NCFP-2.1 & V572 announcement stub

This article is a substitute for an announcement made on Discord.
As it allows for multi-platform sharing, it is duplicated here. This announcement can be found in the Nyzo discord #announcements channel.

Okay, new announcement. It’s one with multiple pain points so it’s important that you read all of it.

Two days ago, the following announcement was made by the developers:

"Implementations of NTTP-1 and NTTP-2 are currently on hold due to lack of cycle engagement. After several weeks, the NCFP-2.1 transaction has less than 23% of votes of the cycle, despite the option for both yes and no votes. Only two transactions for NCFP-3 have been approved. No bounties for version 572 have been proposed or paid.

We took our stewardship of the development fund seriously, and we expect the cycle to do the same.

Quick approval of the NTTP-1 transaction shows that no technical issues exist preventing creation or approval of cycle transactions."

This, apparently got many people going in regards to voting and creating cycle transactions. Unfortunately, things didn’t work out that nicely.

For starters, it is clear that the page on the official developer’s website does not show every cycle transaction in existence. Neither does using the CTL command in the client produce the full list.

The only website right now where you can accurately view the cycle transactions is the one made by @Iyomisc - and can be found here: → cycle transaction was invalidated and needs to be recreated by a different public identifier

The combined transaction for NCFP-2.1 has been approved by the cycle and the escrow operation for sending individual rewards to the developers has concluded.

A full disclosure about this operation has been posted on the community forum: NCFP-2: Ongoing development incentives (3rd-party)

Right now, there are multiple things up for display on the site made by @Iyomisc , let’s go through them.

The only two cycle transactions in existence which are of importance right now are the security bounties for v572, their cycle transactions were incorporated in the following blocks: (this has to be recreated, this post will be updated accordingly)

This corresponds with the following cycle transactions on @Iyomisc 's explorer:

Their signatures appear to be (and I can not cross-verify both of them at current point time, due to the display problems mentioned above):


(could not be cross-verified at this point in time)



(cross-verified, up for display on the website as well:

These are cycle transactions which aim to reward two independent security researchers who reported a security vulnerability of medium risk.

@jimtalksdata has initiated conversation on this matter on the community forum:

And in the light of the announcement made by the core developers, I compiled an average of the proposed amounts, in a similar fashion as has taken place for NCFP-2.1:

As cycle transaction grouping was a point of discussion with NCFP2.1, these cycle transactions were submitted separately. However, it would make little sense to approve one over the other, as that would exclude one of the researchers of a reward.