I'm not sure how much help I'm offering with these questions, but for what it's worth, my next question would be regarding dates. Do you remember more or less the dates you mined the coins? Do you remember more or less the dates for the last time you saw the coins in your wallet? And the date you first noticed they were gone?

You know, when going back and looking at your original post, that sure looks like a send coins to me. This is very weird since it was broken into hundreds of random amounts that all went to the same destination address, and all in the same transaction (from the looks of things). The date of your send coins in your original post is not the same date as the recorded transaction date either. Very strange. The more data you can provide, the better.

Also, DigiByte asked what mining pool you were using at the time you were mining since he's thinking you were on a fork. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=408268.msg7992363;topicseen#msg7992363

But if that were the case, then how did they eventually get sent to another address, and then spent another month and a half later from that address? As I said, this is very strange. I'm wondering if your computer was compromised and the coins stolen . . .

Would it be possible to get you to explain this in more detail?

ceil = ?

dDiff = diff?

525,600 = minutes in a year

nHeight = block count?

I'm not a coder. Sorry,

TIA

--------------------------------------------

Playing around I came up with this simple calculation:

8 * diff / network hashrate * 1 MH/s * .9 =  payout

The reward seems to hold fairly constant regardless of the network hashrate - that is to say as the network hashrate and difficulty increase, the reward also increases to match.

Those rudimentary calculations of mine are all nice and fun, but I do want to understand the offical calculation. !!  

You've got the switches for all three of the groestl flavors: groestlcoin, myriadcoin-groestl, and diamond (but I don't see the diamond files in the github zip . . . the first two are the most interesting anyway). I highly recommend it. Just be prepared to rollback just in case - but I'd take a look at how things go with the 14.6 drivers first anyway. It's a standalone, alongside install . . .

Hey, that wallet is cutting edge. Check it out. It really is a one click install and one click miner. I had a free moment this afternoon to take a quick look, and all I can say is: Impressive.

Have you seen this? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=652849.0 I'm getting a clear double the hashrate for only 28% more electricity cost on my 7950's.


Oh, and, how about that aidbit wallet? Have you taken a look at that?

That depends on who you talk to.

cad_cdn, Had you ever had any other coins in your wallet, ever sent or recieved coins, or were those mined coins the only coins you ever had in your wallet?

Please tell me that Skein might be one of the possibilities, or SHA-256, or Scrypt, but not groestl. Tell us that groestl is untouchable, Please. 

Out of curiosity, do you have an formal, or informal, ranking?

Any sneak peek?

@ Digibyte, How nice to see an idea get some traction! Glad to see it being considered, analyzed, broken down, and dissected. Ideas are just for that: brainstorming starting points that more often than not end up leading to something very different than what they were to begin with. Real nice input so far to get things rolling. I'm delighted to see interest in the debate.

One of the first things I start to do with any idea I have is doubt myself to begin with, and one of my major doubts with this has to do with whether or not the CPU miner is really feasible anymore (regardless of how much we try to make it so), or whether feasibility should even matter to begin with and we shouldn’t strive for CPU competitiveness regardless, and out of principle. I remember seeing oodles of CPU DOGE miners on reddit back in January who were thrilled to be mining double digit amounts of coins a day when a GPU was taking down thousands, and perhaps those same miners would be thrilled to be able to mine again. Another positive would be basic math: if things got really bad and nobody came to the party, at some point the difficulty would be so low that the rewards would look good even to someone like myself. This is a point for real debate in any event. I wonder if there are any stats out there at all to help us with this.

Another debate centers around whether or not price is really being driven down by specialized miners using ASIC equipment. While I'm very much of the opinion that the answer is yes, many, including the following dev insider, argue the complete opposite: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=483515.msg7783111#msg7783111

As you know, I’m not a coder, so I haven’t a clue about what is technically feasible and what isn’t, but the need to keep the little guy “in the game” has me constantly mulling over the issue (very much like you all). This is all very conceptual and the technical aspects certainly leave us with yet another debate.

Taken in Digibyte 'steady as she goes' terms, this all translates into something that might be fairly long term (I might think, but who knows?) since there certainly are lots of questions to be answered.


@ Kayahoga, Your ideas on how to reach the gaming community are so interesting that, now after reading your comments, I too ask myself “why people haven't done this already?” Quite often we miss the forest for the trees.

That one click miner is already happening! I came across this yesterday: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=683317.0

When I mentioned this on the MYR thread, a couple of contributors chimmed in with a couple of ideas (but it really didn't go much further than that, perhaps because there was no dev interest either, who knows?). The main issue that immediately jumped front and center was netbot vulnerability and we talked about the same wallet restrictions and limitations that would lead to the logical conclusion you described in your first point - everyone’s wallet would be the same, and everyone would have the same limitations, thus meaning that regardless of the hash you try to send through any given wallet, you’ll never get credit for more than the maximum limit set.

@ haggis, 1) My thinking, and this is conceptual, mind you, is to not touch, or touch as little as possible, the coin itself, and the only thing that really needs to be done with the coin code would be to set the individual algorithm payouts, and nothing else. 2) The idea was mentioned on the MYR thread that the wallet probably wasn’t going to be able to effectively manage the maximum hashrate “throttling” threshold (which should probably just be referred to as a simple threshold since the world “throttling” suggests something more dynamic than a simple cap) since it could be hacked, like you mentioned, which perhaps would mean that maximum cap would also have to be included in the coin code. I'm thinking now that it would best be managed server side, with the official Qubit P2Pool’s servers doing simple handshake connections and putting a maximum hashrate submission limit into place above which any excess hashrate sent by any given wallet would be simply discarded, and rewards could never be more than that possible for the maximum hashrate share. 3) Everything else would be done with the wallet.

Other secondary ideas mentioned were an IP address connection limit for individual wallets, and, this last one being another of mine, e-mail user registration on install.

Add: I'm also in favor of a 1% fee on all coins mined (that would double at each of the next 2 reward halvings and then stay permanently capped at 4%) that would go directly to development and administration.

I'm a miner, and long term investor (with what I mine). Unfortunately, the "long term" investment part of the picture hasn't been working out so well (unless you have been doing what the majority seem to have been doing by moving all their mining proceeds to BTC).

Hopefully that will change, and I think the multi algo approach is a move in the right direction – even if not in the short run, it still looks like the best bet to me in the long run. We need look no further than early 2014's *star* coin, DOGE, to see where immobility in the face of the advent of ASIC will get you.

That having been said, I think there's still much more to be done if one really wants to take a coin "mainstream" and achieve wide scale adoption. One of the key points I've been focusing on as of late is the necessity to avoid being "just another coin". It seems to me that most devs are caught in the 'gimmick' trap where they are concerned with partnered vendors, cute promotions, and the like. It certainly looks like everyone is putting the cart before the horse and I've come to the conclusion that the best advice I could give any developer would be to stay true to time tested business principles and center efforts on first producing a world class product and then letting the future take care of itself as the world beats a path to your door (as the old saying goes). Remember, even Ronald McDonald needed a good hamburger and fries to stay alive.

The world class product in this case would be: Coin - Wallet - Network (meaning officially sponsored P2Pools) in that order.

I also think that the playing field needs to be further ‘handicapped’ to help the small guy be more competitive - IMO this is central to the world class product itself and eventually being able to take it “mainstream".

Here's a reproduction of something on that subject that I recently posted on another thread that I’ve adapted for DGB:

-----------------------------------------o-----------------------------------------

Here’s a Radical [Not So Novel] Idea (please don’t laugh)

Would you be interested hearing an idea that could take DGB ballistic and worldwide (in the truest sense of the word)? Well, sit back and read on if you answered yes.

This is an idea that could really cause DGB to go 'viral'. Can you imagine people from all over the world automatically mining DGB on startup of their PC? What could possibly get millions of people all over the world (including the underdeveloped world) doing that?

Let’s step back for some background and start out by remembering and taking into account some of my logical anti-ASIC arguments (I haven’t been too bad with my predictions in recent months either) and then move forward going one step further by looking at the opposite end of the spectrum.

Just like at one end of the spectrum we have an ever more concentrated and centralized network in combination with price under serious pressure, at the other end we also have an authentic widely distributed network with a stable and generally rising price, and if hardware specialization leads to the first, then, the opposite, namely, hardware generalization, should logically lead to the second.

Economies of scale are generally a good thing when referring to competitive markets; the only problem exists when those markets become concentrated (centralized) in a few hands, and then economies of scale can work against the common good. We need look no further than the fiat banking system to see what eventually happens.

One of the most important ideas at the heart of the crypto ethic was the idea that decentralization was key for creating a viable 'alternative' storage of wealth that could compete with the traditional fiat system.

Have we by some chance become sidetracked with our obsessions for short term profit? What with, hey, we’ve even got a website dedicated to this extreme distraction. What’s the name? Oh, yeah, here it is, Crypto Pump of course (how could it be named anything else?). http://cryptopump.com Was this what we all had in mind when starting out with cryptocurrencies?

Decentralization is all about making something as available as possible to as many people as possible. Are we really going in the right direction to accomplish that by favoring specialized and centralized economies of scale? Okay, a large market cap would be great for PR, but how long lived would it be if it’s not built on a real foundation. Selling out to short term specialization and centralization is nothing more than assured short term gain in exchange for long term pain.

So, if centralized specialization leads to ruin, then generalization, or decentralization as it were, should lead to system health and vitality – exactly what is desired for a solid and authentic vehicle for storage of wealth. And just what do I mean by “generalization”? I’m referring to making something as “generally” available as possible, and not just in words, but in real deeds as well. It’s one thing to say that even CPUs can mine, and it’s quite another altogether to say (and make real) that they can do so competitively (and we all know that the little guy can only be competitive in a “little guy world” where the rules are fair and designed to protect the little guy, and not one where major competitors are swallowing up what little guys are still left).

Have you guessed where I’m going with this?

CPU mining that is just as profitable as GPU mining, and also with ASIC?

Had you guessed?

Yes, CPU on par with ASIC!

If you do that, if you make DGB the cryptocurrency that everyone who owns a computer could competitively mine (seriously now, everyone), you’d have millions of users all over the world configuring their DGB wallets to launch on system startup!

Okay, there are some details to work out, like having a launch on boot setting in the wallet, and, of course, the automatic mine on launch 'plug and play' coding as well.

The wallet would need pre-configured mining parameters so that the new user could mine with a simple click, either solo, or better yet, with official DGB worldwide P2Pools (worldwide really meaning worldwide with scores of active nodes all over the world).

The pre-configured, in wallet, miner would only mine using the CPU, or CPU equivalent that would be limited by a throttling mechanism that either matched the most powerful end-user CPU, or an average of the most common CPUs in active use (meaning that it would be possible to mine with a GPU miner, but never at a hashrate that exceeded the CPU throttling level per address, and never independent or outside of the wallet).

Rewards would look something like this:

Throttled Qubit CPU pre-configured wallet restricted mining = 4000 coins per block
Groestl = 450 coins per block
Skein = 450 coins per block
SHA-256 = 50 coins per block
Scrypt = 50 coins per block

And, with that, you'd put DGB on the world map as the first truly fair cryptocurrency in the world where everyone who owns a computer is looked at funny if their DGB wallet isn’t running 'in the background'.

How’s that for an idea for taking DGB mainstream?

You’re right. This would be even beyond mainstream!

Isn’t that what we really had in mind when getting involved in cryptos?

-----------------------------------------o-----------------------------------------

Okay, it's not exactly a level playing field. If you look at the payout numbers closely, you'll notice how the GPU still has a very handsome advantage over CPU, and ASIC over GPU, but it is fair[er] FOR ALL since the less specialized miners would be made more competitive thereby giving them more incentive to mine (and really get emotionally attached to DGB in the process) while at the same time technological advances (R&D, innovation and capital investment) would also still be rewarded.

-----------------------------------------o-----------------------------------------

In short, to answer your question in no uncertain terms, I'm not sure. If you look at MYR's price over recent weeks, the market seems to be telling us that multi algo is not enough, so I wouldn't get my hopes set too high. On the other hand, like I said here yesterday, having a real face with a very positive track record behind DGB might be the difference (I may be more or less on target with this, but Jared has steered the ship without incident so far, and I would think that it’s a fairly good bet to think he will continue to do the same by listening to the community, consulting with investors, promoting at conventions, etc., and, ultimately, making the right decisions for DGB).

Gone are the days when we would just point our miners at the most profitable coin and walk away (and don’t get the wrong idea, I’m not a “farmer”, I’m just a little guy, like most – you can count my miners with the fingers of one hand). Gone are the days when you could rack up windfall ‘profits’ mining DOGE (oh, how I wish I’d sold some of those earlier on). Gone are the days when time was on our side (now we’ve all got to make some serious bets very soon – if we haven’t already – since I very much doubt the majority of cryptos will ever get off the life support they’re currently on).

Personally, after having made the rounds in a serious, direct and businesslike manner (here on BitCoinTalk, on other major forums, individual coin forums, a few mining forums, and the like – here as ‘HR’, elsewhere as someone else), my conclusion is that the crypto world is full of kids and/or scammers, neither of which is a recipe for success. Add to that a preponderance of incompetence – not that these people are incompetent per se, but that they are in way over their heads – to the point where you almost want to throw up your hands in desperation and give up on the crypto dream by throwing in the towel altogether. Some will likely blunder along picking up the rear and survive as secondary, niche coins, but the real winners will be few and far between, and I think one of them will be DGB.

And so my days of crypto-globe trotting have come to an end as I’ve made the decision that DGB is the best bet out there for both major price appreciation and long term success – as I've said, based mainly on its track record and the seriousness and integrity of its visible founder. As such, this is where I’m staying, again, not sure at all mind you, but considering all the facts that I’ve gathered these last 6 months, this is the coin that I think has the highest probability for long term success . . . and price should follow . . . if not sooner, then later.

No cheerleading here either.

Pop up the charts.

DGB - horizontal (with spike highs as I said in my original post - pump and return to value like CryptoLTD said) from where it was trading March EOM

Do the same with the others I mentioned. Trend = price moving from upper left of the chart to the lower right.

Do the same with the coin of your choice and let me know how many you can find that are sideways (horizontal). I'd love to know.

Dealing with objective data, not subjective opinions and feelings.

And you don't know the answer? The answer is because the "troll" made them look like . . . well, let's just say, made them look like just who they are, and they don't like that. Simple. People who aren't used to dialog, sharing, really working in a contributive environment, don't know what to do other than resort to intimidation tactics when people don't obey them. Simple as that (I do understand that complicated psychological concepts only come with time and that you're still young, and I'm not trying to be insulting by saying "simple as that", rather only trying to even further emphasize just how simple the answer is so that maybe you might take a chance on learning something new.)

Troll. Sounds like a new badge of courage. TROLL capitalized sounds even better. Especially when being called so by defensive incompetents, unable to even respond to the most basic of questions regarding the everyday ins-and-outs of P2Pool functioning! Damned right they get mad and swear since that's their only 'failover' when they don't know (when they don't know how to even honestly say they don't know, or are not sure, or need to look into that further, or need to confirm what they think is correct . . . ad nauseam). And TROLL comes out as the stopgap. Always does! The incompetent's stopgap: TROLL!

I'm thinking about starting a general thread titled "TROLL, the new badge of courage". You'll all have honorable mention of course.  


Add: btw, your comment about "especially if you're so tight on the schedule and lack a big number of programmers on your team" was well stated and well taken.

Has anyone noticed how stable the price of DGB has been relative to the vast majority of alt-coins since March? Excluding the outlier spikes, the 30+ range has held steady. LTC has lost half its value in that same time frame. DOGE has lost around 75%. MYR has lost over 80%. VTC has lost close to 90%. And the list goes on and on.

DGB has held its own in spite of technical issues and its relatively long reaction time to the ASIC menace. Why is that? Why has the open market continued to support DGB in spite of its difficulties while it has punished the vast majority of other alt-coins?

I would suggest that a very important factor is Jared himself. Not so much that he is a genius or anything like that, but rather that we have a real flesh and bones person behind the coin and not some unknown, God only knows who, person lurking behind an “anonymous” internet nick. He seems to be a hard worker, he’s focused, he’s seemingly professional (at least all his communications are very ‘corporate world correct’), and he seems to know what he’s doing. The jury is still out on definitive statements and only time will tell, but what we can indeed definitively say is that WE KNOW WHO HE IS.

That’s transparency working in DGB’s favor and it’s the main reason why investors continue to support DGB . . . if you ask me. I’m convinced that if DGB didn’t have a public face, it wouldn’t have been spared the carnage of recent months. Think about it. Sound reasonable to you?

If that sounds reasonable then why not embrace transparency wholeheartedly? “Investors” demand transparency. Nobody invests their money where they don’t have clear and legally binding paper trails. Nobody except criminals that is. Anonymity only benefits criminals. Unless you’re a money launder or an online crack dealer, anonymity does nothing for you other than damage the long term prospects for you investment. Legit, law abiding citizens make up 99.9% of modern society – if you want to take your coin (i.e. investment) mainstream, it goes without saying that you need to respond to the needs and demands of the mainstream. It’s a no-brainer.

Embrace transparency and you lock in a guaranteed winner. Insist on anonymity and you automatically condemn yourself to a minority ‘niche’ market that will only lead you to eventual ruin (in more ways than one).

Think about it.


Full Disclosure: that same long term background just mentioned above in conjunction with recent positive developments regarding the algo change has given me reason to re-establish a mid-sized position in DGB.

I've got big issues with all of those coins, from huge technical limitations, to "missing" devs, to omnipotents, to children playing with leggos, etc., all operating under the threat of imminent extinction which only adds to the pressure on their individual pressure points bearing on their collapse. This is an all or nothing game. 90% of coins will be worth nothing in maybe less time than one year, or maybe a little more - the time frame is hard to predict, but the direction they are going has clear and inevitable extrapolations. The point is that the vast majority are heading in the same direction, all copying each other's losing ideas, with very few thinking out of the box, and even fewer really paying attention to the base ethic that is crypto. Do you think someone has a chance in hell of succeeding in creating a viable cryptocurrency if they don't hold to the basic ethos to begin with? Sound like a no-brainer? Why is the majority doing the opposite? And it's almost everywhere you look. So, if you've got capital wrapped up in this "endeavor", you'd be well advised to have it diversified, and some BTC along with some VTC might be good complements to your MYR and GRS holdings, but it just might be that you only have one of those left longer term (the one holding more closely to the main crypto ethic BTW - even if not for the right reasons) so plan accordingly. I mean, look, if you can't even get a straight answer on a P2Pool issue and you're met with aggressiveness and intimidation for asking in the first place, how can you expect that bunch to put together good documentation on the subject, much less operate in a professional manner (the best payout description I could find for everyone, after I was incorrectly told it didn't work that way and that I should go away, was the description I posted from a BitCoin Forum thread!) That's the real state of Crypto (and you can even send that to Nobel   ).

One: I never depicted the voting system, and I "backpedaled" like an honorable man when the data showed the payouts.
Two: My understanding of P2Pools was head and shoulders above everyone else, or was there some other reason why nobody could answer my question and more than a couple got the whole issue turned upside down or simply went OT? - my only mistake was doubting whether or not the payouts would continue, and posing the question to, and expecting an answer from, incompetents (and jumping to a premature conclusion, of course).
Three: Ahmed had already decided to post his source (you haven't even done due dilegence on this).
Four: You got one out of four (which means that you're not stupid).

Instead of viewing this kind of thing as "entertainment" that you are so superior to, and way above, you might try taking it seriously. There are a few people who take this whole business seriously, and it's the childlike, yahoo answers board, idiocy that is harming them and seriously handicapping and holding back cryptos. Is this just your fun place to hangout once in a while, or are you looking at this as the serious business it should be? If you were serious, you'd at least have taken the time to sort out the issue and individual responses to the issue . . . of course, that presuposes a working knowledge of P2Pool . . .

You know you only show just how correct I am with my conclusions about systemic incompetence in the crypto world by posting this kind of thing.

You only show just how insecure and defensive you really are, and if insecure and defensive, it's because you have something to be insecure and defensive about.

I should add juvenile to that since only an infantile mind is incapable of understanding just how much you are shooting yourself in the foot.

I had absolutely no need to share the information I brought to everyone with my last [serious] post. No need what-so-ever. In fact, it was likely to work against my reputation, I knew that, but since I have nothing to be insecure nor defensive about, and since this is supposedly open source and something we do with an open source frame of mind, I brought that new information to the attention of all, so that we could all learn from it, and for the benefit of all.

I can assure you that if the roles had been reversed, none of you would have had the courage to do the same.

That just about says it all, doesn't it?

I've learned that I jumped to the conclusion that someone was being fraudulent when I should have errored on the side of suspecting incompetence (as it turned out to be). In the future, I will be more inclined to think ineptitude before accusing someone of scamming. I've learned that I need to be more patient with the kids.

Have you learned anything at all?

And you, being another member of the "Community volunteers", consider yourself to be prepared and to have the adequate skills to participate in the development of a serious alt-currency?

With posts like the one above?

With posts like the one above you only demonstrate your complete lack of comprehension regarding this misfortunate incident, much less understanding how or why it originates, and even less on how to prevent the same in the future. You show your complete lack of appreciation for what real professionals view as on-the-job, real life, continuing education. I could go on and on, but I'm going to be compassionate and remember what I've learned: we're dealing with systemic ineptitude and the older, more seasoned, better informed, etc., etc., of us need to be patient.

I can’t stress enough your need to mature.

What a shame to see that the Myriad Block Explorer Development and General Contact, and the Social Media and General Contact are such dunces. A damned shame. (And that's not to mention your friend Ahmed . . .) If the rest of the Myriad "team" is anything like you guys, okay, it won't be the immediate end of the world for MYR, but with your mentality and scratch card gimmicks, I doubt very much you'll be around 5 years from now. What a shame. What with MYR's great potential and all . . .



But I guess I'll keep on being patient and working with you. Where else do we have to go? It's the same crap wherever you go in the crypto world. Balanced portfolio? Well, almost, and maybe not. There is one select coin out there (that I know of and am sure about) that is professional, very quiet, and very much under the radar - and we'll have to keep it like that until the accumulation phase is over.

And maybe you'll grow up.

That's always a possibility.

See how I've learned from this! Why not you too?


Add: I will need to downgrade my MYR rating though, or just put MYR on negative watch, yeah, we'll leave you on negative watch for now.

cheers

It's zero now because I just deleted my negative trust score. Now nothing shows. If before it was showing -6: -1 / +0(0) and now it's nothing and you have an issue with BitCoin Forum's trust algo, get in touch with their admins, okay?

Can you dig it ?


foodies, you need to get more serious. This is BitCoinTalk, not reddit.

Now that I've got real hard data to work with, that is to say that thanks to having the server and web interface back online and that I can access the data, I've been able to confirm against my wallet transactions that expected payouts did indeed continue for a 24 hour period after the stratum shutdown (they do not show on the server side stats however, as would be expected with a shutdown).

Of course, I couldn't confirm that until I had server side data.

If the pool operator knew what he was doing, he would have, should have, stated this and made the data available instead of saying “p2pool pays direct to the user when a block is found”.

All subsequent “dialog” would have been unnecessary.

Let's recap:

I ask if “all payouts due before going offline will be paid?

The correct answer is yes. (Indeed, that is what happened.)

The incorrect answer was the answer given (and this kind of babble to further exacerbate things https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=483515.msg7913295#msg7913295 , and then insisting that the pool was still operating when it wasn't, etc., etc., giving you the idea that he's simply flipping you the bird - but he wasn't since he was really just trying to find a place to hide).

Everything else after that point was an exercise of one party trying to get at the truth, while the other evaded honest engagement to the point of using intimidation tactics (along with the help of some friends – suggesting that this is the modus operandi for a generalized phenomenon of incompetents running the show).

Instead of saying that so-and-so doesn't understand, or so-and-so is a troll, it would be a much better best practice to be honest and straight forward. Or did anyone really not know how a P2Pool payout really worked? The "answer" was "yes", and the secondary answer was “we will be able to confirm that the payouts happened once we have the pool back online”.

I correct myself, and apologize for calling Ahmed a fraud. A liar he still is since he was caught lying several times. Incompetent? Yes - at least to the point of not knowing how to communicate reality as it applies to a P2Pool, and most probably also to the extent of not really knowing the answer in the first place. He's probably a good person, and I hope I wasn't too hard on him. Calling him a fraud when he was most probably simply ignorant is certainly unfair, and given the new data brought to light, I must retract that statement.

How does one find themselves in the position of being mistaken for a fraudster? Too much insecurity and defensiveness leads to a black hole you can't climb out of. It's always best to be open and honest, especially when you purport to be working on open source projects!

As for everyone who was made to feel very uncomfortable by this exchange, I can only recommend further developing your critical analytical skills – even if you don't have the technical background, logic can still do wonders for your decision making (not to mention reading and understanding the issue to begin with). And expect a little more from yourselves and others than a menial sheeple attitude and existence.

Questions are to be answered, not disdained (or at least answered as best we can with the data available and in a serious manner).

Anyhow, the payouts did continue, for 24 hours after stratum shutdown, exactly how things should work, and exactly what expectations the first answer to the first question should have set.

Hopefully this will be a learning experience for all of us.

Yeah, right, we know, you're completely lost.

Captain Zero.

Mr. Fraud.


Hurry up now and get to work on deleting those logs.

Wow. I'm sorry. It IS the same IP.


And the stats ARE there, for all to see. (To answer your question "Where the fuck do you expect me to get uptime stats from?)


So now I must conclude that you haven't got a clue either . . . to add to pathological liar and fraud.


Everyone can see with their own eyes how the server abruptly shut down on the 13th and payouts did the same.

http://eu.myriadminers.com:3333/static/graphs.html?Month

You know, you could just fess up to your mistake and incompetence . . . it will be interesting to see if we get payouts once you have new miners hashing again . . .


saving P2Pool Consortium Pool (LTC) - Graphs.htm to local drive

Then you should have no problem with stats should you? And just where would those other miners be right now? Phantom mining on a phantom server those old DNS names are pointed to? I asked before and I ask again, where do you get off?

Who's the retard?