@JordanLee @masterOfDisaster And all those involved (because I cant tag more than 2 people).
This is a broadcast message for everyone in the community. I say the following as a prospective shareholder, voter, and future nubits holder (when BTC reaches a high).
For the last while, I have had no urgency to create an account, until I saw the recent debate over the last few days, and especially today. I created this account to weigh in on this debate of liquidity, spread, and community.
@JordanLee I understand your worries and frustration over the fate of the Nu product. I highly respect you, and love what you have incepted, developed and done, but as a âcommunity observerâ since the before start of Nubits (aka at the announcement/coundown and 2$ peercoin rise)-- this discussion in its character could be harming long term liquidity more than 0.95 at a large spread. I know it is for me. Im worried that this in-fighting will be the demise of talent, energy, love-of-product, dollar tethering, and bitcoin hedging of Nubits. I love Nubits. I love this community. I love the talents of all those involved. But please focus on the movement of the network more than âcalling them as you see them.â Ive found that communities are stronger if the endure different points of view, gracefully. That being said, I do agree that actors that havent kept the peg very very close to 1$ may not have consulted the community first. They should have done so, but I dont think firing helps the process (ie process is greater than product). Also, firing could have a negative consequence of random operators (no one in this community as of now) running away with funds. Im not sure if thats possible given multi-signers (but I also dont know that it wont happen). I also dont want to see the previous head developer to be isolated from a community (or isolates himself, from feelings of a dead product.)
That being said, @masterOfDisaster, your part in this is no more graceful. âIncompetenceâ is just a word and its not the worst of the worst. I understand your interest in keeping the spreads large and the peg 5 cents less than usual, but I think you should have asked for a go ahead from the community/shareholders. (If you did, good job, point that out, and leave it at that.) Explaining your reasoning is great, lets just try to act as if we were business officials with cameras pointed at us [even with pseudonyms].
Both of you (@JordanLee and @masterOfDisaster) are invaluable to the community. This, Im sure of it, shareholders, nu-holders, and prospective holders see you this way. Please treat each other this way.
Towards everyone: please direct your energy towards a healthy debate of liquidity and spreads and motions, rather than blame, defend, offend, and self-righteous indignation.
All that being said on âcommunityâ, heres what I think (being a simple observer),
A) funds for the future are important,
B) liquidity and spread of buy and sell walls are just as important,
C) Nushares and Nubits will likely always be sold by holders in the event of a BTC/LTC rise,
D) this is an experiment, since Satoshi, to Nubits, to BC Exchange
E) Nubits is not the US treasury,
F) 0.05$ off 1$ isnt that much
G) large spreads did make me (as a casual observer) that the large buy walls at 1% [characteristic of Nubits bots] were gone and that the exchange had defunct. I had to do 5 days of reading (off and on) to figure out this wasnt the case.
H) large spreads 5 cents off likely reduce liquidity. Perhaps this is a good thing. Perhaps not.
I) Even if shares are sold, and higher interest rates are given (with a software change to say âinterest rates per park periodâ), it is likely that people will drop Nu and go for BTC since the BTC halving is 1~ month away. Volume and volatility will be insane in the next year (I suspect 2-3,000, then to 5-10,000), then down to 900 or so in several years.
J) Re read A-I, and breathe. Hold your tokens close, dont just walk away or quit because one or many think you are wrong, but try to keep the process in line with the product. Reread the white paper, read other financial books. Relocate the reason you liked Nu.
Conflict is important and inevitable, and sometimes healthy. Just try to keep that conflict respectfully focused on product, not person or characterizations.
Thank you all for working so hard on this and BC exchange. I love both ideas, and the network has a long way to go (in time) for volume and process to be easy. Thank you for sticking to it when it hasnt be so easy.
PS: I think the switch from V2 to V4 of BC exchange might be because people want to pre-mint BKS before the big unveiling of the product. My suggestion: sell BKS at discounted rates to loads of people, off-set the people who havent updated, and move on. (Im interested in BKS @ less than 6$ per, especially since its a pre-released product.) Id say this is the danger of allowing voting before a product is matured enough to have functional use.
PPS: I think the minting should be separate from Nu and BC voting. Also change parking labels to reflect actual interest as this causes people to flood the market (for crazy interest) or leave (for crazy interest.) Perhaps offer better short term interest (like 6%, 10%, 20% for 20 days or less.) Id buy 50 NBTs for that. (And I havent bought anything for months.)
In the wise words of Ron Burgundy: "You stay classy San Diego. Im Ron Burgundy?"
