[Withdrawn] Make Firing and Replacing Incompetent Liquidity Providers Our Top Priority

We have never sold NuShares directly on exchanges before for fear of pushing the price too low. Was this done because we needed the Bitcoin quickly and couldn’t wait for an auction to be held?

One last message for now:
it wouldn’t have been necessary to insult people like @zoro and me as incompetent for keeping the peg on a degraded, but reliable level.

Why not just forcing a tight spread by motion?

Would have appreciated that instead of being called incompetent when doing all I can to support the peg as good as possible given the circumstances after the reserves were torn down to the level that’s the reason for the increased buyside offset.

Shame on you for that, @JordanLee!


Park rates were working to stimulate NuBit demand until the last 10 days. We have increased the risk of parking a great deal by abandoning the peg. It is the abandonment of the peg that is impairing the usefulness of tier 5 and tier 6.

It’s so hard to stay silent if I read so much &#?@@
Tell me, how many parked NBT are from BCE funds?


1 Like

Jordan thinks parking has been impaired by the higher spread, but then there is the other issue that I have been mentioning. How many people here have been advertising park rates using the single park period percentages, rather than the much larger APR?..

1 Like


Sentinelrv’s proposal for how to advertise park rates is a good one.

While it is impossible to understand the motives of each buyer and seller in the market, my guess is that the choice to offer low liquidity has knocked 40% off the NuShare market cap. Any action that results in destroying 40% of the market cap when there are alternatives that wouldn’t do that is indeed incompetent and cannot be tolerated.

Shareholders will decide. They may side with you. I felt it was necessary to articulate the reasons for the situation we are in and the proper solutions as I see it.

I was actually considering using my Peercoin stash to park NuBits, but then I questioned why I would do it if when it came time to unpark I couldn’t sell my NuBits back for what I paid for them because the buy side wall still wasn’t back to normal. This is why I haven’t parked so far. I would end up forfeiting any interest I made when selling back the NuBits. Could others be thinking the same exact thing? That would validate what you say here about the current buy side impairing parking.

Edit: I don’t mean the total Bitcoin on the buy side, but the lowered price per NuBit sold I will receive back.

1 Like

For example, if I sold $5k worth of Peercoin to buy NuBits and park them, I would need to be sure that when it came time to unpark and sell my NuBits, that I could receive back the normal amount and not at a reduced price per NuBit like $0.95 cents. Whatever interest I made on parking would be forfeited through the reduced NuBit price. It would therefore be too risky to park.

Nu needs to commit to always providing liquidity for Park Rates to function, which today means using NuShare sales, and with Park Rates motivate NuBit sales for enough revenue to build sufficient reserves. Nu must in the time until parked NuBits are unparked have succeeded in its possibly adjusted operations for the interest rate not to choke liquidity.


That’s the way I understand it. Effective parking requires a tight spread at the time of unparking in order for it to be worth it for people to park in the first place, or otherwise any interest rewards gained will be lost. The only way to guarantee a tight spread at this point is to sell NuShares. So selling NuShares, will give us more Bitcoin reserves, which can be put toward the buyside at a tight spread, encouiraging people to park again.

Do we need to hold an actual NuShare auction again like we’ve done in the past instead of selling everything on exchanges?

I can see that there’s a limit to how much demand there is for NuShares on the exchanges, though what about the BTC reserves and why are they not sufficient to be providing liquidity at this stage? Pretty much nothing is being offered buy side on poloniex. Why is that? Does it just get eaten up straight away? I don’t really know the details of what is going on, though it’s being drawn out for a long time now. Clearly nothing has worked so far.

And why is Nu reporting 11915.9714 tier 1 liquidity right now? That’s clearly false.

I am surprised that instead of organising a blind auction for a sufficient number of nsr shares to restore liquidity, a lot of time of many capable people is spent on elaborate writings about who is responsible for absence of such. Come on guys, put the fire out first, shake the blame finger later if you must.

I might not understand the situation well enough, but it seems to me that no liquidity at all is worse than liquidity at wider spread. Please explain where I am wrong?


@JordanLee, would you be able to organize a NuShare auction like you’ve done in the past or would somebody else need to do it? You have the most experience in this area, which is why I ask.

1 Like

I asked jl to do a blind auction 2 weeks ago and he said no. My response was to post the code for dual side auctions.


People did what they believed to be a way to put the fire out, and now the finger of blame is being shaken.

We don’t (or didn’t) know the best course of action, and many involved with liquidity assumed maintaining the perception of a peg around $1.00 is important. It might have given us time to think.

why would he say no? auction would have been much more favorable to the price of nushares, wouldn’t it???


We’ll need to pay him a fee for carrying out the service for us. It’s probably a lot of work, especially if it’s unpaid work.