It is possible to run Armory while Bitcoin-Qt is running through Tor.

+1

Took me forever to figure this so I thought I would save you the trouble; you need to add rpcallowip="ip of other miners" (asterisks are allowed) to your bitcoin.conf file.  You can use one for each miner or catch them all with an asterisk.

JSYK you can run bitcoin-qt with the -server option and point your miners there without setting up a pool.

Thanks, that was the obvious info I was missing.

What does "min" stand for and why is their a comma between 14 and posts?  I seem too have missed something obvious and have no clue how activity is calculated.  Help would be greatly appreciated. _{(not in btc)}

I tracked the coins to here, does this ring any bells?

http://bitcoin-otc.com/viewgpg.php?nick=frend
https://blockchain.info/address/17PQphzgUps2NuGLPcNT5c6hJLxyiBTobR

P.S. The coins went to this address two days after you sent them.

No because every time you mine a block it is sent to an address in your keypool.  If you mine on multiple servers with the same wallet.dat then the keypools will eventually diverge and you won't be able to access your coins on the wallet you spend from.

@ Meni: Thanks for the clear answer.  Now I can answer this https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=255927.0;topicseen question.

Here is the scenario, I'm solo mining with bitcoin qt and I manage to mine a block:
To which address do the coins go?  
Is it to one of my existing addresses or to the an address in my keypool?  
If I mine another block will it be sent to the same address?

Whoah, 5 Gigs?   My debug.log file is only 8 MB.  You have either misread the file size or there is something odd going on.  Try deleting your debug file and see if that helps.  You can just move it to the desktop if you don't want to delete it.

search coin control 

Do you mean run multiple instances of bitcoin qt in server mode and mine, or mine on multiple computers but with only one instance of bitcoin qt?  If you mean the first option I think It would theoretically work but you could run into an obscure complication.  If you mean the second option, then yes.

Reread that, I used three conjunctions in one sentence  so let me rephrase it.  Your question isn't quite clear, what exactly are you trying to accomplish?

The option to prevent this would be nice, but I wouldn't want to be forced not to use an address as a label.

np, glad it fixed itself.

This has happened a few times before and has not been linked to being hacked (as far as I have read).  If on the outside chance you don't have any coins in your wallet and don't need the addresses therein just delete wallet.dat and let bitcoin qt create a new on for you.

If you want to keep your wallet first make a copy of it and put it somewhere safe.  Then try running bitcoin qt with the -salvagewallet option.  If this doesn't work you may have to try pywallet to retrieve the private keys. 

Did this happen immediately after you upgraded or is this just a random error?

I hope something here helps you,
BookLover

I don't believe electrum accepts wallet.dat but you can simply send your coins from one client to the other if you just want to migrate them.

This is completely anonymous but you can buy gold/silver and sell that to a local store for cash.  GoldSilverBitcoin is a good place to do this.

There are really to many unknowns for a definite answer, e.g. what pool are you using and what are the fees charged for PPS and PPLNS, what will the average luck of the pool be in the future.  Then really is no solid better answer.  Having said that, it really won't make any significant difference which you decide to use since you only have ~900Mh/s.

I realize it could be read either way, I was simply clarifying to prevent confusion.  Guess I should have clarified my intent as well.