Let religious types worry about religious content, legal types worry about illegal content, and copyright types worry about infringing content.  It is possible but you would be doing well indeed to construct a sequence of 0's and 1's that would phase me.

Although I would personally make a special effort to avoid people like luke-jr, there are far worse people in the world.

I found myself naturally mentioning simplecoin.us on the occasional thread (such as the thread about whether or not pool hopping is ethical).  I'm glad to see that the flurry of blocks has come shortly after the establishment of the new server and the frequent posts on this thread has kept it close to the stickied pools.

Good luck ironing out the various bugs and I hope the new server will manage impressive uptime.

Ah, a reported stats bug.  I guess that was the most likely problem.

It's still a bit odd that some of the older blocks are marked 'Done' and some are marked '120 confirms'.  I also found it amusing a few days ago to find that the datapoints on the x-axis of the below graph were ordered alphabetically rather than chronologically.  This generated x-axes such as:

10th  11th  12th  13th  8th  9th

Unless this too was fixed I expect we'll see it again on 3rd September:

1st  2nd  29th  3rd  30th  31st

My lifetime shares were stuck at 0 for a very long time and that could have been fixed by now but I guess that could be a feature.

tvhwgt's block did the same so I'm not too worried.  I guess we'll see.

Another block,

quite good.

Were it not for several rather intellegent posts made by your account on several threads I would assume you a troll.  Given your reputation I offer my thoughts.

What is this implied agreement?  Can one fairly assume that other miners know of this agreement?  I certainly was not aware of it.

I understand implied agreements and try to be fair to those with whom I deal but I always reserve the right to think for myself, not divulge my thoughts, and use anything I learn to my advantage.  If a thing is not obviously implied (e.g. is pool hopping ok) then an explicit agreement should be made.  I will not be bound by agreements which exist only in the minds of others and certainly not those which encourage bad mathematics, hidden information, and inefficiency.

You don't have to worry about my taking advantage of non-hopping proportional miners.  I mine with simplecoin.us which uses 'pay per last n shares' and urge others who dislike the mess which stems from the fundamentally flawed 'proportional reward system' to give it a try.

Does the automatic payout feature work for anyone or is it not implemented yet?  My balance has been more than double my automatic payout amount for a few days now but no payout has been made.

Another block.  Many thanks tvhwgt.

Unethical? rofl!

Nice.  I go away for a few days and come back to find that not only has the pool doubled in size but two blocks have been found!

I'm using pool.simplecoin.us now and my stales situation seems to have improved to a comfortable 0.2% stales (for 7000 shares).  Looks like I won't have to investigate cgminer further after all.

Please do keep the old server running for as long as you can.  A reputation for reliability seems more important than a fast website.

May I ask what is the "Pool efficiency" statistic represents?

Thanks for the cgminer tip, I'll look at it in a few days time.

Best of luck with the server.  It must be difficult configuring and testing while simultaneously trying to maintain good uptime for the miners.  If it would be at all helpful to have a solid 24/7 miner pointed at a test server then let me know.

I imagine servers like this are hard to configure.  Out of curiosity, which OS are you using?

Thanks for the tip but I can't get the hashrate in cgminer to even approach that which I can obtain in phoenix.

At 940/325 I get about 396 Mh/s (phoenix 1.5, phatk 2.2, Catalyst 11.6, SDK 2.1, Linux 64-bit).  As always, SDK 2.4 and SDK 2.5 are 2 Mh/s slower than SDK 2.1 and Catalyst 11.7 makes my system unusuable (all of which I think are Linux peculiarities).  Other than this on only two occasions were people claiming of hash-rates for a given clock on a 5850 that were simply out of my reach and two of them were using Catalyst 11.4 (in both cases they were about 7 Mh/s faster per 5850).  I tried Catalyst 11.4 but experienced no speed boost so perhaps this is a Windows thing or perhaps there are several different 'Catalyst 11.4's.

I also don't run at this speed typically though because of the increased heat, power consumption, and noise.  My cores are at 847 MHz and 899 MHz right now.

A 'big guy'?  I only have 733 MH/s I'm afraid but I guess every little helps in a small pool.  Thanks.

I'm still struggling with reducing my stales but I imagine I'll get there in the end.  Indeed, being new to pool mining I don't know what's normal?

I can confirm this.  The 11.7 drivers caused my system to be come very slow and almost unresponsive.  I went back to 11.6 at once.

11.6 seems to be best for me on Linux because of the extra overclocking potential.

For Windows I gather that 11.4 and 11.7 rule the roost but I believe they all suffer the 100% cpu bug.

Perhaps, in the short term, the glut of supply will cause the relative value of namecoins to drop sharply.

In the long term, assuming all market participants are rational agents, I would not expect increased difficulty to be met with a proportional increase in price.  However, if there's one thing I've learned from Bitcoin it's that people are not rational agents, neither individually nor on average.

This sounds like a very good setup to me!

Perhaps I misunderstood but it sounds like you can get over 400 MH/s from a 5850 at 940/300?  May I ask which OS/Catalyst/SDK/kernel?  I'm also curious what Mh/J you're getting.

This is a very promising pool.  Thanks for all of the hard work.

I've been solo mining for a long time and I finally joined this pool when you introduced PPLNS.

I was having some trouble earlier with the new server and frequent disconnects but I see you have things under control.  I'll try it again tomorrow but will stick with the old server for now.

May I ask why the dates on the x-axis of "Blocks found over last week" chart are ordered alphabetically rather than chronologically?

PPLNS perhaps.