[Withdrawn] Think big, act small and establish revenue stream

Together with the newly printed 20M NSR (+ future grants to himself), Jordan has around 60% to 70% of the staking weights. If a transaction is considered to be confirmed after 10 blocks, this means that a double spend attack both for NSR and NBT succeeds with a probability between ~0.5% and ~2.5%. Poloniex is registered in the USA, and if they suffer a loss due to a double spend then they need to reimburse their users and won’t get away with some BTER shit.

If Poloniex somehow gets informed about whats going on here with the Nu blockchain, then they will drop the daemon like a hot potato, or at least freeze trading, since its their own money which is at stake here.


I’m not certain either; I’m less worried about exchanges at the moment than a solid community, a leader who doesn’t abscond, and a business model that includes revenue.

Also it is becoming more apparent that the distribution of Nu shares may not have been done fairly – that the end state was a potential majority of voting shares being held or under the control or influence of one person. While technically it is a distributed autonomous org, I don’t think it is in the spirit that many of us had hoped.

A fork would accomplish these. (Ugh, not feeling good to say that). I would not call it Nu.

Logistically it would be possible to do a distribution as follows:

  • all Share addresses showing a vote for this (or some other) motion would be accepted into the new chain.
  • for those that have minimal shares, we may need to leave the voting period up for an extended time – like a month – so statistically there is a chance to vote.
  • We may need to have a threshold of 80% of the funds on those addresses have to vote (and have to stay there)
  • new coin, new rules: we could eliminate all addresses used to vote for Phoenix’s candidacy for Chief of Liquidity ops
  • It’d be a chance to fix the “decimal place issue”

As far as goals or roadmap, in addition to all the above:

  • Maybe the new coin, exchange support, and pegged but profitable liquidity can all be in place before Nu burns down again.
  • Maybe we pivot hard and support a different currency out of the gate (i.e.: CNY)
  • Maybe we offer to buy USNBT at some fraction of NBT so people can bail, and we can sell them at parity to JordanLee on the 3rd attempt to re-establish the peg

It’s not that unthinkable to have a fork. I used to think how to find the best parameter set (POS reward, transaction fee, not-voting=not-ageeing, how many days after moving before a share is able to mint … ). I thought if there is a grid of forks of Nu with different parameters/policies and people can move fund from one chain to another freely, then maybe the best parameter set can be found out. I guess @Sabreiib has something on competing currencies here.


Unfortunately that’s not so easy because JL can easily move or mix the coins, or obfuscate their trace by sending them to an exchange and back to new addresses. The initial distribution of PoS coins is an unsolved problem and the approach taken in Nu now proves that it requires a lot of care and transparency to somehow ensure proper decentralization.

And even with a good initial state the system can diverge quickly if shares can be traded on exchanges and the price drops. As mentioned numerous times on this forum, by many different people, the best way would be to make shares non transferable (i.e. they cannot be sold) but only to allow to burn shares for NBT (and vice versa), such that the DAO can protect itself in a bad market situation by adapting the share / token price on-chain.


Can we poison-pill the motion? “If this motion passes, the Chief of Liquidity Ops role is hereby eliminated”

Fully understand that it is not ideal. But what is the best way to capture the representation of those who see a different direction?

One of the criticism of the dividends was that it could be sending value to addresses that were lost or no longer active. I think with a modified dividend system, where they are distributed only to shares that were seen voting in the last N days/weeks/months.

It would definitely change the construct of share ownership as voting rights, not a hot stock to flip. Though without a doubt some market would emerge for the shares.


My 2 cents:

1 Like

I only find 1/5 number of blocks a day compared with before.

that’s interesting

(1) JL theory: a peg perfectly maintained --> NSR goes up --> we can feed back positively the buy side of NBT walls
(2) non-JL theory: peg maintenance costs and should be paid for by revenues coming from the use of the peg

I believe currently, (1) and (2) should be tested on a thought experiment basis first, and tested then by running the practical experiments, to find out

Offtopic: Doing a bit better but still lost half. The difficulty is still increasing to a situation more than a year ago. With the high SDD’s seen recently it is clear that a lot of shares have been taken out of cold storage to support Phoenix’ proposals.

I’m on the fence. I support an evolving and competing network and if one stalls then it would make sense, but maybe it is too early. It will be very interesting to see what happens in the next few weeks, someone’s reputation, although anonymous is on the line.

Reverting back to the same centralised model as we tried when we started Nu would be a loss and repeating mistakes without learning. The liquidity provisioning costs would be lower than the decentralised model, but a revenue model with a remote chance of succeeding now or in the future is still lacking or at least not being communicated clearly. I would hope that some improvements will be made, but that only happens when Phoenix is really smart :sunglasses:



NSR is at 57 SAT, there are over 20 BTC in close sell orders in the NBT market with no buy support. At the same time the entire buy side order book of NSR contains less than 8 BTC.

Do the math, and cast your vote accordingly. There is no way to escape this vicious circle without forcing the NBT sell wall tokens to be sent to an offline wallet. Don’t wait until you are entirely forgotten, both by the customers and by the community members who cannot look at this any longer.


Unfortunately I can’t agree more.
If this is going on much longer this way here, one might create a new way elsewhere…

1 Like

Until the Shareholders realise that phoenix is not the chicken with the golden eggs, this is going nowhere.
I noticed that the support for this proposal is also waning, probably indicating that either the supporting shareholders of this proposal stopped minting or just sold whatever they had into a bear market. It might already be too late.

Will give it another two or three months to see if phoenix and supports get back to common sense or miracles happen. If not I will announce that I turn off the lights and all infra still on standby from my side and move on to greener pastures.

1 Like

The sooner there is unity around the notion that we don’t break our promises to NuBit holders and we don’t plot plans to steal their value the better. @Cybnate you have hurt confidence in NuBits and our network with this horrific idea of burning NuBits that customers hold and paid $1 for. This after you and about a half dozen other incompetent actors destroyed 2 million USD in our market cap and another 500,000 USD in NuBit value. Shame on you and your co-conspirators! You and your co-conspirators made everyone (NuBit holders, NuShare holders, BlockShare holders, NuLagoon users and contractors) losers. We could have all won if our plan had been followed. That is very sad.

I have been able to raise the price level of NuBits more than 300% in a month, I have tentatively stabilized the price for weeks now, and I did so with zero reserves and no park rates. It has been a spectacular performance.

The results very strongly indicate we had ample funds available at the end of May to rebuild tier 4 reserves and continuously offer good liquidity at $1.00. We have averaged around 3000 USD per day in NSR sales after you and the other rebels destroyed 85% of NuShare value, nearly as much of the NuBit price, and the vast majority of confidence and trust in our product and network. I estimate that had we made an earnest attempt to sell NSR before any loss of liquidity occurred we could have raised three or four times as many reserves to due a higher NuShare price, an unbroken peg and much higher confidence in our system. That is around 10,000 USD per day and $300,000 over the last month. That would have been plenty. It is painful to me that we didn’t take that path. After all, that was our formal, painstakingly created plan.

Having played a central role in the loss of around $3,000,000 in NuShares, BlockShares and NuBits I think it is fair to say your are personally responsible for hundreds of thousands in losses. Will you please stop adding losses by advocating institutionalizing theft among us? Is that too much to ask?

@Phoenix, a good leader should not say in this way, stop fighting please.

whatever you’re doing JL, the last thing you’d want is to scare away potential bag holders and cheap labour.

1 Like

JL is, for being the architect sleeping at the helm when large spread was experimented and resistance and hesitance against selling nsr was building. Now he is scared enough to have changed ID. Cybnate and the community just try to institute a revenue mechanism and deponzi what JL had started.


I think you are giving me far too much credit. For the last time there was no plot or cunning plan at least not from my side. You are seeing things which aren’t there. I just acted within existing motions to keep things afloat. I had no say about selling shares, funding walls etc. as I was not part of FLOT. Just had my bots to keep the walls up according to motions which shareholders passed.

This is just a plan to turn things around. You are doing exactly the same by buying back NBT for around $0.80. It is the only way to return from a default. I would have done it by protocol, you are trying it solely on the Poloniex exchange. Both ways it is agreeing with NBT holders in the market to pay the best price next to $1 you can offer given the circumstances. After buying back most of the NBT and having built reserves the confidence to establish a $1 peg can be established. I’m just not convinced you can do that solely with the remaining NSR value as you are now trying.

Thanks both. @phoenix clearly doesn’t understand how to motivate bagholders, communities and volunteers to follow. Phoenix, you will need this going forward. People like to be part of a community. You should have built on that and monetize that instead you are alienating most volunteers and bagholders with your behaviour. That way it will be hard to find buyers for NSR. It is psychology for dummies, get yourself a good advisor.

Believe it or not I even bought additional shares in the first auction in the hope your emotions would settle and intelligence would prevail. I’m sure many others were in the same position. But you keep on going so my doubts have been higher than ever before, but I persist as I belief that people are able to see the light eventually and set aside emotions troubling them. This forum is just not a great medium for it.

Please allow me another attempt. Search for “leadership” and just do yourself a favour and read some of it and educate yourself. Even more important is followship.

Without followers there is no leader.

Here is an interesting link to start reading about it: http://www.vision.org/visionmedia/interviews/leadership-Stephen-Reicher-Michael-Platow-S-Alexander-Haslam/4744.aspx. There is much more on this topic though. Google and DuckDuckGo are your friends.


@Phoenix, you failed.
You were immune to advice.
You have only been following your own agenda ever since you entered the scene.
You aren’t interested in the well-being of Nu.

This is the current situation of the Nu network today.

  • still no accounting of the beginning of Nu. Please spare us telling you have no information about that. It’s quite clear that you are @JordanLee hiding behind a sock puppet.
  • no business plan besides selling NSR to retrieve BTC to buy back NBT.
  • accounting of the NSR sales / NBT buys as single entries in a thread, no overall balance. How many NSR were sold, how many BTC retrieved and more importantly: how many NBT removed from market?
  • no revenue scheme in sight.
  • forum activity shut down to a minimum.
  • reputed community members being insulted by you.

You can counter with boasting how much you improved the NBT rate.
But this is only a complete farce.
Current total buy volume at Poloniex for NBT is less than 5 BTC while close to 50,000 NBT are for sale.
Close to 600,000 NBT are still in circulation.
The ongoing NSR sale plummeted the rate to 50 Satoshis in case you want to sell 8 million NSR for 4 BTC immediately.
If you want to retrieve 16 BTC you need to sell 83 million NSR.
That’s the current order book situation at Poloniex and it won’t get better by pumping the NBT rate with the NSR sale.
Wanna know why?
Because there’s no revenue in sight!
You failed so hard.
Instead of ralizing it, you accuse those who have a vision trying to rob NBT holders.
At the same time you let NBT be bought for significantly less than $1.
You are a bigot, two-faced person.
You try to run a ponzi scheme, but not very successfully so.

Where’s the comments, the proposals, the help from all the new NSR holders?
Who are they?
Where are they?
Do you, @Phoenix/@JordanLee, still buy the majority of all the NSR that are being dumped on the market and try to pull of an impressive pump and dump with this ponzi scheme later?
How many BTC do you have left from the NSR buybacks to continue that ‘business’ of yours?

It’s a pity to see what Nu has turned into.
It had plenty of chances.
I’m afraid it missed too many already.
This is no business. It can’t succeed this way. Without revenue there’s no future.
It was a great experiment and it ended as an impressive failure (or worse).

I don’t have anything more to contribute.
My advice is not wanted.

1 Like