Pages:
Author

Topic: [NR 1] Triplemining.com <> BIG jackpot every week <> - page 25. (Read 113618 times)

member
Activity: 112
Merit: 10
When Triple Mining started, one of the advertising bits was "no poolhopping restrictions!"  As a way to boost hash rates and make the pool more successful, I suggested that MrSam implement something to take away the incentive to poolhop (such as a scoring system).  This has not happened, and with a pool of this size people can casually check and decide to hop without needing sophisticated software to do this for them. 

In my view, you can't fault people for doing what is in their rational self-interest.  All you can do is to remove the incentive to poolhop in some way, but as MrSam pointed out it is difficult to do that without also causing people to leave the pool altogether.  Obviously if everyone hopped, the pool would very quickly die.  This is why I feel proportional payouts are a negative overall, especially for a pool this size with its history (some *really* fast blocks and some *really* slow blocks). 

Taking away the ability to mine or to view the stats page (or even delaying the stats page) really isn't a solution, because it is easy enough to get around that.  A better solution would be (IMO) to implement a system that rewards people for not poolhopping.

Yeah, i completely agree on that.

We are looking to implement something that would reward miners that stick to this pool permanenty... More on this in the next few days
full member
Activity: 126
Merit: 103
When Triple Mining started, one of the advertising bits was "no poolhopping restrictions!"  As a way to boost hash rates and make the pool more successful, I suggested that MrSam implement something to take away the incentive to poolhop (such as a scoring system).  This has not happened, and with a pool of this size people can casually check and decide to hop without needing sophisticated software to do this for them. 

In my view, you can't fault people for doing what is in their rational self-interest.  All you can do is to remove the incentive to poolhop in some way, but as MrSam pointed out it is difficult to do that without also causing people to leave the pool altogether.  Obviously if everyone hopped, the pool would very quickly die.  This is why I feel proportional payouts are a negative overall, especially for a pool this size with its history (some *really* fast blocks and some *really* slow blocks). 

Taking away the ability to mine or to view the stats page (or even delaying the stats page) really isn't a solution, because it is easy enough to get around that.  A better solution would be (IMO) to implement a system that rewards people for not poolhopping.
sr. member
Activity: 270
Merit: 250
hoppers went to next pool?
member
Activity: 85
Merit: 10
wow hashrate is down to 56gh..what happened?
legendary
Activity: 910
Merit: 1000
Quality Printing Services by Federal Reserve Bank
bleh, fucking poolhoppers are killing everything by surfing 20 times a second to the stats page

How can poolhoppers even tell when the block will be finished? Don't they hop at like 47.5%?
As I understand it, when the number of shares get close to 43% (or is it 47%?) of the current difficulty, all those lowlifes start hopping. To make sure, they do not miss out on the next block, because it can start any minute, they bang the stats page like mad.
Pool operator can see, who those lowlife losers are and something must (probably will) be done soon.

Some of you probably ask why? Understand this - those lowlife losers ruin it for everybody else. Pool is all about mining together. If this concept is too alien for your sick little ego, then be a wanker and mine alone.
full member
Activity: 213
Merit: 100
bleh, fucking poolhoppers are killing everything by surfing 20 times a second to the stats page

How can poolhoppers even tell when the block will be finished? Don't they hop at like 47.5%?
sr. member
Activity: 322
Merit: 250
bleh, fucking poolhoppers are killing everything by surfing 20 times a second to the stats page

Don't put all the stats in one basket.  I also agree with EskimoBob.  You could always have a 15 minute cache of the stats.
legendary
Activity: 910
Merit: 1000
Quality Printing Services by Federal Reserve Bank
bleh, fucking poolhoppers are killing everything by surfing 20 times a second to the stats page

Delay stats to all of those, who did not stick to the end with previous block (repeatedly)?
   
 
sr. member
Activity: 270
Merit: 250
Just for reference, poclbm rej: 0/522 (0%)   Smiley
member
Activity: 112
Merit: 10
bleh, fucking poolhoppers are killing everything by surfing 20 times a second to the stats page
sr. member
Activity: 263
Merit: 250
Pool operator of Triplemining.com
20% stales today...  Shocked
What happens?

Which miner do you use?
There have been some problems with certain versions of certain miners, especially cgminer 1.2.8 is to be avoided, upgrade!
legendary
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1019
20% stales today...  Shocked
What happens?
sr. member
Activity: 322
Merit: 250
At least the bad block wasn't the 136 hour one!


I've modified the site so it is more clear when a block is invalid... The "confirmed" column now clearly states it is invalid, and the link to blockexplorer has been removed (as it was wrong anyway)

That's good.  Looks better now that the confirmation column isn't ambiguous.
sr. member
Activity: 263
Merit: 250
Pool operator of Triplemining.com
I've modified the site so it is more clear when a block is invalid... The "confirmed" column now clearly states it is invalid, and the link to blockexplorer has been removed (as it was wrong anyway)
sr. member
Activity: 263
Merit: 250
Pool operator of Triplemining.com
If we required a fee of 3% like some others, we could pay the 1-2% of blocks that are invalid.  So in the long run, you win, because if we run such a pool, you would still end up earning 1-2% less
sr. member
Activity: 322
Merit: 250
I'm kinda bummed that TM does not pay for invalid blocks. I guess that's what you get with a (nearly) no-fee pool in such an infancy. I mean, no percentage of the blocks (or block fees) are kept by the pool owners. So, there's nothing to insure bad beats. But that's poker. I mean life.
sr. member
Activity: 263
Merit: 250
Pool operator of Triplemining.com
How about something as simple as a 60min CONNECTION REFUSAL based on worker login/pass at the beginning of a new round for those who were not part of the previous round for atleast 90% of it ?

It's usually after the 1 hour mark into a round that the Pool hoppers tend to begin leaving again anyways......

True, but who's going to stay on a pool that does not allow you to mine?  Imagine you have no bad intentions, but your internet provider has some troubles, you're back online and suddenly you're not allowed to mine because a new block has been found?

No I'm afraid that won't .  Everybody must be allowed to mine at all times
sr. member
Activity: 462
Merit: 250
I heart thebaron
How about something as simple as a 60min CONNECTION REFUSAL based on worker login/pass at the beginning of a new round for those who were not part of the previous round for atleast 90% of it ?

It's usually after the 1 hour mark into a round that the Pool hoppers tend to begin leaving again anyways......
sr. member
Activity: 263
Merit: 250
Pool operator of Triplemining.com
Yes we are currently not re-using the shares.  However, re-using the shares would encourage poolhopping, while now you have to stay for your btc's.  In any case, we're looking into changing the way the payouts work, into a totally different system so poolhopping makes no longer any sense.
full member
Activity: 126
Merit: 103
So the way the pool is currently set up to deal with Orphaned blocks is basically that all shares submitted for that block are lost, and we restart and move onto working on a different block? 

It seems the pool operators have the option to either A: throw away all the shares that contributed to the orphaned block and start fresh on the new block, or B: to calculate both the shares that contributed to the orphaned block AND the shares that went towards finding the new block to determine payouts.

Based upon Kinlo's explanation and the way the website appears, I get the impression that the decision made was to go with option A.  Not that I have strong opinions either way (but it sucks thinking that some work was lost due to an invalid block rather than being considered for payout when the next valid block is found) but I am curious how this is set up to work.

Thanks!
Pages:
Jump to: