I decided to try this pool a few days ago, thinking it didn't have stratum support. But you sneaked in the support just before I joined . I hope you enable merged mining on stratum soon, though I see the altcoins are accumulating anyway.

What is the first safe version to use?

ra3QBkZeZqoHUXT8K6ekiZ965bq4etjDXL

Why would anyone use their loyalty points on the redeem pool now? $2.5 per GH/s per day is less than 100% PPS.

This is exactly why I'm staying with BitMinter. But I can't imagine how the pool could stay online if everyone had their fee set at 0%

Thanks for the fix! By the way, is the reward page causing a large load on the server every time it's viewed? It loads quite slowly.

17.95

But Eligius does have a payment threshold. I only got coins generated to my address when I exceeded the threshold of 0.67 BTC. How does that work? It might be problematic with large thresholds, eg. in the extreme case that everyone has their threshold set to the block reward amount and start mining at the same time. At first, the pool wouldn't have any users who have exceeded their threshold, so they'd have to generate rewards to the pool's wallet. That can't be used for payments later, though. After users start hitting their thresholds, how can they be paid? Maybe such a system needs a small enough threshold to work in practice.

+1

I created a new worker and so far it's accumulated an equal amount of BTC and NMC shares, as expected. Something's clearly wrong with the numbers on the old worker.

I believe that applies for blocks only - each share should be accounted for in both chains, and then checked against the block difficulty of both chains. For example, if you submit a 1M/16 share, your target difficulty was 16, but the actual share difficulty happened to be 1M. That's not enough to solve a BTC block, but it does solve an NMC block. Because the share target was 16, that should increase your accepted share count by 16 for both chains. Whatever the block difficulty of both chains is, that shouldn't affect the amount of accepted shares in any way. Every share should increase the accepted share count of both chains by the same amount, unless I'm missing something here.

I just realized that I have in total about 20% more accepted namecoin shares compared to bitcoin shares. Not speaking of per round shares here, those will obviously be wildly different because the chains don't have same difficulty. Maybe I just don't understand merged mining well enough, but shouldn't the total share numbers be roughly equal? I thought every share is used on both chains.

Ukto announced on IRC that there will be maintenance downtime today.

I also have my payout threshold set to 0.01 BTC, but haven't received a payment even though my balance has been over that for weeks. I know that amount is very low and might not be sensible to pay out, but if that's really the case, you should clearly state what the minimum payment threshold is.

Another similar bug happens sometimes when you rename a receive address. It can also randomly renames some other receive address so that you now have two addresses with the same label. The randomly renamed one will reset back to its original name after restarting.

You can have bitcoins generated directly to your address by mining at a pool that does it's payouts like that. P2Pool and Eligius might be the only ones, here's an example of an Eligius payout. But that's still not the same as having the whole block reward generated to you.. or is it? I don't really know what's the value-adding thing here.

Nope, I just happened to catch that one as it happened. I'll try using cgminer's sharelog function, but if that rejection only occurs with shares very close to the target, it might be rare and take a while to see again.

Date was 2012-12-20 17:29:06 UTC.

Yes, that's with stratum.

Yeah, seems to be down.