Topic: [BITLC] Change of payment scheme for Bitlc.net (Previously bitcoins.lc) - page 4. (Read 5730 times)
February 07, 2012, 01:24:07 PM
Jine - Contact me in IRC. I can give you some numbers about PPS and why I would STRONGLY discourage you from choosing that option given your pool size.
February 07, 2012, 01:21:00 PM
Stay with proportional please as none of the systems seemed right for me (I tried) plus the other systems seem to give me a lot less for the same efforts so please stay with proportional.
February 07, 2012, 01:08:05 PM
We will NOT stick with proportional due to a lot pressure from non-hoppers and regular 24/7 mining users have requested that we do actually start using something else.
So yes, things will change, but the question is - to what?
Personally I'd love to stick with proportional if there was something to be done against hoppers...
PPLNS is the closest scheme to what we have now, and will solve the problem for all miners that's mining more or less fulltime.
DGM is "better", but a lot harder to implement and isn't that similar to proportional (you get paid over a longer period of time etc)..
Score based is proved to work and scale, as slush is using it... seems stable enough to me.
I let you guys decide, but this was just some of my thoughts.
PPS comes with a risk for me, so even if it wins - I'll have to think that over quite a bit...
So yes, things will change, but the question is - to what?
Personally I'd love to stick with proportional if there was something to be done against hoppers...
PPLNS is the closest scheme to what we have now, and will solve the problem for all miners that's mining more or less fulltime.
DGM is "better", but a lot harder to implement and isn't that similar to proportional (you get paid over a longer period of time etc)..
Score based is proved to work and scale, as slush is using it... seems stable enough to me.
I let you guys decide, but this was just some of my thoughts.
PPS comes with a risk for me, so even if it wins - I'll have to think that over quite a bit...
February 07, 2012, 01:05:03 PM
Why does something have to change, exactly?
-p
February 07, 2012, 01:04:22 PM
Won't all the poolhoppers just vote for proportional just so that they can continue exploiting the system?
February 07, 2012, 12:46:46 PM
Hi!
It's about time to jump on the train and switch from proportional to some other payment scheme.
This is a a poll for our users (and non-users, and future users) to check what you guys actually want to have.
There is multiple pros/cons for all payment schemes, therefor we want to make this a democratic decision and let you guys decide.
Here's a short description of the alternatives (copy'n'pasted from wiki)
DGM - Double Geometric Method. A hybrid between PPLNS and Geometric reward types that enables to operator to absorb some of the variance risk. Operator receives portion of payout on short rounds and returns it on longer rounds to normalize payments. [1]
PPLNS - Pay Per Last N Shares. Similar to proportional, but instead of looking at the number of shares in the round, instead looks at the last N shares, regardless of round boundaries.
PPS - Pay Per Share. Each submitted share is worth certain amount of BC. Since finding a block requires shares on average, a PPS method with 0% fee would be 50 BTC divided by . It is risky for pool operators, hence the fee is highest.
Score - Score based system: a proportional reward, but weighed by time submitted. Each submitted share is worth more in the function of time t since start of current round. For each share score is updated by: score += exp(t/C). This makes later shares worth much more than earlier shares, thus the miner's score quickly diminishes when they stop mining on the pool. Rewards are calculated proportionally to scores (and not to shares). (at slush's pool C=300 seconds, and every hour scores are normalized)
Either way, we'll be starting to include the block fee's into the user reward when the new payment scheme is implemented.
What do you guys think? Something got to be done.
--
Regards, Jim
Bit LC Inc.
https://www.bitlc.net
EDIT: I hit enter to fast, submitted the thread before i even finished writing.
Fixed now...
It's about time to jump on the train and switch from proportional to some other payment scheme.
This is a a poll for our users (and non-users, and future users) to check what you guys actually want to have.
There is multiple pros/cons for all payment schemes, therefor we want to make this a democratic decision and let you guys decide.
Here's a short description of the alternatives (copy'n'pasted from wiki)
DGM - Double Geometric Method. A hybrid between PPLNS and Geometric reward types that enables to operator to absorb some of the variance risk. Operator receives portion of payout on short rounds and returns it on longer rounds to normalize payments. [1]
PPLNS - Pay Per Last N Shares. Similar to proportional, but instead of looking at the number of shares in the round, instead looks at the last N shares, regardless of round boundaries.
PPS - Pay Per Share. Each submitted share is worth certain amount of BC. Since finding a block requires
Score - Score based system: a proportional reward, but weighed by time submitted. Each submitted share is worth more in the function of time t since start of current round. For each share score is updated by: score += exp(t/C). This makes later shares worth much more than earlier shares, thus the miner's score quickly diminishes when they stop mining on the pool. Rewards are calculated proportionally to scores (and not to shares). (at slush's pool C=300 seconds, and every hour scores are normalized)
Either way, we'll be starting to include the block fee's into the user reward when the new payment scheme is implemented.
What do you guys think? Something got to be done.
--
Regards, Jim
Bit LC Inc.
https://www.bitlc.net
EDIT: I hit enter to fast, submitted the thread before i even finished writing.
Fixed now...
Jump to: