BiblePay | 10% to Orphan-Charity | RANDOMX MINING | Sanctuaries (Masternodes) - page 532.

bible_pay

full member

Activity: 1176

Merit: 215

Jesus is the King of Kings and Lord of Lords

Quote from: proofodc on April 07, 2018, 04:11:36 PM

Hi,

I am newbie to BiblePay, just setup my PODC and got my first payment Grin

Something strange dough Huh

My Windows wallet and my Linux wallet show different amount of BBP.
Linux wallet is missing ~10,000 BBP

Both are version 1119

Did you notice such behavior ?

Try re-launching both wallets with -zapwallettxes=1
See if it was an "orphan", pardon the pun, transaction causing an inflated balance.

bible_pay

full member

Activity: 1176

Merit: 215

Jesus is the King of Kings and Lord of Lords

Quote from: orbis on April 07, 2018, 04:35:19 PM

Quote from: 616westwarmoth on April 07, 2018, 02:31:29 PM

Quote from: bible_pay on April 07, 2018, 10:18:42 AM

It looks like we do have a small bug in our Sanc Quorum calculation. We are assessing his UTXO level once for RAH, then separately for WCG, giving the Sanc Quorum a reading of 90 for the first and then 90 for the second, (instead of summing them then doing it)... So basically we are still assessing a UTXO Level for WCG, but independently.

I'll fix this behavior and then over the next two weeks we can slowly release an upgrade for the sancs. Im going to try to tie this upgrade in with something else that we need however, so please relax.

In the mean time WCG is still 1:1 credit factor wise with RAH, even though it appears to be 3* harder than RAH, so this is not really a big deal since the people placing weight on WCG are doing more work anyway.

But Ill jump on patching it today. UTXO weight will be based on the sum of WCG+RAH. Exec totalrac should already be correct. That is what we use when we send auto podc updates.

Digging around on the World Community Grid site, I found this at

Quote

How do I calculate my FLOPS (Floating Point Operations Per Second) based off my World Community Grid points?

BOINC provides a reference about credit and its relation to FLOPS here. However, you should know that seven (7) World Community Grid points are equal to one (1) BOINC credit.

Therefore, your total World Community Grid points divided by 700 gives you the number of GigaFLOPs and your World Community Grid points divided by 700,000 gives you the number of TeraFLOPs.

This would lead me to believe that their community believes they are 7 times harder, but Free-DC shows a different conversion factor which appears to be about 2.5 times harder as my two identical machines, one running R and the other on WCG both have 7 day averages within 10% of each other, whereas my points shown on the WCG page is about 2.5 times the work rate on Free-DC. In short, I would say whatever conversion they are using there is probably time tested and on the short run, seems to be very accurate.

Granted RAC from WCG is calculated with this 7:1 conversion. You can look at your WCG account. On "My Contribution" site you'll see "Points Generated" which are WCG points. But when you look on "Results Status " on valid tasks there is "Claimed/ Granted BOINC Credit" column with RAC credit which is converted with 7:1.

It looks, that I have different experiences with WCG as you. I am testing two identical machines (only for 4 days now), but from 1. day WCG gives me more RAC.
RaH: https://boincstats.com/en/stats/14/host/detail/3379506/charts
WCG: https://boincstats.com/en/stats/15/host/detail/4542106/charts
Maybe the problem is, that those machines are VPS, so their CPUs are shared.

AHA! I knew there was something funny there about that 7:1. Its because WCG "points" are not Boinc RAC, and Boinc RAC is 1/7th of the "point", ok that takes care of that. That also alludes to why people see 2.5* harder for WCG RAC wise (and like I said, I saw 3* harder the other day, but the baseline isnt complete yet). Let me let it run and see if it settles near the 2.5:1 level the credit aggregators are using.

If they are using 2.5:1 then most likely a lot of scientific measurement went into that figure.

Also be aware that you need to go to your WCG profile page to actually enable all the other projects (like Aids, Malaria, alzheimers etc).

orbis

newbie

Activity: 150

Merit: 0

Quote from: orbis on April 06, 2018, 10:17:45 AM

Quote from: Lichtsucher on April 06, 2018, 01:08:24 AM

Quote from: orbis on April 05, 2018, 05:26:40 PM

Thanks a lot.
Now I use Licht's deb packages, so I have to wait

It is a lot easier to install it on VPS

For now, I just checked twice whether the second wallet is not running Cheesy

The packages are compiling on Launchpad right now

Expect them ready in 1-2 hours.

Thanks Licht

So, I'm installing it right now.
Rob, I will run wallets on two PC's, one with utxooverride=-1 to test it

Rob, it looks, that this problem was solved

utxooverride=-1 works good now and the second wallet is not sending PODC update anymore.

orbis

newbie

Activity: 150

Merit: 0

Quote from: 616westwarmoth on April 07, 2018, 02:31:29 PM

Quote from: bible_pay on April 07, 2018, 10:18:42 AM

It looks like we do have a small bug in our Sanc Quorum calculation. We are assessing his UTXO level once for RAH, then separately for WCG, giving the Sanc Quorum a reading of 90 for the first and then 90 for the second, (instead of summing them then doing it)... So basically we are still assessing a UTXO Level for WCG, but independently.

I'll fix this behavior and then over the next two weeks we can slowly release an upgrade for the sancs. Im going to try to tie this upgrade in with something else that we need however, so please relax.

In the mean time WCG is still 1:1 credit factor wise with RAH, even though it appears to be 3* harder than RAH, so this is not really a big deal since the people placing weight on WCG are doing more work anyway.

But Ill jump on patching it today. UTXO weight will be based on the sum of WCG+RAH. Exec totalrac should already be correct. That is what we use when we send auto podc updates.

Digging around on the World Community Grid site, I found this at

Quote

How do I calculate my FLOPS (Floating Point Operations Per Second) based off my World Community Grid points?

BOINC provides a reference about credit and its relation to FLOPS here. However, you should know that seven (7) World Community Grid points are equal to one (1) BOINC credit.

Therefore, your total World Community Grid points divided by 700 gives you the number of GigaFLOPs and your World Community Grid points divided by 700,000 gives you the number of TeraFLOPs.

This would lead me to believe that their community believes they are 7 times harder, but Free-DC shows a different conversion factor which appears to be about 2.5 times harder as my two identical machines, one running R and the other on WCG both have 7 day averages within 10% of each other, whereas my points shown on the WCG page is about 2.5 times the work rate on Free-DC. In short, I would say whatever conversion they are using there is probably time tested and on the short run, seems to be very accurate.

Granted RAC from WCG is calculated with this 7:1 conversion. You can look at your WCG account. On "My Contribution" site you'll see "Points Generated" which are WCG points. But when you look on "Results Status " on valid tasks there is "Claimed/ Granted BOINC Credit" column with RAC credit which is converted with 7:1.

It looks, that I have different experiences with WCG as you. I am testing two identical machines (only for 4 days now), but from 1. day WCG gives me more RAC.
RaH: https://boincstats.com/en/stats/14/host/detail/3379506/charts
WCG: https://boincstats.com/en/stats/15/host/detail/4542106/charts
Maybe the problem is, that those machines are VPS, so their CPUs are shared.

proofodc

newbie

Activity: 6

Merit: 0

Hi,

I am newbie to BiblePay, just setup my PODC and got my first payment Grin

Something strange dough Huh

My Windows wallet and my Linux wallet show different amount of BBP.
Linux wallet is missing ~10,000 BBP

Both are version 1119

Did you notice such behavior ?

bible_pay

full member

Activity: 1176

Merit: 215

Jesus is the King of Kings and Lord of Lords

Quote from: bible_pay on April 07, 2018, 03:44:27 PM

Quote from: jaapgvk on April 07, 2018, 01:07:17 PM

I've been trying to write some more letters to orphans, but the things that frustrated me a bit in the past could still be improved.

I think the history of an orphan should be more clear. I take an orphan for example:
Aylin Elizabeth Ramos Medina (06991060)

She has been written a letter by us and she send back a letter in reply. Someone has written her a new letter, and although that letter is genuine it's not a response to the letter she has send. This is disappointing to me, because she won't receive a reply to her questions this way.

The reason that this is happening - in my opinion - is because not all information is in clear view. To me, the process is as follows now:
I went to the 'Sponsored Orphan List' to see which orphans still need writing.
Aylin was one of them.

So next I went to the 'Inbound Letters' list, to see her new letter (something that Dale - the one who wrote the latest letter - probably hasn't done. He probably saw that a letter needed to be written and send a letter based on her bio and not her letter).

After that, I started reading her letter and started formulating answers to her questions. But instead of that, I should have gone to the 'Outgoing letters' tab, because only after I wrote my letter, I found out that there was there was already a letter that was written by Dave (although I don't think it a good letter, because he doesn't reply to the questions that Aylin asked), but it wasn't approved yet.

So. I suggest a couple of 'improvements':
-Maybe in the 'Sponsored Orphan List', there should also be a column that shows if an unapproved letter is already written,
-Maybe there should also be a column that links to the latest inbound letter?

I'm not sure how to improve the flow of information here, but to me the whole proces is a bit frustrating at the moment, because I feel that I have to take too many steps.

Or maybe we need a page that shows the following things (just an idea):
Name - Biography - Latest Letter - Needs written (TRUE/FALSE) - Unapproved letter in pool (TRUE/FALSE)

Just trying to find a way that works with less steps than is required now

I think I know what is missing in the letter writing page: the ability to see the communication recently sent from the child in the same view without navigating away. Ill add this in asap.

I like the idea of a user sponsoring or owning the communication responsibility of one child. We should look into that as a possible longer term solution.

Ok, go ahead and write a letter now.

Now you can see the inbound communications on the same page as you are writing on by clicking "VIEW" on the inbound row.

Note: In the pool, you are 'allowed' to right click a browser window and click 'open in new window', and keep one part of your process in another window, and take care of the other process in the other window. If you have multiple monitors this is useful if you are a power user - you can drag window #2 over to the other monitor and refer to the thing you need to refer to. (For example you can have the orphan inbound letter list on monitor #2 and have the Write window on monitor #1).

EDIT:

This inbound feature is actually 'the missing link' to writing quality letters. This is what the child wants to read, and this is what gives the writer great ideas as to what to write! As a matter of fact this is more organized than if you were to lose your mail at home and not find that most recent orphan letter, whereas in our case we have the letters all in one place and organized.

Next we should add a proposal and expense OCR scanning software - and have the inbound letters scanned by the pool and inducted as freetext. <-- But not really, because the letter contains a cartoon, and the formatting is so wild this idea won't technically work. The user needs to primarily read page #2 of the letter, so if you are a writer you can focus more on every even page in the list.

bible_pay

full member

Activity: 1176

Merit: 215

Jesus is the King of Kings and Lord of Lords

Quote from: jaapgvk on April 07, 2018, 01:07:17 PM

I've been trying to write some more letters to orphans, but the things that frustrated me a bit in the past could still be improved.

I think the history of an orphan should be more clear. I take an orphan for example:
Aylin Elizabeth Ramos Medina (06991060)

She has been written a letter by us and she send back a letter in reply. Someone has written her a new letter, and although that letter is genuine it's not a response to the letter she has send. This is disappointing to me, because she won't receive a reply to her questions this way.

The reason that this is happening - in my opinion - is because not all information is in clear view. To me, the process is as follows now:
I went to the 'Sponsored Orphan List' to see which orphans still need writing.
Aylin was one of them.

So next I went to the 'Inbound Letters' list, to see her new letter (something that Dale - the one who wrote the latest letter - probably hasn't done. He probably saw that a letter needed to be written and send a letter based on her bio and not her letter).

After that, I started reading her letter and started formulating answers to her questions. But instead of that, I should have gone to the 'Outgoing letters' tab, because only after I wrote my letter, I found out that there was there was already a letter that was written by Dave (although I don't think it a good letter, because he doesn't reply to the questions that Aylin asked), but it wasn't approved yet.

So. I suggest a couple of 'improvements':
-Maybe in the 'Sponsored Orphan List', there should also be a column that shows if an unapproved letter is already written,
-Maybe there should also be a column that links to the latest inbound letter?

I'm not sure how to improve the flow of information here, but to me the whole proces is a bit frustrating at the moment, because I feel that I have to take too many steps.

Or maybe we need a page that shows the following things (just an idea):
Name - Biography - Latest Letter - Needs written (TRUE/FALSE) - Unapproved letter in pool (TRUE/FALSE)

Just trying to find a way that works with less steps than is required now

I think I know what is missing in the letter writing page: the ability to see the communication recently sent from the child in the same view without navigating away. Ill add this in asap.

I like the idea of a user sponsoring or owning the communication responsibility of one child. We should look into that as a possible longer term solution.

afeno

jr. member

Activity: 175

Merit: 1

Quote from: dave_bbp on April 07, 2018, 03:15:21 AM

Quote from: Lichtsucher on April 07, 2018, 01:34:48 AM

Quote from: afeno on April 06, 2018, 05:33:46 PM

1) Why I am not getting any payout on my account since two days:
https://pool.purepool.org/main/miner/BGeQ6eFaKZW6sBJbP98f6s4bsDV5BDHJov/

I will have a look at this. Anybody else have this problem?

Last payout on purepool was on April 4th for me. However the funds still seem to be there, so no problem. Wink

The funds are still stuck in the pool. Is the daily payment working well?

jaapgvk

full member

Activity: 574

Merit: 104

Quote from: ang2 on April 07, 2018, 02:33:26 PM

Quote from: jaapgvk on April 07, 2018, 02:29:29 PM

Quote from: ang2 on April 07, 2018, 01:42:14 PM

Can someone please explain me why I got 547.1960 bbp from this?
https://www.biblepay-central.org/en/podc/user/1993146/

Also, can someone explain why in previous block the utxo amount was 50,917.0000 and in the next payment it writes that the utxo amount is 7,144.0000 ?

I use v. 1.1.1.9 . Should I set utxoamount or not? Is there any other settings I should set? What does utxoverride do?

Sorry for all of these questions but I am totally confused...

I looked up your stats on pool.biblepay.org and it says the same. I don't understand why your ModifiedRAC (Biblepay RAC) is lower than your RAC, because your TaskWeight seems to be 100.

Did you previously have WCG RAC?

What is WCG RAC?

Oh wait, I just read what Rob wrote some posts above yours:

Quote

Your Modified RAC = UTXO depressed RAC for RAH + WCG

Since your UTXO weight is only 20% now, that would explain why the 'Biblepay RAC' has dropped. But I have no idea why your PODC-update only sent out 7,144 BBP. I hope that someone else can help you with this.

WCG RAC = World Community Grid RAC (our fallback project if Rosetta fails).

afeno

jr. member

Activity: 175

Merit: 1

Quote from: bible_pay on April 07, 2018, 09:32:09 AM

We did add a Narrative that will show "why" your share was not included also, let me see if we can put that somewhere.

The patch has not been deployed to the pool yet, and Im not sure how far Light implemented this yet on his end.

Looking forward for the patch to go back to the original pool.
Thank you Rob!

ang2

newbie

Activity: 16

Merit: 0

Quote from: jaapgvk on April 07, 2018, 02:29:29 PM

Quote from: ang2 on April 07, 2018, 01:42:14 PM

Can someone please explain me why I got 547.1960 bbp from this?
https://www.biblepay-central.org/en/podc/user/1993146/

Also, can someone explain why in previous block the utxo amount was 50,917.0000 and in the next payment it writes that the utxo amount is 7,144.0000 ?

I use v. 1.1.1.9 . Should I set utxoamount or not? Is there any other settings I should set? What does utxoverride do?

Sorry for all of these questions but I am totally confused...

I looked up your stats on pool.biblepay.org and it says the same. I don't understand why your ModifiedRAC (Biblepay RAC) is lower than your RAC, because your TaskWeight seems to be 100.

Did you previously have WCG RAC?

What is WCG RAC?

tmike

member

Activity: 157

Merit: 10

Quote from: SEO_Account on April 06, 2018, 11:11:41 PM

Quote from: tmike on April 06, 2018, 10:47:55 PM

Mining/PoDC chatbox enabled on bbppodc.org website!

High Risk Website Blocked
bbppodc.org
Access to this page is blocked as the threat Mal/HTMLGen-A has been found on this website.

Huh

Apparently my site is marked as high risk somehow. I ran an anti-virus scan and nothing was found, in the process of re-marking the website as safe.

Code:

root@bbppodc:~# savscan -f /
SAVScan virus detection utility
Version 5.43.0 [Linux/AMD64]
Virus data version 5.49, March 2018
Includes detection for 17942295 viruses, Trojans and worms
Copyright (c) 1989-2018 Sophos Limited. All rights reserved.

System time 15:50:33, System date 07 April 2018
Command line qualifiers are: -f

IDE directory is: /opt/sophos-av/lib/sav

Full Scanning

Could not open /usr/bin/db_sql

26132 files scanned in 1 minute and 17 seconds.
1 error was encountered.
No viruses were discovered.
End of Scan.

616westwarmoth

full member

Activity: 406

Merit: 101

Quote from: bible_pay on April 07, 2018, 10:18:42 AM

It looks like we do have a small bug in our Sanc Quorum calculation. We are assessing his UTXO level once for RAH, then separately for WCG, giving the Sanc Quorum a reading of 90 for the first and then 90 for the second, (instead of summing them then doing it)... So basically we are still assessing a UTXO Level for WCG, but independently.

I'll fix this behavior and then over the next two weeks we can slowly release an upgrade for the sancs. Im going to try to tie this upgrade in with something else that we need however, so please relax.

In the mean time WCG is still 1:1 credit factor wise with RAH, even though it appears to be 3* harder than RAH, so this is not really a big deal since the people placing weight on WCG are doing more work anyway.

But Ill jump on patching it today. UTXO weight will be based on the sum of WCG+RAH. Exec totalrac should already be correct. That is what we use when we send auto podc updates.

Digging around on the World Community Grid site, I found this at https://www.worldcommunitygrid.org/help/viewTopic.do?shortName=points#177

Quote

How do I calculate my FLOPS (Floating Point Operations Per Second) based off my World Community Grid points?

BOINC provides a reference about credit and its relation to FLOPS here. However, you should know that seven (7) World Community Grid points are equal to one (1) BOINC credit.

Therefore, your total World Community Grid points divided by 700 gives you the number of GigaFLOPs and your World Community Grid points divided by 700,000 gives you the number of TeraFLOPs.

This would lead me to believe that their community believes they are 7 times harder, but Free-DC shows a different conversion factor which appears to be about 2.5 times harder as my two identical machines, one running R@h and the other on WCG both have 7 day averages within 10% of each other, whereas my points shown on the WCG page is about 2.5 times the work rate on Free-DC. In short, I would say whatever conversion they are using there is probably time tested and on the short run, seems to be very accurate.

jaapgvk

full member

Activity: 574

Merit: 104

Quote from: ang2 on April 07, 2018, 01:42:14 PM

Can someone please explain me why I got 547.1960 bbp from this?
https://www.biblepay-central.org/en/podc/user/1993146/

Also, can someone explain why in previous block the utxo amount was 50,917.0000 and in the next payment it writes that the utxo amount is 7,144.0000 ?

I use v. 1.1.1.9 . Should I set utxoamount or not? Is there any other settings I should set? What does utxoverride do?

Sorry for all of these questions but I am totally confused...

I looked up your stats on pool.biblepay.org and it says the same. I don't understand why your ModifiedRAC (Biblepay RAC) is lower than your RAC, because your TaskWeight seems to be 100.

Did you previously have WCG RAC?

jaapgvk

full member

Activity: 574

Merit: 104

Quote from: 616westwarmoth on April 07, 2018, 01:58:33 PM

Quote from: jaapgvk on April 07, 2018, 01:07:17 PM

I've been trying to write some more letters to orphans, but the things that frustrated me a bit in the past could still be improved.

I think the history of an orphan should be more clear. I take an orphan for example:
Aylin Elizabeth Ramos Medina (06991060)

She has been written a letter by us and she send back a letter in reply. Someone has written her a new letter, and although that letter is genuine it's not a response to the letter she has send. This is disappointing to me, because she won't receive a reply to her questions this way.

The reason that this is happening - in my opinion - is because not all information is in clear view. To me, the process is as follows now:
I went to the 'Sponsored Orphan List' to see which orphans still need writing.
Aylin was one of them.

So next I went to the 'Inbound Letters' list, to see her new letter (something that Dale - the one who wrote the latest letter - probably hasn't done. He probably saw that a letter needed to be written and send a letter based on her bio and not her letter).

After that, I started reading her letter and started formulating answers to her questions. But instead of that, I should have gone to the 'Outgoing letters' tab, because only after I wrote my letter, I found out that there was there was already a letter that was written by Dave (although I don't think it a good letter, because he doesn't reply to the questions that Aylin asked), but it wasn't approved yet.

So. I suggest a couple of 'improvements':
-Maybe in the 'Sponsored Orphan List', there should also be a column that shows if an unapproved letter is already written,
-Maybe there should also be a column that links to the latest inbound letter?

I'm not sure how to improve the flow of information here, but to me the whole proces is a bit frustrating at the moment, because I feel that I have to take too many steps.

Or maybe we need a page that shows the following things (just an idea):
Name - Biography - Latest Letter - Needs written (TRUE/FALSE) - Unapproved letter in pool (TRUE/FALSE)

Just trying to find a way that works with less steps than is required now

I would like to second what had been suggested.

Allow for a letter writer to "Claim" an orphan. Then the primary writer will be that person, and their letters will get higher priority to be approved (since in theory, they've already shown themselves to be good stewards and good letter writers). Each user can claim only one orphan (although the can still write to others, and others can submit letters to their claimed orphan). They should get a notification when their orphan has written back and then have a time period (4 weeks?) where they have to write back or they lose their claim.

That then gets to my other thought, we should have a committee of three to review the orphan letters. This would take some burden off of Rob. Or Rob could be one of the three if he receives joy and satisfaction from that.

Haha! I read your reply after replying to Mike, but nice to see that we think alike on this matter

About the committee: I think this could potentially indeed be a job for Mike's commission, and I wouldn't mind being a reviewer if we can streamline the process in some way.

jaapgvk

full member

Activity: 574

Merit: 104

Quote from: jaapgvk on April 07, 2018, 01:07:17 PM

I've been trying to write some more letters to orphans, but the things that frustrated me a bit in the past could still be improved.

I think the history of an orphan should be more clear. I take an orphan for example:
Aylin Elizabeth Ramos Medina (06991060)

She has been written a letter by us and she send back a letter in reply. Someone has written her a new letter, and although that letter is genuine it's not a response to the letter she has send. This is disappointing to me, because she won't receive a reply to her questions this way.

The reason that this is happening - in my opinion - is because not all information is in clear view. To me, the process is as follows now:
I went to the 'Sponsored Orphan List' to see which orphans still need writing.
Aylin was one of them.

So next I went to the 'Inbound Letters' list, to see her new letter (something that Dale - the one who wrote the latest letter - probably hasn't done. He probably saw that a letter needed to be written and send a letter based on her bio and not her letter).

After that, I started reading her letter and started formulating answers to her questions. But instead of that, I should have gone to the 'Outgoing letters' tab, because only after I wrote my letter, I found out that there was there was already a letter that was written by Dave (although I don't think it a good letter, because he doesn't reply to the questions that Aylin asked), but it wasn't approved yet.

So. I suggest a couple of 'improvements':
-Maybe in the 'Sponsored Orphan List', there should also be a column that shows if an unapproved letter is already written,
-Maybe there should also be a column that links to the latest inbound letter?

I'm not sure how to improve the flow of information here, but to me the whole proces is a bit frustrating at the moment, because I feel that I have to take too many steps.

Or maybe we need a page that shows the following things (just an idea):
Name - Biography - Latest Letter - Needs written (TRUE/FALSE) - Unapproved letter in pool (TRUE/FALSE)

Just trying to find a way that works with less steps than is required now

Yes, this is actually a suggestion that I have also made in the past. When a user writes a genuine letter to an orphan, this user gets 'linked' to that orphan, and it's expected that they write a letter when there is a reply (maybe there could also be a notification system if there is a new letter). I think this is also important, because a personal letter, from someone that you have bonded with, holds more value than if an orphan gets a reply from someone else every time she answers some questions. If I were a child, this would be confusing to me. That's another reason why I think one-on-one letter writing would be better.

If there is not a reply for some time, then the orphan can be 'free' again for someone else to further the communication.

tmike

member

Activity: 157

Merit: 10

Quote from: 616westwarmoth on April 07, 2018, 01:58:33 PM

Quote from: jaapgvk on April 07, 2018, 01:07:17 PM

I've been trying to write some more letters to orphans, but the things that frustrated me a bit in the past could still be improved.

I think the history of an orphan should be more clear. I take an orphan for example:
Aylin Elizabeth Ramos Medina (06991060)

She has been written a letter by us and she send back a letter in reply. Someone has written her a new letter, and although that letter is genuine it's not a response to the letter she has send. This is disappointing to me, because she won't receive a reply to her questions this way.

The reason that this is happening - in my opinion - is because not all information is in clear view. To me, the process is as follows now:
I went to the 'Sponsored Orphan List' to see which orphans still need writing.
Aylin was one of them.

So next I went to the 'Inbound Letters' list, to see her new letter (something that Dale - the one who wrote the latest letter - probably hasn't done. He probably saw that a letter needed to be written and send a letter based on her bio and not her letter).

After that, I started reading her letter and started formulating answers to her questions. But instead of that, I should have gone to the 'Outgoing letters' tab, because only after I wrote my letter, I found out that there was there was already a letter that was written by Dave (although I don't think it a good letter, because he doesn't reply to the questions that Aylin asked), but it wasn't approved yet.

So. I suggest a couple of 'improvements':
-Maybe in the 'Sponsored Orphan List', there should also be a column that shows if an unapproved letter is already written,
-Maybe there should also be a column that links to the latest inbound letter?

I'm not sure how to improve the flow of information here, but to me the whole proces is a bit frustrating at the moment, because I feel that I have to take too many steps.

Or maybe we need a page that shows the following things (just an idea):
Name - Biography - Latest Letter - Needs written (TRUE/FALSE) - Unapproved letter in pool (TRUE/FALSE)

Just trying to find a way that works with less steps than is required now

I would like to second what had been suggested.

Allow for a letter writer to "Claim" an orphan. Then the primary writer will be that person, and their letters will get higher priority to be approved (since in theory, they've already shown themselves to be good stewards and good letter writers). Each user can claim only one orphan (although the can still write to others, and others can submit letters to their claimed orphan). They should get a notification when their orphan has written back and then have a time period (4 weeks?) where they have to write back or they lose their claim.

That then gets to my other thought, we should have a committee of three to review the orphan letters. This would take some burden off of Rob. Or Rob could be one of the three if he receives joy and satisfaction from that.

I think that would be a great job for the charity commission. So far zero votes though.

616westwarmoth

full member

Activity: 406

Merit: 101

Quote from: jaapgvk on April 07, 2018, 01:07:17 PM

I've been trying to write some more letters to orphans, but the things that frustrated me a bit in the past could still be improved.

I think the history of an orphan should be more clear. I take an orphan for example:
Aylin Elizabeth Ramos Medina (06991060)

She has been written a letter by us and she send back a letter in reply. Someone has written her a new letter, and although that letter is genuine it's not a response to the letter she has send. This is disappointing to me, because she won't receive a reply to her questions this way.

The reason that this is happening - in my opinion - is because not all information is in clear view. To me, the process is as follows now:
I went to the 'Sponsored Orphan List' to see which orphans still need writing.
Aylin was one of them.

So next I went to the 'Inbound Letters' list, to see her new letter (something that Dale - the one who wrote the latest letter - probably hasn't done. He probably saw that a letter needed to be written and send a letter based on her bio and not her letter).

After that, I started reading her letter and started formulating answers to her questions. But instead of that, I should have gone to the 'Outgoing letters' tab, because only after I wrote my letter, I found out that there was there was already a letter that was written by Dave (although I don't think it a good letter, because he doesn't reply to the questions that Aylin asked), but it wasn't approved yet.

So. I suggest a couple of 'improvements':
-Maybe in the 'Sponsored Orphan List', there should also be a column that shows if an unapproved letter is already written,
-Maybe there should also be a column that links to the latest inbound letter?

I'm not sure how to improve the flow of information here, but to me the whole proces is a bit frustrating at the moment, because I feel that I have to take too many steps.

Or maybe we need a page that shows the following things (just an idea):
Name - Biography - Latest Letter - Needs written (TRUE/FALSE) - Unapproved letter in pool (TRUE/FALSE)

Just trying to find a way that works with less steps than is required now

I would like to second what had been suggested.

Allow for a letter writer to "Claim" an orphan. Then the primary writer will be that person, and their letters will get higher priority to be approved (since in theory, they've already shown themselves to be good stewards and good letter writers). Each user can claim only one orphan (although the can still write to others, and others can submit letters to their claimed orphan). They should get a notification when their orphan has written back and then have a time period (4 weeks?) where they have to write back or they lose their claim.

That then gets to my other thought, we should have a committee of three to review the orphan letters. This would take some burden off of Rob. Or Rob could be one of the three if he receives joy and satisfaction from that.

ang2

newbie

Activity: 16

Merit: 0

Can someone please explain me why I got 547.1960 bbp from this?
https://www.biblepay-central.org/en/podc/user/1993146/

Also, can someone explain why in previous block the utxo amount was 50,917.0000 and in the next payment it writes that the utxo amount is 7,144.0000 ?

I use v. 1.1.1.9 . Should I set utxoamount or not? Is there any other settings I should set? What does utxoverride do?

Sorry for all of these questions but I am totally confused...

tmike

member

Activity: 157

Merit: 10

Quote from: jaapgvk on April 07, 2018, 01:07:17 PM

I've been trying to write some more letters to orphans, but the things that frustrated me a bit in the past could still be improved.

I think the history of an orphan should be more clear. I take an orphan for example:
Aylin Elizabeth Ramos Medina (06991060)

She has been written a letter by us and she send back a letter in reply. Someone has written her a new letter, and although that letter is genuine it's not a response to the letter she has send. This is disappointing to me, because she won't receive a reply to her questions this way.

The reason that this is happening - in my opinion - is because not all information is in clear view. To me, the process is as follows now:
I went to the 'Sponsored Orphan List' to see which orphans still need writing.
Aylin was one of them.

So next I went to the 'Inbound Letters' list, to see her new letter (something that Dale - the one who wrote the latest letter - probably hasn't done. He probably saw that a letter needed to be written and send a letter based on her bio and not her letter).

After that, I started reading her letter and started formulating answers to her questions. But instead of that, I should have gone to the 'Outgoing letters' tab, because only after I wrote my letter, I found out that there was there was already a letter that was written by Dave (although I don't think it a good letter, because he doesn't reply to the questions that Aylin asked), but it wasn't approved yet.

So. I suggest a couple of 'improvements':
-Maybe in the 'Sponsored Orphan List', there should also be a column that shows if an unapproved letter is already written,
-Maybe there should also be a column that links to the latest inbound letter?

I'm not sure how to improve the flow of information here, but to me the whole proces is a bit frustrating at the moment, because I feel that I have to take too many steps.

Or maybe we need a page that shows the following things (just an idea):
Name - Biography - Latest Letter - Needs written (TRUE/FALSE) - Unapproved letter in pool (TRUE/FALSE)

Just trying to find a way that works with less steps than is required now

How about if we do adopt a child and you just stick with a few kids. I think it is more beneficial if 1 kid is only writing letters to 1 or 2 people. I can immediately do a quick list on the website and we can improve it later.

Topic: BiblePay | 10% to Orphan-Charity | RANDOMX MINING | Sanctuaries (Masternodes) - page 532. (Read 243386 times)