In response to @JordanLee’s post and this motion, which propose the management of funds in tier 4 and 6 by shareholders, a group of potential trustees has arranged an online meeting to discuss the operating details of this arrangement.

The first meeting has been successfully carried out with the participation of @desrever, @mhps, @dhume, @masterofdisaster, @woodstockmerkle, @nmei and myself. Logs are hosted at the following links:

We have highlighted several issues during the meeting, and we would like to ask the community to join our discussion on the following matters.

Firstly,

We would like to divide the funds into two main segments:

(a) a smaller part over which fund managers collectively have full authoritym in case of emergency; and

(b) a larger part whose usage requires shareholder approval. Further subdivisions may be necessary, such as funds that are dedicated to specific projects supported by tier 4.

We have yet to decide the exact portions of the two segments, as well as the threshold for shareholder approval. The purpose of this division is to require consensus regarding the general usage of funds, while also allowing the fund managers to act quickly upon urgent situations that put the NBT/USD peg at risk.

Second,

We will need to design workflows that ensure tier 4/6 liquidity provision to other tiers can be secure.

For example, a custodian may delegated the task to submit funds to an exchange, use BTC to purchase NBT, and provide a proof of burn; this custodian may need to post a collateral to show he will not abscond with the funds.

On the other hand, we may ask liquidity providers to burn NBT in exchange for an equivalent amount of BTC, where our bottleneck would be an escrow.

In general, at some point, the funds will leave the multi-sig wallet and lose various forms of decentralized protection, and we need more input regarding which approaches are more acceptable.

Last but not least,

We need to establish a more detailed view of the roles of all tiers of liquidity, which amounts to a grand architecture of tiers 1-6, which provides a clear designation of responsibilities and a more precise definition of the interfaces among the tiers.

For example, we need to understand the current state of tier 3 liquidity, in order to understand how we can support it using tier 4 funds. We also want to ask @JordanLee regarding the comment that we should regularly maintain tier 4 funds at 80,000 USD worth of BTC, such as how we should seek to replenish these funds when they are used, and whether our role subsumes some form of financial management.

Finally, I would like to thank @desrever for moderating and initiating the meeting, and also everyone else who took their time to make this first step toward building solid foundations for an important project. It is unfortunate that we could not accommodate @cryptog, despite his wishes to join, due to scheduling conflicts. We will work to overcome such limitations arising from decentralized collaborations in the future.