Curiously, why doesn't it just tabulate the amount of space you hashed for a block and then do a proportional payout for it regardless of your deadlines? Since it's random, users have no control over their deadlines and can't really 'tweak' them. The only thing they can tweak is speed. How much you can hash within a given time frame is a good indicator of 'hashrate', since size alone doesn't determine how effective your Burst miner is. A block itself simply could be used for the time frame of hashing and the proportion of work for that block.
I don't know if pools can see how much storage someone has, but if they could this seems like the overall best method. Big miner or small it really shouldn't matter, it's all about the amount of work you can do. Block winner and second best deadlines shouldn't matter again as it's random and the whole reason for being on a pool is to average everything out.
You could add a 'historic' element in there too to prevent pool hoping, but that's really not a thing in Burst and it honestly doesn't matter. Someone hoping on the pool for five minutes is just as effective as someone hoping on for 10 days relatively speaking per block (as long as they stay for the full block).
It is not possible to see exact amount of size a miner has, our pool estimates and that is as good as it gets.
Basing payouts off a rough estimation is a bad plan. Right now we base payouts on how many good submissions and how many of the good submissions are lower numbers, and that is how it is paid out. I believe this to be the only fair way to pay miners in a BURST pool.
payment based on what you give, you get what you give. The better you do, the better the pool does, the more you get. The lower shares you submit, the more you get.
Basing payouts (even if we could estimate size perfectly) on size alone is simply not a good way to do things. What if a miner has a ton of space but can't read through it all correctly because they don't have a great processor, they should be paid more than someone who has less actual space but yet provides more useful share submissions to the pool?
I'm sorry, I just don't agree with this method of payout at all. Feel free to clarify if I'm not correct in your suggestion.
It is all about how much you give to the pool. When you base it off share submissions, and give the better shares a better pay, this is how it works, then the miners who consistently submit better shares, get a little extra bonus with the Historic pie, because they give more overall good work to the pool.
I didn't just state size alone, rather size over the block time. Just discarding the whole idea of deadlines having any meaning on a pool because it's completely random. If people could willingly contribute better deadlines with better hardware it would be different, but it's completely random and only factors that influence it are total size and speed.
So how much someone would get paid would depend entirely on how much space they read over the block time. Payouts would vary, especially for fast blocks. Even if someone has 10GB and gets a really fast deadline on a fast block, but someone reads like 100TB in that time frame, the person with 100TB would get almost all of the reward as 10GB will only give you a edge once in a blue moon and all the other time that 100TB will be carrying the 10GB. Vice versa, the 100TB wouldn't have won without the 10GB. If there was someone that was also reading their 200TB plots in that time frame and only got through 10GB of the 200TB during that block time, they'd get paid the same amount as the other 10GB. Because how much space you have doesn't matter if you don't read through it in time.
How is space estimated? Based on the number of deadline submissions you make?
The whole idea of a pool is to smooth everything out and average it out. Not add spikes. If a miner wanted a spiky income they'd be solo mining.
I'm not sure why the 'pool' is being seen as a entity. The pool doesn't matter, it's all about the miners. There is no reason for loyalty to a pool in mining unless you're trying to keep people on a pool, but even then, it would have to be a extremely long reward time period and I would probably be less likely to go to the pool as I could go to a different one and get a fair payout faster without having to pay 'dues' first. The only reason there was a ramp up for mining shares in other altcoins is to prevent pool hoping. You can't pool hop on Burst because your deadlines get confirmed by the wallet and are essentially worthless on another pool (although some pools may not look to see if a deadline is confirmed already).
It would be nice to set payout frequency or how much you get paid out. I definitely would rather get one payment per day then a bunch of small ones or a couple large ones.
