It's your willingness to not only discuss issues with people but invite it, that made you an easy addition to my list.

The only thing I would maybe change is using the reference link if available, as well as the BTC risked amount. The clearest example of this would be the latest deal with blockforge. I am a little curious as to why this trade wasn't rated as positive?

I also noticed you had changed a lot of positives to neutrals. Iirc there was  a bit of pressure when the new system was put in place and you were under a lot of scrutiny with your list. Personally I like to see trades rated positive or negative based on the outcome, neutral is acceptable if there were hiccups. With appropriate weight for risked BTC and a reference.

Not to pile on, as I did also see some negatives re-rated. I do like to see someone who is flexible in their ratings. I don't agree with one rating being set in stone with no chance at redemption.

All in all the minor differences in how we manage feedback don't affect me overall. I look through the list of anyone I'm dealing with, and have untrusted feedback set to show as default.

I don't see any issue here. The system will benefit from having a wide range of members who make up DT1. I welcome this inclusion more so than some of the trigger happy members you see trying to get into DT1 for whatever reason.

I've removed default trust from my list to experiment for a while. I went through Ddmrddmr's trust list and didn't see anyone I would disagree with being on DT2. This is where a member like Ddmrddmr is great. Considering they like to work in facts and numbers lead me to believe they will be well reasoned in who they add or exclude.

More to your original questions OP, nothing wrong with asking that's how you learn. From my point of view any number of users with a varying degree of activity on the forum and with sending feedback can wind up in the system. It just depends on who sees value in either the small amount of feedback they have left, or who's trust list you also like/agree with.

I would say consider that in building your own trust list, don't just go with the longest list of feedback left. There are a lot of tools now to help you dig deepeer and decide who you want in your list.

I forgot all about this. Not that I was grabbing one just wanted to see the pricing.

Under the noted I think there is a batch 2 on the 10th.

I would say go for it.

You honestly never know when one of the big fish is going to fail over, or when they are coming to stay for a month. There is no good way to time it, like it's been shown as well it's not wasted work either.

It's a tough call to reduce your reward in the short term, but it doesn't become an easier decision. You could wait for the hashrate to increase bit there is no guarantee it stays there.

It's hard to say the way they laid it out. I could see them cherry picking, that would make sense to be able to label it PRO and slap a few extra dollars on it.

Comparing them it almost looks like it just has poor control. They have a wide swing in hashrate like you said for the low mode. Not sure if that would be due to limitations on some chips preventing entire strings or boards from being able to properly lower their frequency.

The numbers aren't the worst on the min. expected. Seems getting an underperformer in hashrate here actually nets you a more efficient model. low 40's

They may be banking on people being willing to spend a few extra dollars to get the machine faster. It doesn't hurt to be first out of the gate before the machines drive the hashrate and Difficulty up.
Aren't the M20's not expected to be shipped until July/August?

You can easily change your name... by creating  a new account, that's the only free way to do it. You are a new member with low activity and not much in the way of established posts yet. I do see a couple of [ANN] which are copy/paste spam really. You should only have 1 created.

Other than that for your current account you need to shell out a large sum of BTC.

Not sure if you read my thread linked above, or missed this. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2439910.0

That's a link to a list of people providing Escrow on the forum. They have a long history of providing this service, and people here feel safer making deals using them. Personally I've used OgNasty in the past.

Good luck with your sales.


It sounds as if they are overseas, so an escrow will be your best bet.

After having seen how many people just blindly threw their information up for April Fools, I want to point out the real risk with this sort of deal.

Do not provide KYC to a random account here on the forum. Whether it's a gag thread or a real sale, this is not the same as an exchange asking for that sort of information.

In the end the end you can be exposing yourself to identity theft.

---

Apart from that very real risk I do not take anything in this thread seriously.

Looks like they are updating everything so far it looks like all S17 and S17 pro.

But they have numbers ranging from 35-48 J/TH for the pro model this is @ 25 Celcisus it jumps if you're running warmer @ 40 Celsius you see 38-52 J/TH. That's between the 3 different power modes.

S17 seems to be 42-45 @ 25 Celsius and 43-51 @ 40 Celsius. Only 2 power modes.

Wide swings in hashrate and between the modes as well.

Pro = 36-62 TH/S based on mode

Regular = 35-53 TH/S


Damn these are looking good.


With these numbers I can't blame you

It can be a couple of things but Avalons are generally really easy to troubleshoot and narrow down issues.

Sounds like you are running 3 of these. If you are running them all off 1 AUC3 I would double check the 5 pin cables running from miner 1 to miner 2, do the same from 2 to 3. Once you've confirmed they are secure, try swapping them around if all 3 miners aren't showing up yet. I have found this is usually my issue after I move things around.

If all 3 still aren't reporting you should changing the order of the miners in the chain. Hopefully that helps get them back online.

Depending on how they get into mining, they may not even know it exists. That's the problem, with all the informative sites just regurgitating the same info. People mostly wind up on a Bitmain owned/controlled/partnered pool or Slush. The bigger hey get the harder it is for people to think about trying out smaller pools spreading the hashrate out but increasing variance in reward frequency.

If discussions ever got far enough to consider moving away from POW and people were actively considering this. You might see people open their eyes and branch out to other pools to spread the hashrate. If for no other reason than to not rock the boat possibly having a negative impact on the overall market.


They will hit them more frequently, but the miner earns a smaller fraction of each block because the reward is spread so thin. That's why in theory these miners can earn the same amount at any size pool over a long enough period of time. Ideally you want to be at a pool that is large enough to expect a block every Difficulty Adjustment Period. This way you might hit fewer blocks but you earn more BTC per block. So really the lowest fee pool, is the best choice assuming they share block rewards.


Just because someone reaches 51% doesn't mean everyone instantly loses everything. If they began doublespends then yes the market would be in trouble, loss of faith is huge. Like I said above if we ever got close enough it would become a frontline issue and people would actually have to make themselves aware.

That would be interesting to see if the majority hashrate holder would try to convince the world to make them the central authority.

Payment and change have all been returned to me. Thanks again for the prompt and professional service.

Not to mention all the help. Greatly appreciated.

In this instance you want to report the topics using "report to moderator" Just state "the user is spamming these threads to promote their platform". There's no need to create a thread everytime we find someone spamming. If you have questions Welsh has a great topic. [Guide] Reporting effectively

If it were just one Ad I would report it still but ask it be moved to "service discssion".

Going through them, I did notice 1 thread was an [ANN], and one was in service discussion. The others definitely go in the spam pile though. I reported 1 and linked it to the other 2

I would probably take your email address out of the post for starters.

There will be a reason your posts are getting deleted so review the rules and make sure you aren't violating them. I don't know anything about the bounty "work" authentication, but if others aren't having their posts deleted try following suite.

Staff isn't going to concern itself with your ability to join bounties.

Having watched your interactions with members recently over the last while. I agree that a few members have probably gone through your post history specifically to try and increase the number of good reports against you.

I seem to recall reading somewhere theymos had addressed you about something like 61 good reports against you, which could eventually lead to a ban. So there is a chance they think that by the number of good reports against you rises a ban may be put into effect. I doubt it would happen from old posts getting deleted, but new  threads considered redundant or spammy might result in a temp ban.

Found it.


You do you, but I would take some time before creating my next threads to see if I've done something very similar recently; or if it will serve a purpose beyond just being created.

Complacency, and lack of awareness are my guesses. If you buy a miner from Bitmain it shows up pointing to their pool. It's also likely they've already seen the info about their pools, I think they even come with a pamphlet suggesting you mine with them. They are also large and can boast about daily payouts which a lot of new miners focus on. If you need to cash out your mining rewards everyday without fault, then you are already running to close to going bust.

I can say from experience when I started I mined at a poor choice for a pool. I was unaware of the benefit to miner transaction fees, and they had neat little manipulation techniques to make me think I needed payouts immediately. Then the bonuses went away, and a few months later I realized how much better off I was with a different pool with a payout system that paid all block rewards and transaction fees.

Loyce I'm wondering if you can work out another list from the data dumps. I laugh as I type it, you already provide so much data interpretation for us. I originally thought it might even run along the lines of one of your current lists but I doubt it now.

I'd like to see users who have left feedback for the same members, or have used the same reference link. I have been spending some time reviewing peoples feedback recently. It got me thinking about clusters of people leaving the same feedback. I there would be a way to see how many people out there are solely following the feedback others are leaving. I noticed some being left months after someone else but a duplicate otherwise.

I'm not sure the best way to represent it. It could be a ranked list of people based on how many matches for users you and them have have left feedback for. Maybe even a second column if there is a matching reference link. It could also show people who tend to counter the feedback of others if a pattern exists there.

I don't know, let me know what you think.

---

Yeah that makes sense. It did seem like a lot to go through.

Just looking at this it looks like your hashrate is good 21.5 TH , and you have no error codes [ECHU] or [ECMM]

I think you have a non issue, are you newer to mining? As long as your pool side hashrate matches roughly the same as your seeing in Miner status you are fine. I'm surprised you didn't get a response saying everything is okay, but I can't speak for them.

Thanks for that. I had never noticed the feature before. Useless to me at the time I was on mobile. I see what people mean about the older monitors I tried on a couple, and wouldn't have noticed at all on a couple if I didn't know it was there.


I know but depending on what section of the forum I'm in links can be useful. In mining it's common to link someone to a cable,fan or other various part they need. Might even just be to reference a thread they might find help in. I'm just saying links can serve a purpose, and having a few extra safeties in place would be nice. In this case I was wrong about the safety not being there, as I misread the link, they would have had me if I didn't already quote posts before clicking on links to see what's really there.


Well that's devious as all hell. Thanks for showing me that, I've never really considered worrying about following a quote to source. It does give itself away when I go to type a reply, but that's the same as quoting beforehand and a step I wouldn't have taken.

I would liken clicking on it to closing the car door, and only a split second after it's to late to stop the door seeing your keys on the seat. It would look weird as I went to click on the quote but I would have already been on autopilot