Topic: [350 GH/s] "Eligius" (experimental) pool: almost feeless PPS, hoppers welcome - page 4. (Read 116938 times)
June 24, 2011, 07:24:02 AM
Eligius-EU appears to be down. My miner is unable to connect, and the stats page shows no hashrate for the whole pool.
June 24, 2011, 05:47:26 AM
New page on the stats : list of contributors (sorted by hashrate). Go check it out !
Nice one mate 
surprised I'm as high as I am, neat.
June 23, 2011, 02:06:08 PM
this applies to all, not pool hoppers alone. the correct term should be addresshopper not pool hopper. the problem is that maxpps creates staying dept.
with prop u work for eligius, this creates dept too, but that is paid every 1btc and fully after one week of inactivity.
with maxpps the dept stays because it's not fully paid out because of the limiting value, and accumulates with every new address. so there needs to be a way that this dept is paid.
u can then implement rules like 1month of inactivity of the address voids the dept(poolowner gets it), but that counteracts the no registration needed, because every time u change ur address u lose a portion of the money still owed to u.
This is not correct. MaxPPS pays out the full debt the same way. The only difference is that you never get paid more than you've done the work to get (like you do in proportional), while the pool keeps track of the operator's finances to make sure it doesn't pay you more than the operator has earned from running the pool for you. If the pool has to underpay you due to the finances, it also keeps track of how much it underpaid you so when/if the operator's finances improve, it can pay you extra. It is true that changing address resets this memory, and that is a real flaw to be considered. with prop u work for eligius, this creates dept too, but that is paid every 1btc and fully after one week of inactivity.
with maxpps the dept stays because it's not fully paid out because of the limiting value, and accumulates with every new address. so there needs to be a way that this dept is paid.
u can then implement rules like 1month of inactivity of the address voids the dept(poolowner gets it), but that counteracts the no registration needed, because every time u change ur address u lose a portion of the money still owed to u.
June 23, 2011, 01:24:51 PM
if you didn't hold in your pockets those "scammed" btc taken from those vicious pool-hoppers, but instead distributed them between "fair" users rectroactively after some period of time, say 10 days, probably more people would accept that MaxPPS thing...
I have to agree with this. This is something I never quite wrapped my head around. I like the MaxPPS model except for that one thing.Example:
I pool hopper starts mining. Then leaves.
A block is found. He joins back... another block is found. This will fill his "value."
If the pool hopper leaves the pool at this point or changes Bitcoin addresses, he will never be able to collect this "value."
So where does this value go? Who eventually gets this built up value if it is never collected?
I agree with jkminkov that after a period of time (10 - 20 days) the unclaimed value should be redistributed to the rest of other miners that are active.
this applies to all, not pool hoppers alone. the correct term should be addresshopper not pool hopper. the problem is that maxpps creates staying dept.I pool hopper starts mining. Then leaves.
A block is found. He joins back... another block is found. This will fill his "value."
If the pool hopper leaves the pool at this point or changes Bitcoin addresses, he will never be able to collect this "value."
So where does this value go? Who eventually gets this built up value if it is never collected?
I agree with jkminkov that after a period of time (10 - 20 days) the unclaimed value should be redistributed to the rest of other miners that are active.
with prop u work for eligius, this creates dept too, but that is paid every 1btc and fully after one week of inactivity.
with maxpps the dept stays because it's not fully paid out because of the limiting value, and accumulates with every new address. so there needs to be a way that this dept is paid.
u can then implement rules like 1month of inactivity of the address voids the dept(poolowner gets it), but that counteracts the no registration needed, because every time u change ur address u lose a portion of the money still owed to u.
so it will be liek the other pools, if u wanna change ur address, u have to time it quite well that not much btc are left behind.
June 23, 2011, 11:39:55 AM
if you didn't hold in your pockets those "scammed" btc taken from those vicious pool-hoppers, but instead distributed them between "fair" users rectroactively after some period of time, say 10 days, probably more people would accept that MaxPPS thing...
I have to agree with this. This is something I never quite wrapped my head around. I like the MaxPPS model except for that one thing.Example:
I pool hopper starts mining. Then leaves.
A block is found. He joins back... another block is found. This will fill his "value."
If the pool hopper leaves the pool at this point or changes Bitcoin addresses, he will never be able to collect this "value."
So where does this value go? Who eventually gets this built up value if it is never collected?
I agree with jkminkov that after a period of time (10 - 20 days) the unclaimed value should be redistributed to the rest of other miners that are active.
June 23, 2011, 11:33:24 AM
if you didn't hold in your pockets those "scammed" btc taken from those vicious pool-hoppers, but instead distributed them between "fair" users rectroactively after some period of time, say 10 days, probably more people would accept that MaxPPS thing...
I have to agree with this. This is something I never quite wrapped my head around. I like the MaxPPS model except for that one thing.Example:
I pool hopper starts mining. Then leaves.
A block is found. He joins back... another block is found. This will fill his "value."
If the pool hopper leaves the pool at this point or changes Bitcoin addresses, he will never be able to collect this "value."
So where does this value go? Who eventually gets this built up value if it is never collected?
I agree with jkminkov that after a period of time (10 - 20 days) the unclaimed value should be redistributed to the rest of other miners that are active.
June 23, 2011, 03:18:53 AM
if you didn't hold in your pockets those "scammed" btc taken from those vicious pool-hoppers, but instead distributed them between "fair" users rectroactively after some period of time, say 10 days, probably more people would accept that MaxPPS thing...
June 22, 2011, 11:04:57 AM
Please nominate and vote in the upcoming poll for the new Eligius payout method.
Nominations: https://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=20689.0
Upgrade should occur before the next difficulty (2 days away!), so we need to act quickly here...
Nominations: https://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=20689.0
Upgrade should occur before the next difficulty (2 days away!), so we need to act quickly here...
June 22, 2011, 09:59:04 AM
Yeah, "only" was only due to my expectations being that there should be more miners in the pool. But then again, at 350 Gh/s that makes about 410 Mh/s for everybody, which is exactly what I do. So I'm totally mediocre! Woohoo!
Sorry, I understood the stats wrongly. I thought the "Relative contribution in the pool (%)" was what it was sorted by, but it's sorted by hashrate and since US has been offline for so long, his hashrate is fairly "low" on that pool although he is the biggest contributor overall. Makes sense now.
Sorry, I understood the stats wrongly. I thought the "Relative contribution in the pool (%)" was what it was sorted by, but it's sorted by hashrate and since US has been offline for so long, his hashrate is fairly "low" on that pool although he is the biggest contributor overall. Makes sense now.
June 22, 2011, 09:46:20 AM
#481 is showing as 100%.
Interesting to see that there are over a hundred CPU miners on the list.
Interesting to see that there are over a hundred CPU miners on the list.
June 22, 2011, 09:17:44 AM
Hey, cool stats! Thanks artefact2, I really appreciate your work and the 1337 stats are one of the main reasons for me to be on Eligius!
However, I noticed something odd. Apart from "only" 828 miners in the last 3 hours, #488 has 64.236111 % at 73.57 Mh/s, which can't be right, since his peers have 0.020962 % and 0.021306 %, respectively. Wrong handling of scientific number format, I wonder?
However, I noticed something odd. Apart from "only" 828 miners in the last 3 hours, #488 has 64.236111 % at 73.57 Mh/s, which can't be right, since his peers have 0.020962 % and 0.021306 %, respectively. Wrong handling of scientific number format, I wonder?
Only 828 miners ? That number seems right to me.
Also, the 64% is because this crazy miner is on the US pool. Keep that in mind !
June 22, 2011, 08:55:35 AM
Hey, cool stats! Thanks artefact2, I really appreciate your work and the 1337 stats are one of the main reasons for me to be on Eligius!
However, I noticed something odd. Apart from "only" 828 miners in the last 3 hours, #488 has 64.236111 % at 73.57 Mh/s, which can't be right, since his peers have 0.020962 % and 0.021306 %, respectively. Wrong handling of scientific number format, I wonder?
However, I noticed something odd. Apart from "only" 828 miners in the last 3 hours, #488 has 64.236111 % at 73.57 Mh/s, which can't be right, since his peers have 0.020962 % and 0.021306 %, respectively. Wrong handling of scientific number format, I wonder?
June 22, 2011, 08:39:52 AM
New page on the stats : list of contributors (sorted by hashrate). Go check it out !
June 21, 2011, 07:32:02 PM
I had trouble finding the facts in that post, but it did lead me to an interesting find. Yeah, the poster, but also this:
There is one of the top miners who stuck it out after being forced to loan the pool 6.83411865BTC
This miner consistently gave over 3% during the maxpps scam while receiving as little as 0.22075991 BTC in one round (where the expected reward would be 1.5+BTC per round) that adds up to quite some value of btc.
http://eligius.st/~artefact2/us/1Fc6YXroabfKBjvXYzMxjWfE7kmdKzss1c
I was wrong, there is a top miner who stuck it out, does that mean the pool didn't cheat me and other miners by withholding payments and lowering the rewards?
This one also stuck it out even a week after the pool is apparently withholding his money and shorting his rounds:
http://eligius.st/~artefact2/us/1621CyDporXDEbeVim1KkT8dYqCPhRmSYB
Maybe they are some of the individual payouts that were written about above
There is one of the top miners who stuck it out after being forced to loan the pool 6.83411865BTC
This miner consistently gave over 3% during the maxpps scam while receiving as little as 0.22075991 BTC in one round (where the expected reward would be 1.5+BTC per round) that adds up to quite some value of btc.
http://eligius.st/~artefact2/us/1Fc6YXroabfKBjvXYzMxjWfE7kmdKzss1c
I was wrong, there is a top miner who stuck it out, does that mean the pool didn't cheat me and other miners by withholding payments and lowering the rewards?
This one also stuck it out even a week after the pool is apparently withholding his money and shorting his rounds:
http://eligius.st/~artefact2/us/1621CyDporXDEbeVim1KkT8dYqCPhRmSYB
Maybe they are some of the individual payouts that were written about above
June 21, 2011, 06:31:07 PM
There was an evidence denial posted recently, so, I'm reposting the evidence (see above) which was never refuted.
The poster didn't use basic discussion principles, so I can't really respond other than trying to steer him back to the factual evidence under discussion.
The poster didn't use basic discussion principles, so I can't really respond other than trying to steer him back to the factual evidence under discussion.
I'm so glad you misused the term "basic discussion principles" in your normal subterfuge.
Quick edit - forgot the link: http://unrforliberty.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Our-Discussion.jpg
Again, you can't simply introduce vocabulary that is bias and misleading while suggesting it is a standard of some sort. You've done this several times - even if I did believe you, I wouldn't want to agree with someone that was masking their own inadequacies, incorrectness or inability to understand with these behaviors unless they were able to support their ideas in a sophisticated and accurate manner.
The MaxPPS announcement was in a *HUGE* banner at the top of the status pages for each address. You missed it on your own negligence.
An example of your undeniable evidence that is very easy to disprove with the amount of effort equal to what I feel you are bothering to put in to resolving your own issue:
A possible reason "top hashers" on eligius are only there for a week? Because we are able to switch addresses and aren't bound to ridiculous logins. More realistically, and more factually, it is completely not true "top hashers" are leaving in droves after "being cheated":
http://eligius.st/~artefact2/
Top 10 contributors have been there for... how long? Now you've walked yourself into a corner with your broad and scandalous statements that are easily disproved.... again.
If you're expecting me to chalkboard where you are incorrect in your assumptions of your balance - too bad. luke-jr has already stated what he (as the system designer - proof by attestation of a user with superior knowledge than either of us) that you are not owed the amount you claim. Had you been more civilized, it has already been stated he would be more than willing to immediately pay you out at that amount.
You can continue to throw around words like "cheat" and "scammer" as well as attempting to be condescending in the discussion.... You can continue to insist your evidence is undeniable while continuing to literally wrap it in bullshit.... do you know what that gets you? Do you realize what it has gotten you?
(hint: it's below this line)
June 21, 2011, 04:36:10 PM
June 21, 2011, 04:28:22 PM
June 21, 2011, 04:23:57 PM
June 21, 2011, 04:20:05 PM
June 21, 2011, 04:13:32 PM
The last several pages are full of highly unprofessional banter. Can we please stick to the facts and lay of the ad-hom attacks?
I think the real problem here is that Luke-Jr has changed the rules of the game several times lately without warning. Some of these changes have resulted in the pool holding on to small, but not entirely insignificant, amounts of BTC owed to the miners. To make matters worse, these withheld earnings come with little explanation from Luke-Jr and little more than a vague promise to pay them out at some later date.
These events as of late are disappointing, to say the least, for a pool that prides itself on transparency.
The MaxPPS change was expected for about a month before it happened. If people had a problem with it, they should have said so before then. As it turned out, the variation made the 40% MaxPPS impractical to run long, so I had to (retroactively) revert it to proportional rather soon. In short, all balances are presently correct, as determined by the original Proportional payout method, even if there is a (small) backlog on the US server. Occasional backlogs have been normal since almost the start of Eligius (ever since the 1 BTC minimum was implemented), and the only reason it's taking so long now is the general problems with getting the US pool running again. Since all the US blocks have long since reached the 120 confirmations, I have been making an exception to the usual policy by sending manual payouts on request to people who need their funds sooner.I think the real problem here is that Luke-Jr has changed the rules of the game several times lately without warning. Some of these changes have resulted in the pool holding on to small, but not entirely insignificant, amounts of BTC owed to the miners. To make matters worse, these withheld earnings come with little explanation from Luke-Jr and little more than a vague promise to pay them out at some later date.
These events as of late are disappointing, to say the least, for a pool that prides itself on transparency.
Why wasn't the miner stats page I linked to above rewarded proportionally for the period around June 14th on the us-server?
Did you or will you change the reward balances to undo the maxpps shorting that occured around June 14th? If so, do you have a link to any miner stats page/s which received proportional rewards for eligius us around June 14th? (proportional = 50 x %contributed)
Jump to: