Hi!
I am gradually re-importing routines for analysis, and I have the first preliminary results,
which are based on what my wallet loaded, although I can not swear on their accuracy.
Regarding the fork, actually there were a couple, one already mentioned by the operator
of Bittrex (which I would like to thank), about 7 blocks long, ending with the last block
orphan 5fdb3400f535bae5fa1b8c8627cea860dfa298090541c857ecb21cef3842673e and
originating from b2ac1020174b0cbe530bcc46451b01b15e16e9d506bdbd28829752058b7b99b6
after the regular block 1028800.
And another longer and older, about 164 blocks, which ends with the block orphan
d7f04eed72a78e74dc4b3ce2517b3d6ee46032342eabe96536f6db22800964c8 and
originating from 0ced41c9fb23e7f0568bc9e2ae0f0e6b96dabfd6f057015715f2d6f8e80c6577
after the regular block 1021725.
The good news is that none of the two fork contained transaction, so no damage
and no worries.
Indeed there were many blocks orphans, in particular in the last 48 hours, as it was
expected, but generally do not form chains greater than 4 consecutive blocks.
And if I compare the data calculated on window of 4000, 1000, and 500 most recent
blocks, i notice that their percentage is decreasing with time.
The average frequency of the blocks is around 25 seconds, slightly too fast, and in this
regard I would like to remind everyone, but especially to sYf5qH to control the correctness
of their system clock.
After a quick look the first 20 positions of the top rich list, it seem to me in the right order,
just the usual difference based on updating time.
In summary, if you want the opinion of those who see the glass half empty...
could be better, but it does not go that bad.
Have patience.
Remy5
