New profit-switching mining pool with nightly bonus payout-- CoinSolver.com - page 3.

zneww

sr. member

Activity: 434

Merit: 250

Quote from: Jacky161 on June 01, 2014, 08:43:35 AM

I been mining for a few hours then stopped mining. I got around 1000 shares. The next day I checked my balance. Immature (estimate)   0 BTC
Unexchanged (estimate)   0 BTC
Combined Balance (estimate)    0 BTC
Total BTC Paid   0 BTC
Then I checked my wallet which had nothing in it. Did I really just waste about 5 hours of my life?
It says that payouts happen at 11pm Est. I checked the time for est right now. It is 9:41 am. That is way past 11pm est.

You need to mine for more then a few hours. This isn't some get rich quick scheme.

wwzoon

sr. member

Activity: 406

Merit: 250

one advice: "borderd" the box to put your address,now it is invisible Tongue

Jacky161

newbie

Activity: 13

Merit: 0

I been mining for a few hours then stopped mining. I got around 1000 shares. The next day I checked my balance. Immature (estimate)   0 BTC
Unexchanged (estimate)   0 BTC
Combined Balance (estimate)    0 BTC
Total BTC Paid   0 BTC
Then I checked my wallet which had nothing in it. Did I really just waste about 5 hours of my life?
It says that payouts happen at 11pm Est. I checked the time for est right now. It is 9:41 am. That is way past 11pm est.

zneww

sr. member

Activity: 434

Merit: 250

Quote from: fivejonnyfive on May 28, 2014, 11:24:06 PM

Grumble Grumble. First day trying the pool.
.003 confirmed balance - no payout.

The minimum is indeed .001, no? Payed out at "about 11pm EST"?

Nope :-|

Actually the payout went fine, only a little late. Color me satisfied! Going to stick to this pool for a while.

hehe awesome, good to hear Grin

payouts are somewhat manual so they dont have a super set time

fivejonnyfive

sr. member

Activity: 294

Merit: 250

Grumble Grumble. First day trying the pool.
.003 confirmed balance - no payout.

The minimum is indeed .001, no? Payed out at "about 11pm EST"?

Nope :-|

Actually the payout went fine, only a little late. Color me satisfied! Going to stick to this pool for a while.

p4u

member

Activity: 111

Merit: 10

crypto lover

Then it should be OK, I can set d=8192 for both, small and big rigs.
But it would be even nicer if it would be possible to specify different difficulties for different workers using the same BTC address as user name.

zneww

sr. member

Activity: 434

Merit: 250

Quote from: p4u on May 26, 2014, 11:16:46 AM

From your quote:

Quote

Note: All miners using the same BTC address must share the same custom difficulty. Failure to do so will cause erratic difficulty levels, and degraded performance.

From my quote (took from the FAQ):

Quote

Due to the technical requirements of allowing multiple miners to share a single username (BTC address), no VARDIFF is used. Difficulty is set to 256 for all workers at this time. Don't worry, that has zero effect on your profitability over the course of a day.

What I understand is that this p=d is disabled

Anyway, it is also a big problem to not being able to set up different difficulties for different stratum connections using the same BTC address.

My information is more correct. P=d is not disabled. It says it does not use VARDIFF, not that p=d is disabled.

What is such a big problem?

p4u

member

Activity: 111

Merit: 10

crypto lover

From your quote:

Quote

Note: All miners using the same BTC address must share the same custom difficulty. Failure to do so will cause erratic difficulty levels, and degraded performance.

From my quote (took from the FAQ):

Quote

Due to the technical requirements of allowing multiple miners to share a single username (BTC address), no VARDIFF is used. Difficulty is set to 256 for all workers at this time. Don't worry, that has zero effect on your profitability over the course of a day.

What I understand is that this p=d is disabled

Anyway, it is also a big problem to not being able to set up different difficulties for different stratum connections using the same BTC address.

zneww

sr. member

Activity: 434

Merit: 250

Quote from: p4u on May 26, 2014, 09:00:52 AM

Quote

Due to the technical requirements of allowing multiple miners to share a single username (BTC address), no VARDIFF is used. Difficulty is set to 256 for all workers at this time. Don't worry, that has zero effect on your profitability over the course of a day.

Please, fix this issue. Scrypt mining devices are getting more and more faster and 256 is a too small difficulty. I would suggest you to use VARDIFF (from 64 to 16384 at least) or in the worst case set a fixed difficulty of 1024 or 2048. It is OK also for small miners, they will just have more variance but same profitability (and probably less rejected).

Pretty sure you can set your difficulty threw your password... ie -u BTCADDRESS -p d=1024...you can....

From CoinSolver's site.... http://coinsolver.com/getting-started.php

Quote

Choose your own difficulty
You can optionally set your own difficulty by using the password d=X, where X is the difficulty number you want. Valid choices are: 64,128,256,512,768, 1024.
Note: All miners using the same BTC address must share the same custom difficulty. Failure to do so will cause erratic difficulty levels, and degraded performance.

If you choose any other password, we will select the best difficulty for you, based on the coin being mined.
http://coinsolver.com/user-details.php?account=[your BTC address]

Please note:
you can use the same BTC address for as many mining rigs as you like, making managing your systems a snap.

p4u

member

Activity: 111

Merit: 10

crypto lover

Quote

Due to the technical requirements of allowing multiple miners to share a single username (BTC address), no VARDIFF is used. Difficulty is set to 256 for all workers at this time. Don't worry, that has zero effect on your profitability over the course of a day.

Please, fix this issue. Scrypt mining devices are getting more and more faster and 256 is a too small difficulty. I would suggest you to use VARDIFF (from 64 to 16384 at least) or in the worst case set a fixed difficulty of 1024 or 2048. It is OK also for small miners, they will just have more variance but same profitability (and probably less rejected).

zneww

sr. member

Activity: 434

Merit: 250

SO I guess since it has been so quiet in here and the hash has been rising, that means VT is doing something right

I have averaged around 0.003 and 0.005 BTC/Mh/Day on the scrypt-n side.

zneww

sr. member

Activity: 434

Merit: 250

To your edit: IRC or Reddit

Fizikal

newbie

Activity: 25

Merit: 0

Quote from: zneww on May 13, 2014, 06:04:34 AM

Quote from: Fizikal on May 13, 2014, 02:03:54 AM

VT... What haaappened today? Did the exchange take a dump before coins were exchanged? By the looks of the charts, that's what it appears to be. Lost all of a day's profits. Back at square one now.

From the site

Quote

May 12th, 2014 - Delayed Payout

Just to clarify what happened during last night's payout... the scrypt-n pool payouts were proceed on time, however the scrypt pool payouts encountered a new sort of problem that prevented them from running. As I was just about to run the scrypt pool payouts, I lost power/internet. I suppose living in Vermont has its benefits and drawbacks. In any event, I do apologize since I am to blame for this event.

Since the delay lasted many hours, I will be rolling the payouts forward to this evening, as is usual. By the way, this process of rolling payouts to the next evening as opposed to running delayed payouts asap (causing a shortened day for the next day) is based on user preferences and feedback. If you have other suggestions or preferences, please don't hesitate to let me know.
Sincerely,
-VTMiner

That's not quite what I was referring to. I was referring to the huge drop in estimated unexchanged and combined with the normal subtle increase in actual BTC. The way I see it, the coin that was being mined, likely SC, dropped more than anticipated and only contributed to a very small amount of BTC. I would suggest cashing out all that SC right now if possible, it shot up 2.5x overnight.

EDIT: BTW, what is the best way to get in contact with VT? I didn't find him on the Twitterverse, and I honestly don't think the forum is the best place to get in contact with him, is it?

tammuz

full member

Activity: 263

Merit: 101

La Liberté guidant le peuple

Quote from: vtminer on May 08, 2014, 09:39:17 AM

I also wanted to loop back to another issue brought here recently, specifically the BTC transaction fee bug. This issue has now been fixed, and users should no longer see transaction fees in their payouts (the pool now correctly covers these)

Good news! Thanks a lot, VT!

zneww

sr. member

Activity: 434

Merit: 250

Quote from: Fizikal on May 13, 2014, 02:03:54 AM

VT... What haaappened today? Did the exchange take a dump before coins were exchanged? By the looks of the charts, that's what it appears to be. Lost all of a day's profits. Back at square one now.

From the site

Quote

May 12th, 2014 - Delayed Payout

Just to clarify what happened during last night's payout... the scrypt-n pool payouts were proceed on time, however the scrypt pool payouts encountered a new sort of problem that prevented them from running. As I was just about to run the scrypt pool payouts, I lost power/internet. I suppose living in Vermont has its benefits and drawbacks. In any event, I do apologize since I am to blame for this event.

Since the delay lasted many hours, I will be rolling the payouts forward to this evening, as is usual. By the way, this process of rolling payouts to the next evening as opposed to running delayed payouts asap (causing a shortened day for the next day) is based on user preferences and feedback. If you have other suggestions or preferences, please don't hesitate to let me know.
Sincerely,
-VTMiner

Fizikal

newbie

Activity: 25

Merit: 0

VT... What haaappened today? Did the exchange take a dump before coins were exchanged? By the looks of the charts, that's what it appears to be. Lost all of a day's profits. Back at square one now.

zneww

sr. member

Activity: 434

Merit: 250

Quote from: DarkAGeS on May 09, 2014, 01:33:01 PM

wow, ther is now possible to tripple merge-mining VTC/PLX/MON
http://www.reddit.com/r/vertcoin/comments/24vpgf/how_to_mine_vtcmonplx_all_3_simultaneously/
that pool can do it - simplevert.com
I'm mining with all my power Wink

Interesting. Not what CoinSolver was made for...and it's difficult, like VT has said. He has his own custom stratum. You cannot just say "Oh i want to merge mine" doesnt work like that

DarkAGeS

full member

Activity: 219

Merit: 100

wow, ther is now possible to tripple merge-mining VTC/PLX/MON
http://www.reddit.com/r/vertcoin/comments/24vpgf/how_to_mine_vtcmonplx_all_3_simultaneously/
that pool can do it - simplevert.com
I'm mining with all my power Wink

zneww

sr. member

Activity: 434

Merit: 250

Quote from: vtminer on May 08, 2014, 09:39:17 AM

Hi Folks,

Sorry about the intermittent responses, but as zneww says, I've been/am pretty busy these days. But, let me set the record straight on a couple things:

1. No, I'm not secretly stealing any coins via merged mining, or any other fantastical ploy.
2. Yes, I setup ParallaxCoin yesterday, but no, it isn't currently doing merged mining yet.

In fact I added PLX mostly so I could study the requirements for merged mining on our backend and codebase, which appear to be non-trivial. Not that merged mining PLX/EXE would currently amount to a windfall for the pool in itself, but the idea is intriguing, and I will continue to tinker with it to see if its something that can be added. When and if I do add it, I will certainly announce it publicly (from the deck of my yacht, purchased with stolen merge-mined coins, of course).

I also wanted to loop back to another issue brought here recently, specifically the BTC transaction fee bug. This issue has now been fixed, and users should no longer see transaction fees in their payouts (the pool now correctly covers these)

1. Are you positive? Grin

hahahaha thx for the work VT

vtminer

newbie

Activity: 14

Merit: 4

Hi Folks,

Sorry about the intermittent responses, but as zneww says, I've been/am pretty busy these days. But, let me set the record straight on a couple things:

1. No, I'm not secretly stealing any coins via merged mining, or any other fantastical ploy.
2. Yes, I setup ParallaxCoin yesterday, but no, it isn't currently doing merged mining yet.

In fact I added PLX mostly so I could study the requirements for merged mining on our backend and codebase, which appear to be non-trivial. Not that merged mining PLX/EXE would currently amount to a windfall for the pool in itself, but the idea is intriguing, and I will continue to tinker with it to see if its something that can be added. When and if I do add it, I will certainly announce it publicly (from the deck of my yacht, purchased with stolen merge-mined coins, of course).

I also wanted to loop back to another issue brought here recently, specifically the BTC transaction fee bug. This issue has now been fixed, and users should no longer see transaction fees in their payouts (the pool now correctly covers these)

Topic: New profit-switching mining pool with nightly bonus payout-- CoinSolver.com - page 3. (Read 23429 times)