 6 operational, until the NuShare price is zero. @masterOfDisaster shut down tier 5 with his rash and unapproved action. We didn’t need our BTC in tier 4. We needed tier 5 and 6 to work, and we needed the confidence that comes from in an intact peg.

Getting tier 5 working again has to be our first priority. The only way to do that is to buy NuBits at 0.99 or more and be convincing that we will continue to do so.

1 Like

Using the word incompetent is interpreted as emotional. Like "Oh, whats Jordan mad about?"
Thats why name calling doesnt work, especially over text based interfaces.

“Im going to keep talking about it.” Good, lets just move away from value judgements and use action judgments: “x’s actions were not cleared by such and such.”

@Jordan, may I remind you that Nu can’t grant BTC and the capabilities of T5 and T6 are too low to satisfy the demand for BTC with a tight spread?

How often will you continue to accuse me before you start doing something?
Stop complaining and act!

  • draft a grant for 100 million NSR to dump them for BTC
  • make a NuBot and show us how far you get with the T4 BTC, that have been low because of the NSR buyback
  • make a calculation that shows how you can create sufficient NBT demand with T5 and how many BTC you retrieve by T6 sale

Is all your doing limited to accuse me, make me the reason for this (which I am not), continue your propaganda instead of dealing with facts?
Your motion to tighten the spread is all that’s needed to make

  • me close the spread
  • let BTC run completely dry
  • see the peg fail completely

No need to continue that witch hunt, unless you have reasons to fight a decentralized body, which FLOT is, by alienating the members.
You want to have control back, right?

The more i read, the more i am convinced that this topic is created in order to devide and drive away the community!
What are the differencies from below motion?

1 Like

I must confess - I dont understand very well the liquidity model.
Offset = ?
I would be a LPC if that would be easy and profitable with guarantees.
Any reliable manual?