Topic: Neighbourhood Pool Watch - page 13. (Read 49929 times)

Also, realise, as I mentioned further up and you can read elsewhere on the forum, P2Pools advocacy of saying that non-P2Pool pools are not trustworthy will obviously imply that those who agree with that will not trust any pool but P2Pool and thus any of them could choose any pool to list as untrustworthy.

Not long after I mentioned that I trusted Ozcoin, the number of people who selected Ozcoin jumped up (from 1 to 4)

Be interesting to see if I've just caused yours to jump up
It's currently 7 - maybe even your comment made it go up 1 more?

Edit: actually I was thinking about this advocacy yesterday and realised I had seen something similar here on the forum before.
SolidCoin

Anyway, I would also suggest that my comments in this thread have probably made this current poll meaningless ... ... ... ...

Edit2: it's gone up 2 more since I posted - hmm I wonder

Hey so who are the six that don't trust EMC?  I'd certainly like to address any issues with that, as I try to be as open as possible with everything I do with regards to the pool.  If there's something that is questionable, I will certainly address it.

Do I need to explain the English?
If English is not your first language I'll go to the trouble.

Otherwise - try reading it from the position of someone not enraptured with P2Pool

No.

I don't see how declaring someone else 'bad' makes you or P2Pool seem better.
It actually reflects poorly on both yourself and P2Pool that you need to use such a comparison.

I was simply referring to the issue that MANY P2Pool acolytes say that normal pools are untrustworthy thus you should use P2Pool
So in that respect, P2Pool is in opposition to Ozcoin when it comes to trust.

I trust Ozcoin and Graeme probably more than any other pool around.
(I'm even mining on Ozcoin at the moment and have been 100% for the past 6 days)

Aside: The early on P2Pool evangelism turned me off P2Pool, so for myself it's unlikely I'll use P2Pool in the near future (and I have brought up reasons on the forum also - e.g. other issues relate to having no technical documentation, and IMO a lack of reliability and stability - also the 'accepted stales' issues I've brought up elsewhere)

I am the only one who feels like throwing up when reading this?

On one hand, we have ForrestV, who actually built something himself, from the ground up. Something thats incredibly innovative, (very) valuable to bitcoin and the community at large. Something that is open and opensource.

No secrets, no lies.

OTOH, we have a clueless Goat who has never done anything himself, but leaches off everyone else and thrives through secrecy and deceit. A goat that runs a mining business owned by his shareholders who are not being told where his farm is mining, who are not being told how much is truly being earned from pool hopping, who are not being told anything but who are paid dividends based only on fabricated numbers that dont come close to reflecting actual pool hopping profits.

That same Goat now cries foul because someone ignorant may not read the readme and therefore unwittingly donate  a small amount to someone deserving, yet he runs a hopping proxy, developed by people with the skills he lacks, a proxy that robs the poor and ignorant miners of prop pools from far more than 0.5%, yet he makes zero effort to educate those miners or protect them from their far larger losses because he pockets them, and not Forrestv.

So that hypocrite is now going to pretend being the miners advocate, judging what an honest (and optional) donation fee is for ForrestV's hard work, most (or all?) of which is redistributed among the miners?

If you really think like that and are absolutely certain, then you should remove your p2pool guide. If someone is reading the code and studying the wiki, they won't need the guide. Guides are for people who don't do those things. In fact, your guide is enabling people to use p2pool that apparently shouldn't be. Don't be an enabler.

I just want to let this sink in for a bit. You are one of the big proponents of p2pool. You would have everyone use it rather than other pools. And now you think that everyone should be auditing the code of p2pool before using it? So everyone who mines bitcoin (and any other cryptocoin that uses p2pool) should 1) have the programming ability to read and analyze the code and 2) the time to do so? Just think about that for a bit and tell me if you think that is a reasonable request.

I think he just means the literal definition of a pool, as such, and therefore all pools apply. If I am wrong, I would also like to hear an answer to this. Graeme runs an excellent pool.

Kano, can you tell me why you think Ozcoin is "in direct contrast of trust"? It's one of the few pools I have trust in, so I'd like to hear an opposing view point.

Middle of the docs? Who's going to read docs to join a mine? If I was joining a mine, I would expect the "fee" to be listed in the first post of the pool thread:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.231846

Hmm. Nothing about it there. How about in the guide to setup p2pool?

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/1500-th-p2pool-decentralized-dos-resistant-hop-proof-pool-18313

Nah, still nothing.

Oh wait, I remember seeing a link to a wiki. It must be there:

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/P2Pool

I scan the page down till I get to the heading beginning with Donating... thinking I hit the jackpot, but no. Surely something as important as a built-in fee in a pool that claims to be fee-free should be mentioned in a paragraph that talks about the reasoning behind it? Alas, I finally spot it hidden in the command line options, where very few people will ever notice, especially if they just follow the guides.

You guys are exploiting people much the same way that companies will exploit customers who buy products with rebates. They expect that a certain percentage won't know about the rebate, will forget about the rebate, or won't fill it out correctly. You're also taking advantage of people's inclination to do nothing when faced with a tough decision and hence take the default option. While it isn't truly hidden and has been talked about several times on here (with each time p2pool users surfacing saying that they never heard of it), anything less than front and center IS hidden when it comes to a fee, ESPECIALLY when one of your primary raison d'etre is no fees! You can claim that people should know about it and how to stop it. That the donation is worthy. That it is good intentioned. None of that matters.

There are only two options if you want to have an honest, reputable pool (which we all want). Advertise the built-in donation loudly and boldly, or make it opt-in rather than opt-out.

It's a very small fee by default (0.5%), and you can always set it to 0 with "--give-author 0"

It's an option listed in the middle of the docs with all the other options.
Read if you are interested
That gives you a chance to decide if you think it is visible enough or not

Edit: hmm it's now 4 for P2Pool - maybe 4 people didn't realise it - or there are 4 other reasons?

Actually - both of those pools are in direct contrast of trust.
P2Pool people say that you can't trust normal pools - so at least someone somewhere will probably say they don't trust each normal pool.
P2Pool, on the other hard, takes a 0.5% fee that most people don't realise until someone points it out to them and they can change it to zero - so there would certainly be a lack of trust by some due to that also.

Actually I think they vote against Eligius for taking down the Springcoin.

Hmm - simplecoin.us still mines also (their last block was ... 171650)
I only know that coz they have their name in the coinbase

(at the moment there's 10 pools I can tell from looking at the block in the last 100 blocks - accounting for 68% of the 100)

Currently prop with delayed stats. I think they're changing to pplns soon, or may have already. If you're asking about how to hop them .... well, there's another thread for that.

Wasn't me. I forgot to vote after I posted the poll. I think it's pretty obvious which at least one of the pools I voted for was. Not Slush.

New poll started. To complement the last one, this time it's: which pool do you trust the least?


...and done.