Hi, had some feedback on things that I would make use of if the site offered it.
----------------------
I would like a way to not show the graph,takes up multiple rows and while useful isn't what I'm looking for in a list of prices perhaps a hovering over  Having to page down multiple times is inconvienent.
Add Currency shortname/3 letter in it's own field
Sort order up/down by the various columns.

A way i could pass it my balances in coins maybe through the url as parameters? Then show a #coins owned column and a tot value column(owned*value)
http://coinmarketcap.com/default.html?showbalances=true&BalanceBTC=35&BalanceLTC=100&showgraph=false&showcoinswith0balance=false

For my example url its a mockup so don't ding me if I constructed it wrong.

It would turn off the graph.
It would add the total balance and amount owned columns
For coins where no value was provided, it would not show them

I have joined this pool and been trying to mine for a few weeks.
I love the idea but the pool just isn't working for me.
I have tried contacting the website a few times through their contact us link but no reply as of yet.
I am mining with
1x7970 scrypt
2x5830 scrypt
1xBFL Jalapeno

When mining against other pools, I have a very low stale/reject ratio always above 99.0%
The sha-256 miner seems to be horribly affected by this on multipool.
I have come home several days and found over a 50% reject rate. Needless to say I have moved the jala back to BTCGuild where I am getting after a full weekend of mining a 99.54% accept rate.
While my scrypt mining is still seeing alot of rejects, about 10-20% I haven't dived off just yet and gone back to wemineltc, but I'm getting ready to if I don't hear back from my support emails soon.

I've set the gpu miners all to difficulty 1 and the jala to 2 and tried various config settings but still see the stale/reject rates outside the norm. Btw - having a single forum thread as you support medium seems really bad idea. But since your page says this post is where to post, here it is.
Thoughts / ideas anyone?

thanks digital
i haven't noticed it this week, the last time i noticed it, i found a second instance of pocdlm(i know i spelt it wrong) running not sure how or why, my system didn't show in my guiminer so not sure what caused it.
but killing both, restored the 220mhash I expected.

Since the orphaned process wasn't being controlled by guiminor and didn't show up on the taskbar/systray I didn't notice it at first.

just and update, still have not identified cause, however a reboot restored the normal 220mhash rate,
at some point during the evening, web browsing /few rounds of league of legends it dropped to half again
closed all processes, restarted mining no change.
Rebooted again and 220 achieved again.

How about protesting against girl scouts until they offer a bitcoin merit badge.

Thanks for the replies,
No overclocking, no flags set in the guiminer additional flags box. I figure i would slowly work on tweaking it but haven't found that time yet.
Like i said it started around when i first saw the notice on slush saying the new features had been implemented.
My speed when slush is up has remained around 120, which is about half of what it was running at.
I made no changes to my system (might of been an automatic update that rolled through) but other than that no changes.

I thought mhash was directly related to hardware components, not network speed.

And as I said, i get the same speed when i tested on bitcoinpool which has the same features.

That said, I am of two thoughts.

1. Those features cause a mhash speed to drop.
2. something has happened to my system that's affecting the mining speed. but i have no clue how to diagnose, hence why i'm here posting.

I'm fairly new to all this, had been using slushes pool for about a week and half before they upgraded to Long polling and NTime rolling. After that my speed dropped in half. I'm using GUI Miner and running a xfx black 5830, from what I've read 220mh websites say 280 is avg for the chipset.

I signed up at bitcoinpool to see what my speed there would be and it's the same.

Does this sound like something screwy with my machine or is this normal performance?