oops. typo......
For all I know you could have included the reward halving in 4 months and I didn't include that math. My basis for being for the reduction is because masternode profits have to come from somewhere. I also believe that implementing masternodes would potentially increase the value of TRC significantly, thus, profits from mining would also potentially increase. |
|
|
|
As a miner, I am completely against having my mining reward reduced by 65%.
As a miner I am completely FOR having a reduction of 55% (its not 65% unless my caffiene infused math is incorrect) with the implementation of masternodes (as I will also be running masternodes) ... I can see this could become an awesome debate  |
|
|
|
Here is another idea I had for the masternode roll out.
Each masternode can have up to 10,000 TRC or as little as 1,000 TRC. For each 1k TRC you have in your masternode wallet you would get more of a reward. A masternode with 10k would get 10 times the reward compared to one with 1,000. Each masternode would get only 1 vote regardless of the number of coins it holds. That way the more you have up till 10k the more reward you get, but you couldn’t pay to vote more, unless you create more masternodes.
More masternodes help protect the network.
That way if you are an early adopter but can't afford the 10k TRC you could set up a masternode with 1k TRC and just hold onto your coins and as the payouts roll out you would get a larger reward.
What does everyone think?
With how the masternode checks work, I don't think this is possible as the masternode setup checks the txid for the amount (iirr it has to be exactly 1k for dash) .. if its not exact, I don't believe the masternode can be brought online (don't quote me on that though as I haven't dived into the code). With ongoing payments into a masternode, there are multiple txid's. Not exactly a simple check against one txid compared to ongoing increments of txids. With your thought of "each masternode would get only 1 vote" .. so if I had 1k trc, or 10k trc in one masternode, I only get 1 vote, but if I take my 10k trc, divide it up into 10 masternodes, I get 10 votes... Doesn't seem like a good setup imo. Maybe have weighted voting.. if a user has 100k trc in a masternode, give them voting power of 100x compared to a vote from a node of 1k. I'm all for the idea of trc going to masternodes. TBH I think it would give trc a nice boost. |
|
|
|
2017-03-25 09:59:53.292243 p2pool (version 15.0-33-gf6a6ea0) States version 15 on load ... does it switch to v17 when running? never bothered to bring it up that far as all variants I have found are 16 or pre-16 |
|
|
|
|
v17 is getting majority shares?
|
|
|
|
Can't say I'm happy to see TRC follow in the footsteps of a glut of other altcoins in trying to copy the DASH bubble in the search for a wider userbase. DASHS, Scryptdash, CRW & others all copying DASH & now TRC? - care needs to be taken before following the crowd. It's pretty common knowledge that DASH has a hidden premine, meaning it's open to false P&D by the premine holders which might be exactly what is happening now. DASH is a bubble - why follow/copy/immitate it based purely on a sudden price hike?
If TRC is to grow it needs to come up with it's own original idea & keep it's own identity IMHO.
You need to research what you are talking about before putting pen to paper. CRW is not a copy of DASH, in fact, the masternode portion of CRW is to be utilized for an application layer, they are removing darksend in order to apply that layer. So no, not all alts are copying DASH "right out of the box". They are incorporating open source aspects of DASH into an already existing product in order to expand on it. After all, you have the same complaint for dash or litecoin copying bitcoin's codebase? That is where almost all sha256d alts come from is that project (yes, I know that dash is not sha256d but is in fact x11 .. so what, they still used code from bitcoin core). |
|
|
|
Moving a slab of dvc there now |
|
|
|
my CRW can not withdrawl from yobit wallet status maintenance,please fix  That has nothing to do with the CRW team, you would contact yobit regarding that (good luck, they are not in good standing with the crypto community these days!) |
|
|
|
Hi. I worked out my loss (took a while to work out how many coins I mined) and decided to ask for 50% compensation from the dev fund. I decided upon 50% because I already benefit from the fact I was protecting my own investment. I received my compensation in the form of 8,933 CRW.
Ahhh, I must have gotten forgotten in the madness  Infernoman! (or whoever deals with the payout). If you want to just send to the pools payout address for mergemining.com that would be fine with me as it'll get distributed to the miners automagically. 1KebRP3votHfCcY1bFy54bZa9GsHM49Q27 Done 5k sent 8663e949f73d1df860ffd9cc2fd51c992b410c892989633e5a4d1a7be2be2ffc Thanks Infernoman! |
|
|
|
Hi. I worked out my loss (took a while to work out how many coins I mined) and decided to ask for 50% compensation from the dev fund. I decided upon 50% because I already benefit from the fact I was protecting my own investment. I received my compensation in the form of 8,933 CRW.
Ahhh, I must have gotten forgotten in the madness Infernoman! (or whoever deals with the payout). If you want to just send to the pools payout address for mergemining.com that would be fine with me as it'll get distributed to the miners automagically. 1KebRP3votHfCcY1bFy54bZa9GsHM49Q27 |
|
|
|
We're working on stonehedge too I'll keep you updated with how that goes, like i said quite a few members from the team put out for hashing, originally on infernopool, then on mmpool after i fell asleep and infernopool crashed lol... stonehedge rented around the same as you did, so i'll keep an eye on his final losses. and base a payment for you off of his? I would like to make sure that nobody got killed too badly. we're all trying to make sure that losses we're minimal. and a bit of the dev funds is being used to keep everyone happy Any news on this infernoman? Never did read anything more about it. |
|
|
|
And an address for the pool, Make sure you claim your pool's mining address by adding "auxminingaddr=<ADDRESS>" in your crown.conf. Please post that address with the link and logo Mergemining.com changed payout address a little while ago :: auxminingaddr=1KebRP3votHfCcY1bFy54bZa9GsHM49Q27 |
|
|
|
That's a very strange way to do it - so if 5.00001% of users don't update their client it means that 94% of users are mining for nothing? The normal way is by block number - not amount of users........why like this?
I'm not a dev for EMC, just relaying the information in the release notes from earlier in this thread. And no, the mining is not wasted (unless your merge mining) ... The 95% consensus is to have merge mining enabled. I believe segwit fork for bitcoin uses the same consensus. We have to just wait until 95% are on latest client (which, as I have seen in some communities, can take an eon) |
|
|
|
Can someone please clarify when merged mining is active? Is there a certain block this will activate?
Thanks
Needs 95% (950/1000 blocks) to be latest version iirr in order for MM to be activated. Would be nice to see what current % we are at .. was trying to find a current list of versions for EMC, but couldn't find one yesterday. |
|
|
|
Emercoin switches over to Merged Mining.http://www.blockchainengine.org/merged-mining-btc-emercoinTechnical Features: Block mining is only available after a new customer has created any 950 blocks from the 1,000 most recent. Until then, MM blocks are rejected. Compared with client version 0.5.X, the latest 0.6.0 version has undergone significant alterations: Merged mining with Bitcoin is now available. The not critical double-vote PoS vulnerability has been fixed. The rarely experienced freezing of a wallet with a large number of transactions has been eradicated. Long awaited release! Updating on mergemining.com as I type |
|
|
|
stonehedge rented around the same as you did, so i'll keep an eye on his final losses. and base a payment for you off of his? I would like to make sure that nobody got killed too badly. we're all trying to make sure that losses we're minimal. and a bit of the dev funds is being used to keep everyone happy Sure, that sounds fine. Any recoup of losses is always welcome |
|
|
|
And if you have any issues getting synced up on the new client.
New client setup on test site and pool, both synced, looks like its gtg again. |
|
|
|
I trust that you'll be fair with your estimates A few of the other team members and I also did the same and incurred some losses along the way, It was a big learning experience for the whole team, so we're trying to make sure that nobody got hurt too badly while we were learning. Like I said, I really can't estimate what was lost. The hashing, I don't really see as a major loss (although it would have been nice to keep all that crw that was building up from almost solo mining CRW Saw stonehedge on there and we were pretty much competing for hashing at the start, so I can verify that they most likely suffered large losses as I believe they were trying to support the proper chain) If need be, I can dig up the list of their tx's/txid's. (I'm not overly concerned about my losses on the mining aspect, just the users of mergemining.com). The thrones, well, lets just say thats up in the air. 4 of them I can bring back today, the other 10 are hosted, and it doesn't sound like they are coming back anytime soon, since it sounds like the entire setup needs to be cancelled and re-setup. If anything, I guess I'd like to see stonehedge compensated as he was a major contributer of hashing yesterday. I'll just suck up my losses. |
|
|
|
Yeah there were forks all over the place, Let us know if you incurred any losses from the fork. And if you have any issues getting synced up on the new client. Should have no problem with syncing now. and enforcement has been manually disabled for now. the spork/alert/throne keys were also updated. so we can enable and disable sporks at will, and push alerts to the network notifying people to update.
Well, the pool, the users, the 14 thrones we have ... I would imagine that there are losses and I cannot even calculate that. rented out 250ths x 4 before I went home from work last night from nicehash in order to try to keep the chain alive, and now its lost (not entirely obviously as its MM'd, just the crw portion is obviously lost). |
|
|
|
|
Was there another fork? Notice that yesterdays tx's have been wiped from the blockchain, and it has a feeling that the "proper chain" we were on, is no longer the proper chain. ATM I'm updating daemon on mergemining.com again
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
