Bitcoin Forum

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 <current difficulty> shares on average, a PPS method with 0% fee would be 50 BTC divided by <current difficulty>. 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... :)

Won't all the poolhoppers just vote for proportional just so that they can continue exploiting the system?

Why does something have to change, exactly?

-p

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...

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.

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.

Many of us have discussed this at length, including you and I, in the past on IRC.  The biggest reason to switch was in order to discourage pool hoppers from leaving the pool.  After much discussion it was (I thought) decided that pool hopping doesn't actually hurt the pool or the workers in it.  Yes they reduce the payout for all of the shares since there are more of them, but they contribute to more frequent blocks so it all comes out in a wash.  It has been quite a while since I've participated in any discussions, so if the overall consensus has changed, then I digress.

To me determining why is it time to change the payout method affects the preferred method.  If it is "just because" then my vote is to leave it as-is.  "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."  If there is a reason other than an (arguably) irrational fear of pool hopping, choosing a method that best answers to that reason is the way to go.  Is it because the risk is unbalanced between the pool and the workers, then choose the method that shares that risk in the most fair manner.  Is it because there is too much confusion on how proportional payouts work?  Then choose the method that is easier to understand (is there one?)  Is it because proportional is too much load on the servers to calculate payout?  Choose the method with the least load to complete the payout calculations.

In the long run, assuming any fees/charged by the pool are reasonable, it all works out the same for people who have workers that sit and stay in the pool, and payout calculation method really doesn't matter.

Just my 2 bitcents worth.

Jeremy

The reason for me wanting to switch payment scheme comes from the anger and frustration of pool-hopping-pools. (Abcproxypool for example)
It's not a single users that hops us, it's entire pools (which results in slowdowns and frustration from my side) - i know that eleuthria agrees on this.

So yes - we're switching cause of pier pressure and to "escalade" and in the long run - be a better pool.
As I've said before - we're here for the long run.

--
Regards, Jim
Bit LC Inc.
https://www.bitlc.net/

Shame.  P2pool is looking better by the day.

It's not like the anti-prop folks dont have any pools to choose from.. are you losing users? or are people just being loud for the sake of being loud?

Vote with your feet I say, or in this case with your hashes.

nope

Sorry for the newbie question, but can someone explain to me how you can exploit the system by pool-hopping?  Thx!!

is that hard to ban 10Gh+ hopper or review 10+ btc per 24h payments by hand?

I want ESMPPS -tx fees

10gh?

more like 400gh  ;D

You're only confirming my theory by doing that.

my theory is that regular miners are sheep, you can put 10% pool tax(see btcguild hashrate) and they won't figure it out for months even if you put it on front page with size 24 font...

I'm not sure exactly what the best method is but I think something needs to be done, if anything to help stabilize and work to grow bitlc. If miners that are unhappy vote with their feet the pool will definitely loose some real hashing power but I suppose that must be balanced with the fact that right now he attracts a large number of hoppers, is that good for the consistent users, I say no. Is it good for the pool operator, I can't say but I assume because of the 0% fee the answer is no.

I do like the point about hoppers earlier in the thread though, if I were one of the 200+ Gh/s that hops I guess I would vote to stay on the current method.

Well I'd voted for keeping it as-is before learning that hopping-pools are actually causing undue stress on the system and/or operators.  Unfortunately you can't go back and change a vote, so please disregard one of the proportional votes.  I think the best way to choose is to compare and contrast what the various methods actually mean to the pool and its members.

DGM - I haven't gone and looked up how the calculation is actually done, but on the surface it sounds a bit complicated.  The pool absorbing some of the fee from shorter rounds and paying it out on the longer rounds seems to add a bit of accounting overhead.  I would think there'd be risk of pool members accusing the pool of trickery if they don't understand precisely how it works.  Unfounded negative publicity would be a very bad thing considering how paranoid some bitcoin users are to begin with.  Wouldn't this also expose the pool to risk that a large number of subsequent long rounds causing the pool to constantly pay out without any income to compensate for it?  Long term this should average out, but the pool would need enough capital to survive shorter-term ruts.
PPLNS - This is a very transparent methodology, and is simple to calculate.  The negative here is the shares become completely worthless over time.  I think many users that only mine part-time (not hoppers, but those that mine when not gaming, etc...) would tend to not like this method for the same reason hoppers don't.  This is a non-issue for those of us who mine 24/7 since we're constantly replacing the shares that roll off with new shares.
PPS - I wouldn't even consider this for the pool.  Right now BitLC is built on being a fair pool, not charging fees to the miners, and being open and transparent.  Switching to PPS would cause undue risk to you as the pool operator, and/or would require the pool to charge fees.  The first is not fair to you, and the second goes against the philosophy of the pool (at least how I perceive it as a pool member.)
Score - This may be the best choice, since it eliminates the "worthless" share issue with PPLNS.  A part-time miner still gets "something" if they stop mining during a round.  It would ease their minds getting a miniscule "token" amount for the work put in.  Hoppers would still get paid some too, but they're in it for the quick reward and the token payment they receive should not be enough to have them view this pool as a valid target.

For full-time 24/7 miners the payout method really means nothing in the long haul; it all averages out.  The change in payout method needs to be used as a method to attract part-time individual miners that come and go based on individual PC habits, but not give enough advantage to make it a viable pool for hopping purposes.  Score-based payout is probably a good balance and would be my first choice, but if you wanted to follow the KISS principal, PPLNS is the way to go, and I'd consider that my second choice.

No matter what you decide, thank you Jim for all of the hard work you put into running the pool.  I know it isn't easy, and to do what you do without charging fees is saying a lot.

Jeremy

Very scientific.

Jine, prop is how you are going to grow ATM...let the market decide.  Add a fee to prop like nmcbit?  If your avg hashrate drops, the market will confirm your decisions as foolish. Like Masterpool, Triple, and MtRed...  

Notice how pool ops are moving to  giving members a less that 100% return  on their hash power and then use the aggregate hash power to pool hop or kill crypto currencies.  Just like a corrupt politician, pacify the decent while you are milking everyone! ABCproxyPool and Eligius using bH's port "http://mining.eligius.st:8337"

I love how Pool Ops get persuaded to change things by some members at the risk the members that made the pool grow.  

McDonald's still makes burgers and fries (what made them,) not only pseudo bbq rib sandwiches, coffee or salads...   So, make a PPLNS or DGM pool along side Prop configured via the worker and see where the hash power gravitates to.  That way you don't lose members and you give members options...win/win and you can test your theory in production

In marketing, you should study the "new coke" mistake...  Pool ops should run the pool as a business and they would be less likely to change things without understanding ALL the costs to the business.

My preference is in my sig...

A rewards system is best and most transparent if your payout still comes when the pool finds a block, as long as the pool hashrate is high enough to give miners several daily block finds. It lends to enthusiasm about finding blocks and doesn't hide how Bitcoin works. The rewards system simply determines how the 50BTC block generation reward is split between pool miners, and we want it to be fair and easy. We know that proportional is not an option because it can be gamed by pool hopping.

Geometric formulas that alter or "decay" the value of shares give a level of obfuscation where you can't determine what your shares will earn. A few other pools already have gone to geometric rewards (and PPS with fee), so you wouldn't be offering anything unique by using those. PPS pool ops can be attacked by block withholding. Slush's formula is not perfect and still hoppable. SMPPS you don't have in the poll - good, because it is a PPS, but lowers the reward when the pool gets unlucky (this variability makes it still hoppable).

The only miner complaint (from those who don't understand the system) is "expiring shares". PPLNS, however, also allows for multiple block wins from the same submitted share, so you can be unexpectedly surprised and rewarded by pool luck (on a proportional pool, all shares expire once a block is found, of course). When you submit a share, it will earn you a fixed payout, 1/N * 50BTC, for any block finds during the next N pool shares after submission. The N number can be set higher than difficulty if users prefer a longer window, so during an unlucky stretch there are fewer shares that expire with no reward, or can be set lower, if users want faster bigger payouts. Any value of N still gives both full-time and part-time miners the same expected reward. (Note: N should not be time-based, expiring after 12 hours for example, as this breaks the payout system by making share value variable and exploitable.) Mining is really a lottery anyway - if you solo mine, for example, every hash that didn't find a block instantly "expires"; when you mine and don't find a block, you really contributed zero work to the pool.

Consider any votes for proportional as coming from the pool hoppers. When the posting history (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=36229;sa=showPosts) is in many pools and pool hopping threads, we know they are the pool exploiters. Pool hoppers don't contribute anything by their straw-man argument that they "help find blocks"; the hashrate of the pool doesn't affect earnings (I was very happy with mineco PPLNS even at 80ghash). When everyone but the pool hoppers leave, there will be one last time that the pool crosses 43% of difficulty shares, and then it will be dead.

PPLNS worked very well on mineco. It doesn't have any pool-op risk requiring extra fees. Miners still get joy when a block is found.

It's funny you say that, I'm by no means unique but I am one of the users that asked to re-evaluate and I'm in the top 25 for all time shares submitted, I've supported Jine since the beginning. I don't think you are saying anything that isn't understand, one of the first methods to determine how the community feels is market research, so here we are (referring to "new coke").

"I'm in the top 25 for all time shares submitted" So what? are you contracted to mine here?  There are another top 24 that have a say just like every other member of the pool...  Instead of changing the pool, go somewhere else and make less btc...who cares?  Why have you mined here since the beginning and now want a change, just wake up?  If you can't figure out how to change your miner to try a different pool, I can help you? You choose to mine here for a reason ~100% return, the pool owes you nothing but the btc to compensate you.  

IMHO, jerkoff pool ops or contract proxies who pay the 115% to miners do do what ever they want with the hash power are trying to mine here...with the delayed stats, they are losing money...  I watched 400 GH hop at the wrong time and now they are gone...fail.  Why do you thing bitclockers has such a high spike in the beginning, cause it is easy pickings or hard to do?  You can't hop here as easy as at bitclockers... Dude, stop freaking out.  Ask hoppers what their efficiency is here?  it is not 125%, the stats are way too unstable...  Dude, don't freak out!  I averaged 99% and i am happy...BTG pays 93%....go mine there and suck up the loss or come crying back...

"I don't think you are saying anything that isn't understand" double negative...so you understand what I am saying...Thanks

"one of the first methods to determine how the community feels is market research, so here we are (referring to "new coke")."  And I am providing insight to step 2, test marketing - alternative pool with Jine using the new payout scheme...  

referring to "new coke"?  what are you referring to?  New Coke was back in the 80's in the US and was a big disaster. See, they did not do enough market research and launched a new flavor for coke while they stopped producing the original recipe...sales dropped.  It is an analogy.

nah, it's as easy. nothing's too hard.

Anyone voting for proportional either is hopping or doesnt understand hopping.

Those 115% PPS proxy pools by Clipse and Goat are hopping you and bitclockers.
I charted bitclockers stats,  did the math and calculated the effect:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=61985.msg737310#msg737310

I havent done this for your pool yet, but I expect the results to be similar.

THe short version; anyone not hopping there but mining 24/7 is losing out on 20% revenue compared to the hoppers.

To think its "a wash" because they increase hashrate is silly. Each block only gives you 50BTC, if hoppers can increase their portion of that by 20%, who do you think loses ?

Let me be clear then, you used the analogy of new coke specifically referring to a lack of market research.. My point was this very thread is just that so my point was that you are not saying anything that isn't understood yet you tried to make that point in the very thread surveying the pool's userbase (form of market research).

Well since you find it appropriate to slander me with heresay, I will do the same.

P4man is actively persuing underage boys in Pattaya, I found it on google. It must be true because I think it is.

Get of your high horse, your fat ass is hurting its back.

@Jine: What N would you choose for PPLNS? Also, could you please enable changing one's vote for this poll?




p2pool uses PPLNS...

Angry neighborhood bastard mod here. Cut that out.

I mine when computer in my bedroom is turned on. I'm not interested in mining at a pool that forces me to mine 24/7.
Therefore I'm not enthusiastic over PPLNS. Maybe DGM (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=39497.0) would be better, but it's obscure and offers small rewards at the beginning.
Yes, poolhoppers are parasitic, and they wouldn't visit a pool without the base of honest miners.
But they massively contribute to finding blocks also , and finding many blocks attracts honest miners.
There is a rule in business: "IF IT WORKS, DON'T MESS WITH IT".

This is a misconception. PPLNS does not require full-time mining, nor does it punish part-time miners (nor unfairly reward part-time pool hoppers). If you submit a share now, it will pay you a reward of (50/N) BTC for any block that is found during the next N shares on the pool. You can keep on mining or you can quit, it doesn't affect what that submitted work will earn you. If your hashrate's expected reward for 24 hours of mining is 2BTC, your expected reward for 12 hours of mining would be 1BTC, regardless of when or how you part-time mine.

PPLNS does have a lottery-like aspect similar to solo mining, but it is significantly more favorable because you are part of the pool's high hashrate, and your work continues to count even after you quit. If solo mining with an expected 2BTC/day hashrate, you might earn 0 BTC in a month of mining, or you might find three lucky blocks worth 150BTC. If you mine on a PPLNS pool for an hour, you might get 0 reward if the pool is unlucky, or you might share several block finds, and earn significantly more than expected for your work. Proportional has the same situation, miners suffer lower earnings if the pool is unlucky. However even the modest part-time miner will quickly see they are getting their expected earnings over time with PPLNS.

Proportional also has the "OMFG, when are we going to solve this ridiculous long block? I'm gonna quit" factor. PPLNS is much more optimistic, you start submitting work and wait for the block finds to roll in, you aren't overly invested in unlucky blocks, and nobody is punished for starting mining in the middle of a round.

Precisely. I think some people misunderstand "hopping". Mining at random intervals, or only during day or whatever, is not hopping and "hop proof" payout schemes do not penalize this behavior. Quite on the contrary, even if you mine at random times, you would be gaining substantially more with PPLNS or DGM compared to proportional.

Jine,

Do you have the statistics available (and the time of course) to generate some comparisons of payout methods using real historical data from the pool?  Per user would be great (I'd like to see if I would have made more or less with my miners since joining the pool) but a lot of work I'm sure.  Even some "this is a typical full-time miner of X mh/s, this is a typical part-time non-hopper user, and this is a typical hopper" over the last 365 days would be very helpful.  If you could also show what payouts would have been without the hoppers in the pool for everyone else that would be even better.  My suspicion is without factoring out the hoppers being in the pool, merely adjusting their payouts to the tested method along with everyone else, the amount of payout I'd have received would be roughly the same.  If you can in fact "remove" them from the pool for the statistics, I'd be curious to see if they really do hit regular users for up to 20% as is being claimed, or if the reduction in found blocks due to loss of hash power will offset some or all of that loss.

At the end of the day, I don't care if I make (obviously exaggerated) 20% of 50 BTC found or 10% of 100 BTC found in the same period of time, the payout to me is the same, 10 BTC, for the same amount of work I contributed.  I don't care about hoppers unless they're reducing that number either by taking an unfair portion, or if they're causing undue delay or downtime on the pool.  It sounds like that is happening, but as they say, "the proof is in the pudding."

Thanks Jim!

Jeremy

I already made a spreadsheet to calculate that for bitclockers, so I pasted data for this pool in to it and tried to make it work with the not so easy time formatting of the site..  I might have made a mistake somewhere, but it looks correct and the result (if correct) is quite sobering.

Assuming hoppers jumped at 40% CDF, this is the result for the last 98 blocks:


Expected is what youd get on a hop proof pool, or PPS.
Hopper is what the hoppers took.
Nonstop is what you got on this pool if you mined 24/7 and didnt hop.

You can check my spreadsheet and play with the number by grabbing the spreadsheet here:
http://www.mediafire.com/?qbqrcu4iyycacrx

Nice comparison - thanks!!

That was never the consensus.  It isn't a wash.  There is a mathematical advantage to hopping.

Hoppers earn > full PPS value
Since mining is zero sum that means everyone else earns < full PPS value.

Hopping a prop pool and robbing the suckers may be unethical but at least it is smart.  Mining a prop pool and NOT hopping is basically say I prefer to have 20% of my revenue stolen from me everyday.  I could have 100% but I would rather have 80% instead.


Game theory.  There are three options you must choose one
a) Earn 1.2x per day but it requires a little more work and you must live with the fact you are stealing from others
b) Earn 1.0x per day.
c) Earn 0.8x per day.

Which options seems the best?  Which options seems the worst?


If the pool is hop-proof that is correct however proportional pools aren't hop-proof.

Been mining 24/7 for months >> never hopped >> tired of being called a sucker >> casted my vote >> switching to a PPLNS pool >> I'll check back with the site next month.

Best!

Well said..

if you are right, that kind of "hopping" rips off regular miners...but wait... hop proof schemes protect regular miners...unless they are screwing them to pay that "substantially more" to someone else...unless you are clueless

 ???

In a proportional pool, hoppers will get, say 120% PPS and non hoppers 80% PPS (assuming equal average hash rate between hoppers and non hoppers)
In a hop-proof pool, everyone will get  100% PPS, there is no difference between hoppers and non hoppers.
Duh.

Not true, AFAIK, PPLNS will penalize occasional miners.  DGM, PPS or SMPPS are better choices for hoping / occasional  mining. 

PPLNS is preferred for full time mining on one pool...good to maintain pool loyalty but not very flexible.

You dont know "far enough" then, because it doesnt. There is an equal chance of your shares ending up in a shift that doesnt get paid (because no block is found within the next 10 shifts) as ending up in a shift that gets paid multiple times (because several blocks are found within the next 10 shifts).

Perhaps looking at these graphs helps:
https://bitminter.com/stats/rewards

The top chart show shifts and their payouts. If you mine intermittently, you shares could end up in any of those shifts randomly, some are paid zero PPS, some are paid 1x PPS (yellow line), some are paid multiple times. On average, assuming average pool luck, you will end up on the yellow line and obtain 100% PPS payout.

Of course you will have a higher variability than with PPS, and probably a higher variability than a non stop miner, but on average you will make exactly the same per share as a 24/7 miner and exactly the same as with any other hop proof payout scheme.

just did a Google and forum search for "far enough" with or without PPLNS and did find anything, you are coining this "far enough".  BTW, mining prop the same way will do the same thing? Mining 24/7 on PPLNS is better than prop, but that is not what I said.  Occasional mining on PPLNS and Prop are the same so bitlc should stay the same unless it want to be a much smaller  inflexible pool than it is now. 

it was a joke. You said "AFAIK".. As Far As I Know. Thats why I said you didnt know "far enough" :)


They are only "the same" (as in, same average reward)  if no one hops the prop pool.
Since bitlc is being hopped extensively, both 24/7 and intermittent miners are losing 20% compared to hop proof payout schemes.

Only if intermittent miners are intermittently mining late round.  If they intermittently mine early, they are golden :)  Ha

I know you are joking, but some people in this thread may not understand the humor, so I corrected it.

Magic sauce?
Here, have some:

http://blockchain.info/

Wow, that must be much easier to just look at that page.  It is totally accurate and in real-time.  OK, so it must be really easy to hop for you, give it a try.  And again, what will you do after 47% (?), if you turn off your miners you WILL have less than 100% payout over just a few blocks...  

BTW, your magic sauce is just mustard.

What makes you think it isnt?


If goat can, I think just about anyone can. Well maybe anyone except you?


WTF? You cant be that stupid. You mine on a PPS or pplns pool of course and get 100% like anyone else mining there until you can hop again!

glad you did some reading!  "You mine on a PPS or pplns pool of course and get 100% like anyone else mining there until you can hop again!"  is much better.  But you clearly understod that when you posted:


Cause that made more sense, like when you explained the difference between prop and dgm, and why I should not use them as a BACKUP pool...cause they are hop proof!   Really, you best be watching http://blockchain.info/ for the next hop point...oh wait there is no share count? no hash rate, no round time? when would you hop out?  Oh wait you got that magic mustard!  And YOU called ME stupid...? Doh...

Look Marty, maybe you have tried and failed to hop and therefore you think it cant be done. In that case, I dont know who is the bigger idiot, the 24/7 miners getting raped on a prop pool or you.

The tools are all out there, opensource and all, its no secret, its all on this forum and github, and while I havent tried it myself, it looks like anyone with half a brain should be able to get it to work. This was news back in February 2011 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3165.0) before people mined on GPUs. Welcome to 2012. You must be one of the last men standing who thinks hopping prop pools doesnt work.

Anyone else thinking it doesnt work, and is mining 24/7 on bitlc, calculate your revenue and you will see you are only earning ~80% of expected revenue. Its not bad luck of the pool, block average is spot on. Marty, why dont you mine 24/7 on Bitlc or bitclockers and prove me wrong?

Marty is a poolhopping troll who's mad that he can hop one less pool after this, so could you please consider not feeding him/it? Pretty please?

I dont think so, I think he is truly as clueless as he appears. He is offering his hashrate to Clipse for 100% PPS. Enough said.

Read enough of his posts, especially the btc guild thread and that "btc guild is stealing from its users" thread a couple of months back. Enough said.

Maybe you're right, but there seem to be plenty of posters in this thread that still dont get it, so it doesnt hurt to defuse his nonsense just in case someone actually believes it.

??? I thought Clipse's was paying 115%

IF i can get 120% as a backup pool, good enough, but I think it is hop proof PPS? :( Also, i would be upset if another prop pool goes down due to http://www.thefreedictionary.com/whining (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/whining), but Jine will make a move and we will all see if it benefits his business, cause that is what its really about.  

Thanks for pointing me to github for help on hopping, look around genius!  Clue may be closer than you think, look down, lower, over...past your stomach is too far and you hands are out of bounds.  However, http://blockchain.info is the sauce!

Sell ya a core2...duo?  You can be C2dwoMan mining 24/7 on PPLNS!

Just posters who spreads disinformation when another hoppable pool looks like it is going to disappear. Not the first to employ this troll technique or the first to get ignored by me.

You just did, and why are you mining a prop pool?  Cause it's not that bad as C2dwoMan says?  Anywho, I am dropping it...  However, C2dwoMan is being so dumb that I can't control myself :)  

All I am doing is summing up what lazy people didn't already know.

Point taken and ignore list expanded.

BTW, saw your sig.
The one in my sig fits the bill.

http://we.lovebitco.in/img/ignored.png
The best feature of the forum, it's like browsing with Firefox troll block plus.

What took you so long?!

wtf.

all pps is pretty much hop-proof.

I was being sarcastic.  Cause, I was being told that I shouldn't use PPS cause it is hop proof...yes.., however I clearly stated in a backup role.  See, someone was else was confused or was clueless at the time they made the statement I was referencing.  I, on the hand, waited my time trying got explain it to the confused one.  

My point was 120% pps as a backup pool is a great strategy.

Well DC, I am a huge fan of your self-righteousness and work on hopping...but, I guess you won't see this... :(  Just having a laugh...

why 120% when you can go up to 160%?  ;D