[4+ EH] Slush Pool (slushpool.com); Overt AsicBoost; World First Mining Pool

[organofcorti]

<snip>
Do i really need to go back thru my post history to find how many months ago i started barking about this..  ITS BEEN Far too long ago now.. Esp the size of the miner in question.  Should have been more obvious to someone that is a great pool op or so caring of the miners like you say!  guess ill check my first fb post and on here about this exact problem.  Only to come to find out after 4 months i was right.. Seriously man defending slush makes you look the fool..
<snip>

I'm not seeing four months of significantly bad luck here, just around mid December to maybe end January.

Heh you missed my post to you about the whole of December?
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=77000.msg13482822#msg13482822

That's not four months though?

[1714274057]

1714274057

[1714274057]

1714274057

[1714274057]

1714274057

[1714274057]

1714274057

[1714274057]

1714274057

[1714274057]

1714274057

[kano]

<snip>
Do i really need to go back thru my post history to find how many months ago i started barking about this..  ITS BEEN Far too long ago now.. Esp the size of the miner in question.  Should have been more obvious to someone that is a great pool op or so caring of the miners like you say!  guess ill check my first fb post and on here about this exact problem.  Only to come to find out after 4 months i was right.. Seriously man defending slush makes you look the fool..
<snip>

I'm not seeing four months of significantly bad luck here, just around mid December to maybe end January.

Heh you missed my post to you about the whole of December?
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=77000.msg13482822#msg13482822

That's not four months though?

No idea about the previous months, just saying that was for the whole of December. And ridiculous bad luck.

[pekatete]

Bitcointalk is big forum filled with lots of smart guys, creators of the stratum protocol and i think if he point some transparent facts they will chime in, investigate, point some real facts and proof and than i will beleive. You know the saying "innocent untill proven guilty", sadly in this case he is "guilty until proven innocent".

Facts are plainly there for all to see, if you choose to open your eyes and see them for what they truly are. Problem is you do not want to see them for what they are.
1. There was a block with-holding attack which negatively affected pool luck
2. The said attack was detected, miner identified and, after thorough investigation, the attack was attributed to buggy software
3. The offending miner's buggy software was patched with the un-doubtable expertise of the slushpool team which positively affected pool luck

The rest is the usual tripe by lesser pool operators fishing for miners, I have to say, slush keeps growing and that is telling.

[organofcorti]

<snip>
Do i really need to go back thru my post history to find how many months ago i started barking about this..  ITS BEEN Far too long ago now.. Esp the size of the miner in question.  Should have been more obvious to someone that is a great pool op or so caring of the miners like you say!  guess ill check my first fb post and on here about this exact problem.  Only to come to find out after 4 months i was right.. Seriously man defending slush makes you look the fool..
<snip>

I'm not seeing four months of significantly bad luck here, just around mid December to maybe end January.

Heh you missed my post to you about the whole of December?
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=77000.msg13482822#msg13482822

That's not four months though?

No idea about the previous months, just saying that was for the whole of December. And ridiculous bad luck.

Yep, you're right -- it was all December (1.26 for 228 blocks p>= 0.9998722) , not January (1.059126 for 202 blocks p>=0.8016885).

[d57heinz]

<snip>
Do i really need to go back thru my post history to find how many months ago i started barking about this..  ITS BEEN Far too long ago now.. Esp the size of the miner in question.  Should have been more obvious to someone that is a great pool op or so caring of the miners like you say!  guess ill check my first fb post and on here about this exact problem.  Only to come to find out after 4 months i was right.. Seriously man defending slush makes you look the fool..
<snip>

I'm not seeing four months of significantly bad luck here, just around mid December to maybe end January.

Heh you missed my post to you about the whole of December?
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=77000.msg13482822#msg13482822

That's not four months though?

No idea about the previous months, just saying that was for the whole of December. And ridiculous bad luck.

Yep, you're right -- it was all December (1.26 for 228 blocks p>= 0.9998722) , not January (1.059126 for 202 blocks p>=0.8016885).

but it was going down hill two months prior to my dec 5 th post  i just thought that it would correct.. i held my breath for two freaking months then i decided i needed to start bringing attention to this.. Thats why you dont see it for the whole picture.. There were so many days in those two months prior that we had 30 % block days of normal.. and then followed by several days of 70 %.. just because your weekly stats dont show the day to day.. it was much worse that it appears.  Hell without the attacker who knows we could have been at kano standing of 106 % for the year instead slush was pushing to go lower than 90 % for the year.. and weekly stats he was barely finding more than 70 %..  im not going thru your weekly block maker stats organ but your know what im talking about.  This started well before dec 5th  its just wasnt till then when im like this cant be all variance!

Anyway. it is what it is.. you all seem to trust slush.. Lets see if he comes out with the brand and firmware of miners.. If that info never comes he was lying about the real reason for the shit luck.

https://slushpool.com/news/2016/02/06/recent-low-luck-information/

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1976.msg13183847#msg13183847  if you read from this message on other members chime in on them leaving months ago due to this!!.. just saying..

best Regards
d57heinz


EDIT   What i think is happening here. is im compounding the issues he had prior to this.. which i think are all really related to again i keep going back to server issues..   https://slushpool.com/news/2015/10/23/recent-orphaned-blocks-explanation/     He comments on facebook about this to a person and they say this.. 
Nepa Luzinka "Is soemthing cooking captain? three blocks on the trot without any fees ...."
Like · Reply · November 18, 2015 at 8:55pm

Slush pool
Slush pool "Hi Nepa, we have upgraded Bitcoind to new version yesterday and experiencing few difficulties. But we fixed it already and everything should be working fine now. wink emoticon"
Like · Reply · 1 · November 19, 2015 at 8:05am

But you have to remember for them to even start to think the orphans were a problem they let that happen for a month or so aswell.. i mean hell you cant let shit ride when its this serious!


And back in october going further back. he did some work on it to support bip 101  and then got attacked left and right.. EVER since that point on.. it has been going down hill.  Starting with the orphans  then all of sudden bad luck as well.> Orphans got fixed and then the bad luck continued to get worse.. then he decides that orphans arent the whole story.. >> A little honestly goes a long way.. I see a pattern of repeated failures going back as far as oct 2015 with the support of bip 101 (BTCXT).. 

[pekatete]

but it was going down hill two months prior to my dec 5 th post  i just thought that it would correct.. i held my breath for two freaking months then i decided i needed to start bringing attention to this.. Thats why you dont see it for the whole picture.. There were so many days in those two months prior that we had 30 % block days of normal.. and then followed by several days of 70 %.. just because your weekly stats dont show the day to day.. it was much worse that it appears.  Hell without the attacker who knows we could have been at kano standing of 106 % for the year instead slush was pushing to go lower than 90 % for the year.. and weekly stats he was barely finding more than 70 %..  im not going thru your weekly block maker stats organ but your know what im talking about.  This started well before dec 5th  its just wasnt till then when im like this cant be all variance!

Anyway. it is what it is.. you all seem to trust slush.. Lets see if he comes out with the brand and firmware of miners.. If that info never comes he was lying about the real reason for the shit luck.  https://slushpool.com/news/2016/02/06/recent-low-luck-information/

best Regards
d57heinz

If your enduring argument is you do not trust slush, then go mine somewhere else that has a pool operator you trust, END OF STORY.

Conceptually (and sematically) in cryptocurrency pool mining terms, you could not be more wrong in not trusting the very person who by many accounts "invented" pool mining (and the stratum protocol that made it feasible) in the first place. That is quite aside from the fact that despite being the longest existing pool around, such an accusation has NEVER been laid against slush, let alone the lack of any concrete proof to back up your accusation being brought for scrutiny.

The stats and facts speak for themselves, and assertions otherwise - akin to applying a razor to a hair strand only to be emphatically empirically disproved (aptly demonstrated by the quack pool op fishing for miners) cannot alter them. YOU are wrong to accuse slush of dishonesty, and the quack pool op fanning your ignorance is the dishonest one (that in more ways than fishing for miners .... but you'll find out in time).

[Legacy2005]

d57heinz : unfortunately you cant talk logically to those of low IQ such as pekatete. just look at his lack of trust rating. If he wants to continue to mine on slush and throw away his money/profits to a lying thieving pool operator then let him.

Pekatete: how about you actually shutting up for once and reading posts and forming intelligent responses instead of mindless blind following of a pool owner that has led you all around by you johnsons as he steals from you by overcharging for pool fees and for allowing the withholding attack to happen and not revealing who did it and what miner/software they were using.

Amazing how this "miner" has been identified yet hasn't been reveled. Makes one think why he/she/them haven't been identified to the public. or why themselves haven't come on here and apologized. My thoughts is that the "attacker" and slush were working together or the attacker was slush himself. why not toss a miner on the pool and get paid for work he hasn't done. O that's right that's what hes doing right now with his outrageous pool fee, getting paid for doing nothing. for the fees he charges he should be on here posting constantly.

[pekatete]

d57heinz : unfortunately you cant talk logically to those of low IQ such as pekatete. just look at his lack of trust rating. If he wants to continue to mine on slush and throw away his money/profits to a lying thieving pool operator then let him.

Pekatete: how about you actually shutting up for once and reading posts and forming intelligent responses instead of mindless blind following of a pool owner that has led you all around by you johnsons as he steals from you by overcharging for pool fees and for allowing the withholding attack to happen and not revealing who did it and what miner/software they were using.

Amazing how this "miner" has been identified yet hasn't been reveled. Makes one think why he/she/them haven't been identified to the public. or why themselves haven't come on here and apologized. My thoughts is that the "attacker" and slush were working together or the attacker was slush himself. why not toss a miner on the pool and get paid for work he hasn't done. O that's right that's what hes doing right now with his outrageous pool fee, getting paid for doing nothing. for the fees he charges he should be on here posting constantly.

You got an axe to grind? You are being fed nonsense by quack pool ops and spout it straight out without giving it thought and you have the audacity to lay claim to anything like an IQ score? That on the back of your only "evidence" being slush has not revealed who the "attacker" was?
It has been proved beyond reasonable doubt that the gibberish you've been fed by the quacks is just that and there's nothing to it at all. Now if you want to lay claim to being the person that "discovered" how low luck was and thus detecting there was an attack on the pool, what has that got to do with anything?

If you think slush is not trustworthy or that he charges exhorbitant fees, do not mine there. Feel free to pop over to the slow cooking heist pool .... but you have been warned, dishonesty, as has been clearly laid bare of the quack pool op fishing for miners, is an ingrained thing ... it is not learnt. It is just a matter of time before the big opportunity presents itself to THAT quack pool op and you'll only have yourself to blame .... mark my words.

[krisgt30]

Do you even realize that none of us speaking are pool operators (other than ck)?  All I have been saying is, just because it was okay in the past for pools to have the mentality of "oh well, we had a block withholding attack, nothing we can do about it." ----Does not mean here in 2016--- with difficulty being so high, and virtually every home/hobby miner resorting to mining in a pool because of the centralization of hashrate, that it should still be accepted; nor the norm.

You would expect an OG pool such as slush to understand this more than anyone, and maybe, to have a reserve set aside from his fees, to say something to the effect of "hey guys, we just had a withholding attack, but I set apart an insurance policy wallet for just the occasion, you will be paid out based on the average amount of blocks we find a day for the current month, oh and btw the ip address, machine, firmware in question is xxxxxx, that would go over with all of us wayyyyy better than what has happened. Maybe I grew up in an area of the world where we are taught to be much less trustworthy than some of you, and that is why it appears to us that you are blindly following.

I guess maybe I am hoping for too much, but for someone who claims to have an extensive past in the banking industry, something like this would exactly be in place.

[pekatete]

Do you even realize that none of us speaking are pool operators (other than ck)?  All I have been saying is, just because it was okay in the past for pools to have the mentality of "oh well, we had a block withholding attack, nothing we can do about it." ----Does not mean here in 2016--- with difficulty being so high, and virtually every home/hobby miner resorting to mining in a pool because of the centralization of hashrate, that it should still be accepted; nor the norm.

You would expect an OG pool such as slush to understand this more than anyone, and maybe, to have a reserve set aside from his fees, to say something to the effect of "hey guys, we just had a withholding attack, but I set apart an insurance policy wallet for just the occasion, you will not be paid out based on the average amount of blocks we find a day for the current month, oh and btw the ip address, machine, firmware in question is xxxxxx, that would go over with all of us wayyyyy better than what has happened. Maybe I grew up in an area of the world where we are taught to be much less trustworthy than some of you, and that is why it appears to us that you are blindly following.

I guess maybe I am hoping for too much, but for someone who claims to have an extensive past in the banking industry, something like this would exactly be in place.

Actually, I totally understand the argument for such attacks not being accepted as the norm, but that one happened to slush can not make the pool responsible for such an attack happening. You also need to know that this pool mining phenomenon is not even a decade old, so is still evolving, and in most aspects, slush is the leader in improvements to the protocol. I am confident that future block with-holding attacks, on any pool going forward, will be easier to detect on the back of the fantastic work the slushpool team put to identifying the attack on the pool.

That said, we as miners can not expect to have our cake and eat it at the same time, and that is with regard to expecting the pools to re-imburse us when they are the victim of, for example a with-holding attack, but then demand low to no fees for mining at the pool. Insurance policies have a cost and that would inevitably have to be met by the miners, which would mean an increase in fees.

Bottom line, we are where we are, and slush can not be blamed for being attacked. The pool is one of the most resillient on the network as was demonstrated during the recent DDoS attacks targeting pools / nodes voting for BIP101, but block with-holding attacks, as has been demonstrated, are not easily detectable ..... well, it had to come to pass for it to get on the radar.

Now, unless you believe slush should have a crystal ball to know what kind of threat / attack is next on the horizon, I'll take their word for what it truly is worth over some opinion that has been pumped up based on false information by a dishonest pool op fishing for miners.

[bittalc1]

Do you even realize that none of us speaking are pool operators (other than ck)?  All I have been saying is, just because it was okay in the past for pools to have the mentality of "oh well, we had a block withholding attack, nothing we can do about it." ----Does not mean here in 2016--- with difficulty being so high, and virtually every home/hobby miner resorting to mining in a pool because of the centralization of hashrate, that it should still be accepted; nor the norm.

You would expect an OG pool such as slush to understand this more than anyone, and maybe, to have a reserve set aside from his fees, to say something to the effect of "hey guys, we just had a withholding attack, but I set apart an insurance policy wallet for just the occasion, you will not be paid out based on the average amount of blocks we find a day for the current month, oh and btw the ip address, machine, firmware in question is xxxxxx, that would go over with all of us wayyyyy better than what has happened. Maybe I grew up in an area of the world where we are taught to be much less trustworthy than some of you, and that is why it appears to us that you are blindly following.

I guess maybe I am hoping for too much, but for someone who claims to have an extensive past in the banking industry, something like this would exactly be in place.

Actually, I totally understand the argument for such attacks not being accepted as the norm, but that one happened to slush can not make the pool responsible for such an attack happening. You also need to know that this pool mining phenomenon is not even a decade old, so is still evolving, and in most aspects, slush is the leader in improvements to the protocol. I am confident that future block with-holding attacks, on any pool going forward, will be easier to detect on the back of the fantastic work the slushpool team put to identifying the attack on the pool.

That said, we as miners can not expect to have our cake and eat it at the same time, and that is with regard to expecting the pools to re-imburse us when they are the victim of, for example a with-holding attack, but then demand low to no fees for mining at the pool. Insurance policies have a cost and that would inevitably have to be met by the miners, which would mean an increase in fees.

Bottom line, we are where we are, and slush can not be blamed for being attacked. The pool is one of the most resillient on the network as was demonstrated during the recent DDoS attacks targeting pools / nodes voting for BIP101, but block with-holding attacks, as has been demonstrated, are not easily detectable ..... well, it had to come to pass for it to get on the radar.

Now, unless you believe slush should have a crystal ball to know what kind of threat / attack is next on the horizon, I'll take their word for what it truly is worth over some opinion that has been pumped up based on false information by a dishonest pool op fishing for miners.

Omg man you have no proof of anything and yet still you shiil about them! How much BTC did slush paid you to shill here? Wtf is going on in your brain if he did not paid anything... Im sorry if i insult you, but we lost money hello money because we trusted him! And yet without proof you still make him honorable and you try to bring points up for him! I really dont understand you...

[mettalmag]

I remember the first design of pools webpage, I was mining there for cople month. Last year I returneturned and its great, nothing else to say

[pekatete]

Omg man you have no proof of anything and yet still you shiil about them! How much BTC did slush paid you to shill here? Wtf is going on in your brain if he did not paid anything... Im sorry if i insult you, but we lost money hello money because we trusted him! And yet without proof you still make him honorable and you try to bring points up for him! I really dont understand you...

I do feel for you if you actually lost money (even if you only think or believe that you lost money, I still feel for you), however my point is simple, slush DID NOT steal it from you, that much everyone knows. Actually, I am not sure ANYONE has what you percieve to have been stolen from you as a block with-holding attack does not necessarily mean the attacker actually kept the block reward to themselves.

What is beyond any shred of doubt though is that slush is an honest (and if you want honorable) pool operator, and his pool was a VICTIM of the block with-holding attack. Now, if you want me to join you in badgering and castigating slushpool for being a victim, I kindly refuse. Unless by mistaken identity, it is abominable in any culture, law or natural justice to victimise a victim, and to see a quack, slow cooking heist pool operator attempting to aid the victimisation through plain dishonesty is diabolical (for lack of a better word).

To paraphrase a famous American politician:
1. That you lost money as a result of the block with-holding attack is a known unknown.
2. That slushpool was a victim of a block with-holding attack is a known known.
So there ... that's what's going on in my brain since you asked.

[sloopy]

d57heinz : unfortunately you cant talk logically to those of low IQ such as pekatete. just look at his lack of trust rating. If he wants to continue to mine on slush and throw away his money/profits to a lying thieving pool operator then let him.

Pekatete: how about you actually shutting up for once and reading posts and forming intelligent responses instead of mindless blind following of a pool owner that has led you all around by you johnsons as he steals from you by overcharging for pool fees and for allowing the withholding attack to happen and not revealing who did it and what miner/software they were using.

Amazing how this "miner" has been identified yet hasn't been reveled. Makes one think why he/she/them haven't been identified to the public. or why themselves haven't come on here and apologized. My thoughts is that the "attacker" and slush were working together or the attacker was slush himself. why not toss a miner on the pool and get paid for work he hasn't done. O that's right that's what hes doing right now with his outrageous pool fee, getting paid for doing nothing. for the fees he charges he should be on here posting constantly.

In my opinion, negative trust ratings should be evaluated and researched if you are going to choose to use them to base your belief in what someone states. Trust ratings are gamed by too many people on this forum. Pekatete was unfairly targeted by dogie to get the ones from dogie. Dogie is looked down on by the real forum members with the titles of Legendary or Hero who have brains. They simply avoid the public arguments because they became bored, or realized he is an immature child.
Excuse my off-topic post there, but it bothers me to see people try to promote trust ratings as a valid measurement for someones honesty or sincerity when they are constantly abused. In summary, trust ratings, titles of hero or legendary, or any other quick gauge of someone posting here is not accurate at all. The only thing it can be is a data point to be used in evaluating someone. IT is the content of their posts and actions over a long period of time that you should consider. If their posts never reference facts, and are basic reposts where they take the same thing they previously stated and rehash it then the agenda should be obvious.

On topic though, when I initially came to this forum I believed Pekatete had somewhat of a handle on what he was doing. Unfortunately after doing more research and spending time reading every word he has posted within the last year it is obvious he does not have a real understanding of mining, equipment, mining politics, or basic common sense. He lives in a world of his own making, and even the people he defends have privately wished he did not. The usual story I hear from those people is that his statements are based on nothing. He picks one or two things and bases an entire statement on those items rather than considering an entire list of facts. You cannot make an unbiased comment when you start with an imagined reality. The reason this is on topic is because of how he pops in now and argues with anyone saying anything negative about slush using the same tired tirade discussing a few days of luck. If luck is the basis lets talk about the luck I have been fortunate to participate in for the past year at 103%+.
Luck is not the end-all gauge of a pool's success, but Pekatete will take exception to how luck is calculated without any facts. I challenge anyone to find a fact his comments are based on before CK splits out the comments again.

I hope Slush has gotten things worked out, and I don't think he intentionally stole anything. I do not have facts to say things are working correctly. Mining is not short term for most, and it will take a few months to make a case one way or the other based on an accumulation of statistics. People mining at Slush reading this forum have heard the same things stated many times so continuing to make requests which will never be satisfied is wasting your time. I learned this all to well from F2pool. That doesn't mean there are not ways to inform people and make sure newer miners are educated regarding risks. PMs are extremely valuable and there are other threads where these people can become informed without the silly antics of Pekatete constantly using his factless bashing of kano.is when to anyone with any time here can see it is pure jealousy which drives him.

I have zero intention of mining at slush again and like most I like the layout of the website and several other things about the pool. I simply hated the payout amounts and the lack of a forum presence. I do not like facebook and having to post there to see what is happening or communicate is not my idea of a well ran pool.

Regarding the fact that slush created the stratum protocol I think is a fantastic landmark, but it is not a defining personality trait and does not mean that this pool is the best in any way. It is a ridiculous argument to make. IT is another data point to use when making your own judgment regarding where to mine. Not something to base the decision on. I think the best things to use are how do you get support, how successful has the pool been over a long period of time, and does the pool management's mining philosophy neutral or agreeable with  your own.

To me, even higher payouts should not trump your decision to support a pool which is making bitcoin related political decisions which are totally against your own beliefs. Transparency regarding those beliefs, such as supporting XT, Classic, or not, etc is huge if you care about bitcoin. If you are here to make a buck regardless of what the pool where you mine supports you are making short-sighted decisions. Speak with yourhashrate be it gigahash or petahash and support the pool based on that first and then bring the payments in at some point. Supposedly it all evens out over the long term. I suppose that depends on when and where you start and stop mining.

A 40 PH pool is nothing to sneeze at and for so many people it means everything, but I'd go back to the 1 PH sized kano.is any day because of my personal experience and how I rank pools. My way of ranking isn't going to be the same as everyone elses. My ability to accept variance is not the same either. I am happy we have these choices available. What is important is that you actually consider important attributes based on facts. If you listen to what someone is telling you, are their comments based on facts or just the same ol' ramblings?

If in doubt, you can always split hash across pools and compare for yourself but again, do not simply compare payouts for a week, compare a variety of things from support, presence, the things the pool management support, how quickly you receive assistance, what they do for the community over a long period of time, and payouts.
Some pool operators are way out of touch with the small miners and some have never even been on a social level with us.

The miners are a part of the pool, if it is a good pool. If miners are ignored then the pool management has gotten involved in more important things, at least more important as far as they are concerned.

IF Slush knows of a particular retail miner running a release version of firmware which is causing block with-holding then yes he damn sure should be letting everyone know. If it was custom firmware by one miner then as long as the pool Ops know I am good with that because I trust my pool Op to address it.

[krisgt30]

Pekatete:
You do understand principles of leadership in an industry correct? Companies that are thought to be leaders should lead through innovation by providing offerings or solutions that are not yet provided by other companies. In this case pools. If slush really cared about being a trailbazer, he wouldn't maintain the status quo of "oh well we had a withholding attack", he would do something different and innovative that would make everyone happy and help change the landscape of the mining world. By him not doing anything, it makes it perfectly fine for any other pool to follow suit. Those are just my two cents.

[pekatete]

Pekatete:
You do understand principles of leadership in an industry correct? Companies that are thought to be leaders should lead through innovation by providing offerings or solutions that are not yet provided by other companies. In this case pools. If slush really cared about being a trailbazer, he wouldn't maintain the status quo of "oh well we had a withholding attack", he would do something different and innovative that would make everyone happy and help change the landscape of the mining world. By him not doing anything, it makes it perfectly fine for any other pool to follow suit. Those are just my two cents.

I am sure that you'll be benefiting from the hard work that the slushpool team put into detecting the with-holding attack, which-ever pool you decide to mine at in the future. If that is not enough innovation for you, that should not form the basis of accussing slush of dishonesty as the two (things) are not related.

[bittalc1]

Pekatete:
You do understand principles of leadership in an industry correct? Companies that are thought to be leaders should lead through innovation by providing offerings or solutions that are not yet provided by other companies. In this case pools. If slush really cared about being a trailbazer, he wouldn't maintain the status quo of "oh well we had a withholding attack", he would do something different and innovative that would make everyone happy and help change the landscape of the mining world. By him not doing anything, it makes it perfectly fine for any other pool to follow suit. Those are just my two cents.

I am sure that you'll be benefiting from the hard work that the slushpool team put into detecting the with-holding attack, which-ever pool you decide to mine at in the future. If that is not enough innovation for you, that should not form the basis of accussing slush of dishonesty as the two (things) are not related.

So just let me simplesizeit for you.. How much does slush pay you?!!

[pekatete]

So just let me simplesizeit for you.. How much does slush pay you?!!

Don't be such a simpleton ... how much did YOU lose in the block with-holding attack?

[Herv12]

Hello,

The question is not whether an attack may be good or bad for the pool manager (I have the same opinion as pekatete on that) but whether this with-hold attack has really taken place!

If slush had increased the power displayed his pool for exemple +10PH (no one can know if the indication is true), it dims the incomes of miners and pool keeps the difference.

He only needs to find an credible excuse such as a problem of withholding to justify the poor results and voila, neither seen nor known!

The problem is, that to my knowledge, slush has not proved that it was indeed an withholding attack.

Everyone is free to believe him or not...

[pekatete]

The question is not whether an attack may be good or bad for the pool manager (I have the same opinion as pekatete on that) but whether this with-hold attack has really taken place!

Phew, thats a relief! Somebody actually has an opinion congruent to mine on at least one aspect.

If slush had increased the power displayed his pool for exemple +10PH (no one can know if the indication is true), it dims the incomes of miners and pool keeps the difference.

I fundamentally dis-agree with this, both in terms of the motive for slush to "lie" about the hashing power of the pool, and in terms of dimming / reducing the incomes of miners. For example, if a pool displays its hash power as 30PH when it is actually 20PH
1. The pool will only be earning circa 20PH worth of rewards
2. The pool will report lower luck because it is only earning 20PH worth, which is less than what is computed for 30PH
3. The miners will only be paid what the pool has earned
4. Miners will STILL be earning proportionately to their real hash power and therefore will NOT loose anything.

Unless you are saying that slush's setup is by far very superior to any other pool / mining operation on the network to an extent that he needs to fake his hash power so that pool luck reported is within the generally published values (but on this accassion something went wrong), then your assertion is flawed. I can not fathom any other plausible reason why slush would want to inflate the pool hash power.