[20 gh] NMCBit pool 3% fee prop 6.6% PPS - page 9.

bitlane

sr. member

Activity: 462

Merit: 250

I heart thebaron

Quote from: DeathAndTaxes on November 01, 2011, 11:21:58 AM

Did that pool have merged mining? It not, then just speculating it could be something on the backend setup that was causing higher than normal stales or delays in issuing work.

That's a good possibility. The NMCBIT stales were also well within acceptable ranges (under 1%) yet the overall valid shares were approx 11.5% lower, compared to the other pool I use as reference (which I am currently mining on & monitoring for fresh data). With everything said and done (using a bit of past as well as current 'other' pool data), I actually profited 8.5% less on NMCBIT (with merged mining) than I would have if I had used the other pool in question, which is not even doing merged mining at the moment.

Again, everything 100% same, except for Pool address.....

My 24hr monitoring of the 'other' pool ends in about 20mins, so I will recalculate everything then and report back.

DeathAndTaxes

donator

Activity: 1218

Merit: 1079

Gerald Davis

Quote from: bitlane on November 01, 2011, 11:16:44 AM

Quote from: DavinciJ15 on November 01, 2011, 10:58:11 AM

I am speaking with shadders the creator of PoolServerJ to find out if your claims have merit I can assure you I am taking this very seriously. If we discover an issue rest assured you will be compensated. If you have any more information you wish to share please do.

Regards

Davinci

FYI....both pools I used in the comparison above currently run PoolserverJ Wink

(probably not what you wanted to hear...lol)

I appreciate you looking into this though,
Allan

Did that pool have merged mining? It not, then just speculating it could be something on the backend setup that was causing higher than normal stales or delays in issuing work.

DavinciJ15

hero member

Activity: 780

Merit: 510

Bitcoin - helping to end bankster enslavement.

Quote from: bitlane on November 01, 2011, 11:16:44 AM

Quote from: DavinciJ15 on November 01, 2011, 10:58:11 AM

I am speaking with shadders the creator of PoolServerJ to find out if your claims have merit I can assure you I am taking this very seriously. If we discover an issue rest assured you will be compensated. If you have any more information you wish to share please do.

Regards

Davinci

FYI....both pools I used in the comparison above currently run PoolserverJ Wink

(probably not what you wanted to hear...lol)

I appreciate you looking into this though,
Allan

Can you let me know what pool? And the name of the operator?

bitlane

sr. member

Activity: 462

Merit: 250

I heart thebaron

Quote from: DavinciJ15 on November 01, 2011, 10:58:11 AM

I am speaking with shadders the creator of PoolServerJ to find out if your claims have merit I can assure you I am taking this very seriously. If we discover an issue rest assured you will be compensated. If you have any more information you wish to share please do.

Regards

Davinci

FYI....both pools I used in the comparison above currently run PoolserverJ Wink

(probably not what you wanted to hear...lol)

I appreciate you looking into this though,
Allan

DavinciJ15

hero member

Activity: 780

Merit: 510

Bitcoin - helping to end bankster enslavement.

Quote from: bitlane on October 31, 2011, 08:28:26 PM

Quote from: DavinciJ15 on October 31, 2011, 08:03:34 PM

Do you have data you wish to share? If there is a problem I will gladly correct it.

I realize now that it would be completely unfair of me to make any statements with specifics and I'd rather not get into those specifics in a public forum, because it will look completely 1 sided and seem as though I am attacking 1 pool while being a fanboy of another. You work hard as both a BTC & NMC supporter as a whole and I respect that.

You and I did stumble across (what I believe to be) the main problem when I first joined up @ NMCBIT last week and that had more to do with geographical location of miner vs pool and the route between them. Once you provided me with an alternate route (to coinserver4) most of the problem went away.

With 100% same hash rates on my end (same settings, equipment etc, only pool address changed) I simply noticed, during my 'calculations' today, that my average share per hour count was approx 3010 shares/hour at one pool, while it was approx 3360 shares/hour at another, using approx 13.67 hours of data initially to come to the conclusion. I am going to re-read a few of my posts and edit them to reflect meaningful info rather than 'heat of the moment' rants etc....lol

Again, I do respect what you have done for the community and to overlook that would be silly on my part.

Allan.

I am speaking with shadders the creator of PoolServerJ to find out if your claims have merit I can assure you I am taking this very seriously. If we discover an issue rest assured you will be compensated. If you have any more information you wish to share please do.

Regards

Davinci

bitlane

sr. member

Activity: 462

Merit: 250

I heart thebaron

Quote from: DavinciJ15 on October 31, 2011, 08:03:34 PM

Do you have data you wish to share? If there is a problem I will gladly correct it.

I realize now that it would be completely unfair of me to make any statements with specifics and I'd rather not get into those specifics in a public forum, because it will look completely 1 sided and seem as though I am attacking 1 pool while being a fanboy of another. You work hard as both a BTC & NMC supporter as a whole and I respect that.

You and I did stumble across (what I believe to be) the main problem when I first joined up @ NMCBIT last week and that had more to do with geographical location of miner vs pool and the route between them. Once you provided me with an alternate route (to coinserver4) most of the problem went away.

With 100% same hash rates on my end (same settings, equipment etc, only pool address changed) I simply noticed, during my 'calculations' today, that my average share per hour count was approx 3010 shares/hour at one pool, while it was approx 3360 shares/hour at another, using approx 13.67 hours of data initially to come to the conclusion. I am going to re-read a few of my posts and edit them to reflect meaningful info rather than 'heat of the moment' rants etc....lol

Again, I do respect what you have done for the community and to overlook that would be silly on my part.

Allan.

DavinciJ15

hero member

Activity: 780

Merit: 510

Bitcoin - helping to end bankster enslavement.

Quote from: bitlane on October 31, 2011, 07:09:30 PM

Quote from: DavinciJ15 on October 31, 2011, 06:31:31 PM

What stat did you uncover?

That everyone really needs to calculate their valid share per hour average, regardless of where they are mining.

With so many users (myself included) busy shopping Pool Stats/Fees/Percentages.....they completely disregard their own performance and how they are able to perform on the pool of their choosing.

Using a big chunk of historical data along with more recent stats, I was able to establish that for me (only me), mining with your pool actually resulted in me generating less BTC than my previous pool due to my own real world performance..... and had nothing to do with the generous offering of what was 'on paper' (or, the website as it were).

Low fees & merged mining mean nothing if a miner's hourly share rate average is garbage due to things beyond his/her control and have more to do with either the Pool's performance or connectivity issues.

Do you have data you wish to share? If there is a problem I will gladly correct it.

bitlane

sr. member

Activity: 462

Merit: 250

I heart thebaron

Quote from: DavinciJ15 on October 31, 2011, 06:31:31 PM

What stat did you uncover?

That everyone really needs to calculate their valid share per hour average, regardless of where they are mining.

With so many users (myself included) busy shopping Pool Stats/Fees/Percentages.....they completely disregard their own performance and how they are able to perform on the pool of their choosing.

Using a big chunk of historical data along with more recent stats, I was able to establish that for me (only me), mining with your pool actually resulted in me generating less BTC than my previous pool due to my own real world performance..... and had nothing to do with the generous offering of what was 'on paper' (or, the website as it were).

Low fees & merged mining mean nothing if a miner's hourly share rate average is garbage due to things beyond his/her control and have more to do with either the Pool's performance or connectivity issues.

DavinciJ15

hero member

Activity: 780

Merit: 510

Bitcoin - helping to end bankster enslavement.

Quote from: bitlane on October 31, 2011, 04:21:26 PM

....yet you still disregard my plea to change the following, further misleading more people (FIRST POST IN THIS THREAD)

Quote

3% is the fee, that will be given back many times to early adopters.

...with NO mention of any other fees or percentages.

Shouldn't it read:

Quote

The PPS Fee is currently 6.6%. PROP is NO FEE, although both are subject to an additional 3% withdrawl fee, making PPS a total of 9.6% and PROP a total of 3% in Fees.

? ? ? ? ?

Regardless, I have uncovered far more disturbing statistics that affect me, that make this almost irrelevant.
ENJOY !

Again you don't understand how it would more confusing to post a 10% fee then the PPS amount and people see a 3% fee. If you are smart enough to know that PPS is diff/50 then you can figure out how my site works. Also your statement...

Quote

The PPS Fee is currently 6.6%. PROP is NO FEE, although both are subject to an additional 3% withdrawl fee, making PPS a total of 9.6% and PROP a total of 3% in Fees.

is even more confusing.

So why should I change information that has no effect on you because you know what the deal is?

What stat did you uncover?

bitlane

sr. member

Activity: 462

Merit: 250

I heart thebaron

....yet you still disregard my plea to change the following, further misleading more people (FIRST POST IN THIS THREAD)

Quote

3% is the fee, that will be given back many times to early adopters.

...with NO mention of any other fees or percentages.

Shouldn't it read:

Quote

The PPS Fee is currently 6.6%. PROP is NO FEE, although both are subject to an additional 3% withdrawl fee, making PPS a total of 9.6% and PROP a total of 3% in Fees.

? ? ? ? ?

Regardless, I have uncovered far more disturbing statistics that affect me, that make this almost irrelevant.
ENJOY !

DavinciJ15

hero member

Activity: 780

Merit: 510

Bitcoin - helping to end bankster enslavement.

Quote from: bitlane on October 31, 2011, 02:00:39 PM

Quote from: DeathAndTaxes on October 31, 2011, 01:59:18 PM

Quote from: bitlane on October 31, 2011, 01:58:20 PM

Quote from: DavinciJ15 on October 31, 2011, 01:55:13 PM

I am not sure how that's confusing.

Just so we can agree.

NMCBIT Fees:
- 6.6% PPS Fee (as you ponited out above).
- 3.0% Withdrawl Fee.
--------------------------
Total = 9.6% PPS Pool Fees.

Well actually it is 9.402% total fees. Grin

LOL.... atleast I know that jab was directed at me this time Wink

thanks for using quote to help me stay less confused....hehe

For you I will call it a 10% fee and the extra you get is a bonus.

fair enough.

bitlane

sr. member

Activity: 462

Merit: 250

I heart thebaron

Quote from: DeathAndTaxes on October 31, 2011, 01:59:18 PM

Quote from: bitlane on October 31, 2011, 01:58:20 PM

Quote from: DavinciJ15 on October 31, 2011, 01:55:13 PM

I am not sure how that's confusing.

Just so we can agree.

NMCBIT Fees:
- 6.6% PPS Fee (as you ponited out above).
- 3.0% Withdrawl Fee.
--------------------------
Total = 9.6% PPS Pool Fees.

Well actually it is 9.402% total fees. Grin

LOL.... atleast I know that jab was directed at me this time Wink

thanks for using quote to help me stay less confused....hehe

DeathAndTaxes

donator

Activity: 1218

Merit: 1079

Gerald Davis

Quote from: bitlane on October 31, 2011, 01:58:20 PM

Quote from: DavinciJ15 on October 31, 2011, 01:55:13 PM

I am not sure how that's confusing.

Just so we can agree.

NMCBIT Fees:
- 6.6% PPS Fee (as you ponited out above).
- 3.0% Withdrawl Fee.
--------------------------
Total = 9.6% PPS Pool Fees.

Well actually it is 9.402% total fees. Grin

bitlane

sr. member

Activity: 462

Merit: 250

I heart thebaron

Quote from: DavinciJ15 on October 31, 2011, 01:55:13 PM

I am not sure how that's confusing.

Just so we can agree.

NMCBIT Fees:
- 6.6% PPS Fee (as you ponited out above).
- 3.0% Withdrawl Fee.
--------------------------
Total = 9.6% PPS Pool Fees.

DavinciJ15

hero member

Activity: 780

Merit: 510

Bitcoin - helping to end bankster enslavement.

Quote from: bitlane on October 31, 2011, 01:46:38 PM

WITH EVERYTHING CONSIDERED, I DON'T CARE ABOUT DECIMAL'd TOTALS......PERCENTAGES ONLY.

Get it ? NMCBIT is a 9.6% PPS Pool. The current OCT31, 2011 PPS FEE - 0.000041537620702

Users get 0.000041537620702 MINUS 9.6%

I'm not trying to hide anything if you head over to deepbit's front page you see this...

Code:

We pay a competitive price:
Pay per share: 0.00003739212601047 BTC per every submitted share
Proportional: your part of every solved block less 3% fee

I see nothing about 10% fee on PPS only the 3% fee, so how am I doing something dirty? I wanted to post just 10% total fee but that was confusing and inaccurate since there is a withdraw fee and all I think it was clear... you get the posted mount plus a 3% fee. Thus some basic math would give you a total to your wallet PPS of around 0.00003762.

I am not sure how that's confusing.

bitlane

sr. member

Activity: 462

Merit: 250

I heart thebaron

WITH EVERYTHING CONSIDERED, I DON'T CARE ABOUT DECIMAL'd TOTALS......PERCENTAGES ONLY.

Get it ? NMCBIT is a 9.6% PPS Pool. The current OCT31, 2011 PPS FEE - 0.000041537620702

Users get 0.000041537620702 MINUS 9.6%

DavinciJ15

hero member

Activity: 780

Merit: 510

Bitcoin - helping to end bankster enslavement.

Quote from: bitlane on October 31, 2011, 01:28:12 PM

Another thing quite funny is the fact that the ONLY PERCENTAGE reference on your Pool's homepage is the mention of a 3% redemtption fee.

This essentially makes your pool look like a 3% Pool.....NOT A near-10% Fee Pool.

It's quite easy to hide fees when simply listing a 5-decimal point value to miners who don't care to do the math themselves.

VERY DIRTY.

Be clear......

WHAT IS THE FINAL WITHDRAWL RATE OF EACH SHARE ON YOUR POOL ?
Not 'before this fee', or 'before that'.....

FINAL IN MY WALLET PPS BTC RATE = ...............

Quote from: bitlane on October 31, 2011, 01:39:27 PM

Quote from: DavinciJ15 on October 31, 2011, 01:32:49 PM

Thus if you earned 1 share in PPS your balance would be...
0.00003878
If you could withdraw that amount the total transferred to your wallet would be...
0.00003762

Come on, really ? WHAT ELSE WOULD WE DO WITH A BALANCE ?

So, if I TRANSFER rather than WITHDRAW, the fee is NULL'd ?

Seriously.....

JUST BE STRAIGHT SO THAT USERS CAN MAKE A $$%% -to- %%$$ comparison of your pool against other's pools.

I am not being dirty the system is designed that way, in order to give you what you want I would have to totally rewrite the payment system and I can't. Thus I can't give you an exact PPS fee after tax because of rounding would not give you a correct official value.

The system was designed to be proportional only, PPS was a hack job and this was the only thing I could do. I hope you understand.

bitlane

sr. member

Activity: 462

Merit: 250

I heart thebaron

Quote from: DavinciJ15 on October 31, 2011, 01:32:49 PM

Thus if you earned 1 share in PPS your balance would be...
0.00003878
If you could withdraw that amount the total transferred to your wallet would be...
0.00003762

Come on, really ? WHAT ELSE WOULD WE DO WITH A BALANCE ?

So, if I TRANSFER rather than WITHDRAW, the fee is NULL'd ?

Seriously.....

JUST BE STRAIGHT SO THAT USERS CAN MAKE A $$%% -to- %%$$ comparison of your pool against other's pools.

USERS see percentages.....that's it.
DeepBit is a 10% PPS Pool.
BTCG is a 5% PPS Pool.

Quote from: DavinciJ15 on August 01, 2011, 11:29:29 PM

3% is the fee, that will be given back many times to early adopters.

Get it ? NMCBIT is a 9.6% PPS Pool.

NOT a 3% pool as the main page of this thread and the pool itself's main/home page would have users believe......

THAT is clear.

DavinciJ15

hero member

Activity: 780

Merit: 510

Bitcoin - helping to end bankster enslavement.

Quote from: bitlane on October 31, 2011, 01:21:59 PM

DavinciL, please add the following, along with completing it....to the FIRST POST.

OCT31, 2011 PPS FEE - 0.000041537620702
NMCBIT POOL FEES:
3% withdrawl fee
6.6% PPS fee
etc.
etc.
NMCBIT MINERS ARE SUBJECT TO A TOTAL OF x.xx% IN FEES.
Final PPS NMCBIT =

I'm not following? so I will try to write it out.

(50.0)/( 1,203,728.07) = 0.000041537620702
Minus 6.6% = 0.00003877729626660837
Plus 3% tax on withdraw.
Thus if you earned 1 share in PPS your balance would be...
0.00003878
If you could withdraw that amount the total transferred to your wallet would be...
0.00003762

I Hope that clears it up for you.

NOTE: Those are rounded values and are not accurate based on the shares you may have provided.

bitlane

sr. member

Activity: 462

Merit: 250

I heart thebaron

Another thing quite funny is the fact that the ONLY PERCENTAGE reference on your Pool's homepage is the mention of a 3% redemtption fee.

This essentially makes your pool look like a 3% Pool.....NOT A near-10% Fee Pool.

It's quite easy to hide fees when simply listing a 5-decimal point value to miners who don't care to do the math themselves.

VERY DIRTY.

Be clear......

WHAT IS THE FINAL WITHDRAWL RATE OF EACH SHARE ON YOUR POOL ?
Not 'before this fee', or 'before that'.....

FINAL IN MY WALLET PPS BTC RATE = ...............

Topic: [20 gh] NMCBit pool 3% fee prop 6.6% PPS - page 9. (Read 63693 times)