Re: Mining pools list

[c1010010]

I say have a separate thread.

I happen to think it is a viable currency and, while not on the same level as BTC, it is real.

Having two threads would clean up the BTC pool thread and make people better find what they want.

I don't see a downside.

[Graet]

If you would please add in a new one I've found particularly nice for LiteCoin: www.CrypDough.com

Currency: LiteCoin [LTC]
Pool: www.CrypDough.com
Pool Fee: 0.5%
Payout Type: PPLNS
Extras:  Fantastic interface, useful chrome extension, very open and honest owner.

Reward innovation:
See:

Interesting question - should we add LTC pools or have a separate sticky for them? I can't really fit any more columns in, so if we include them in the OP as another section, it could get rather large and unwieldy. Plus I don't do stats for LTC pools (just yet, I aim to at some point) so I can't add them to the hashrate list.

Opinions?

Bitcoin Forum > Bitcoin > Mining > Pools
The Bitcoin forum was good enough to allow an alt-currency subforum, alt currency stuff should be there

[AskMiners.com]

Pool owners contact me in order to get your pools listed at AskMiners.com pool lists...

[Graet]

Pool owners contact me in order to get your pools listed at AskMiners.com pool lists...

why?
There is a comprehensive list at the beginning of this thread and your site is inaccurate and opinionated...

[AskMiners.com]

Pool owners contact me in order to get your pools listed at AskMiners.com pool lists...

why?
There is a comprehensive list at the beginning of this thread and your site is inaccurate and opinionated...

Well I agree with you but it's also an free advertisement so some pools might get new miners from being listed on my site...

[kinlo]

Pool owners contact me in order to get your pools listed at AskMiners.com pool lists...

why?
There is a comprehensive list at the beginning of this thread and your site is inaccurate and opinionated...

Well I agree with you but it's also an free advertisement so some pools might get new miners from being listed on my site...

So what you're saying is that you agree that your site is inaccurate, opinionated, and also incomplete, but you still want poolops to contact you to be added on your site, while you already have all information from this thread.  So you're too lazy to copy the data from this thread, and your website is no good, and you agree with that.  I don't really see why we should contact you....

[organofcorti]

Updated. Please let me know if there are any errors or omissions.

[Balthazar]

pool.itzod.ru no longer provides JSON-RPC interface. Only stratum is available from now.

[organofcorti]

pool.itzod.ru no longer provides JSON-RPC interface. Only stratum is available from now.

Fixed!

[organofcorti]

Updated. Please post if there are any errors.

[nibor]

Any chance of adding in a section that details the fee rules used by each pool?

Although this is not totally relevant for most pools to the miners (as the pools generally keep the fees) it is relevant to site operators to understand what the fee rules are used by each pool.

This is especially relevant now we have 0.8.2 with the dust (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/2577) and change from 0.0005 -> 0.0001 that mining pools may or may not implement.

[DrG]

Updated. Please post if there are any errors.

BTCGuild PPS fee went from 5% --> 7.5% well over a a week ago, surprised nobody mentioned it here for correction.

[organofcorti]

Updated. Please post if there are any errors.

BTCGuild PPS fee went from 5% --> 7.5% well over a a week ago, surprised nobody mentioned it here for correction.

Thanks DrG - fixed.

[organofcorti]

Any chance of adding in a section that details the fee rules used by each pool?

Although this is not totally relevant for most pools to the miners (as the pools generally keep the fees) it is relevant to site operators to understand what the fee rules are used by each pool.

This is especially relevant now we have 0.8.2 with the dust (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/2577) and change from 0.0005 -> 0.0001 that mining pools may or may not implement.

Started to do this before the hard fork - maybe now is the time to bring it up again?

[os2sam]

Any chance of adding in a section that details the fee rules used by each pool?

Although this is not totally relevant for most pools to the miners (as the pools generally keep the fees) it is relevant to site operators to understand what the fee rules are used by each pool.

This is especially relevant now we have 0.8.2 with the dust (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/2577) and change from 0.0005 -> 0.0001 that mining pools may or may not implement.

Started to do this before the hard fork - maybe now is the time to bring it up again?

Is he/you referring to the block size policy for each pool?  The fee and block size policy are related so that would be nice for someone to resume.  But make it a separate thread I would think.

[organofcorti]

Any chance of adding in a section that details the fee rules used by each pool?

Although this is not totally relevant for most pools to the miners (as the pools generally keep the fees) it is relevant to site operators to understand what the fee rules are used by each pool.

This is especially relevant now we have 0.8.2 with the dust (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/2577) and change from 0.0005 -> 0.0001 that mining pools may or may not implement.

Started to do this before the hard fork - maybe now is the time to bring it up again?

Is he/you referring to the block size policy for each pool?  The fee and block size policy are related so that would be nice for someone to resume.  But make it a separate thread I would think.

Yes, I consider them similar issues. I also agree on another  thread being appropriate. Not how it should be done though.

[os2sam]

Any chance of adding in a section that details the fee rules used by each pool?

Although this is not totally relevant for most pools to the miners (as the pools generally keep the fees) it is relevant to site operators to understand what the fee rules are used by each pool.

This is especially relevant now we have 0.8.2 with the dust (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/2577) and change from 0.0005 -> 0.0001 that mining pools may or may not implement.

Started to do this before the hard fork - maybe now is the time to bring it up again?

Is he/you referring to the block size policy for each pool?  The fee and block size policy are related so that would be nice for someone to resume.  But make it a separate thread I would think.

Yes, I consider them similar issues. I also agree on another  thread being appropriate. Not how it should be done though.

Pools would have to volunteer the information.

Doing research like Mr. Hearne was doing and posting the pools information without their input was prone to a high margin for error and wasn't fair to the pools.

[organofcorti]

Updated. Please post if there are any errors.

[nibor]

Regarding the fee rules thread I think the table should contain the following settings for each pool:

• bitcoind version - the version they are using to build/validate blocks
• blockminsize - this is the minimum block size they will create (I assume always zero?)
• blockmaxsize - this is the maximum block size they will create (default is 250k)
• blockprioritysize - this is the size dedicated to low priority/fee tx's (default is 27k)
• mintxfee - the minimum tx fee to include in majority of block (default 0.0005)
• mintxrelayfee - not sure this is relevent to pools as they already have the tx??
• Other - any other unique/special features of their tx selection process

Only other thing that would be interesting would be some stats that the pool operators might collect:
Average min priority to be included.
Average fee to be included.
etc...

Everyone agree with this list?

[organofcorti]

Regarding the fee rules thread I think the table should contain the following settings for each pool:

• bitcoind version - the version they are using to build/validate blocks
• blockminsize - this is the minimum block size they will create (I assume always zero?)
• blockmaxsize - this is the maximum block size they will create (default is 250k)
• blockprioritysize - this is the size dedicated to low priority/fee tx's (default is 27k)
• mintxfee - the minimum tx fee to include in majority of block (default 0.0005)
• mintxrelayfee - not sure this is relevent to pools as they already have the tx??
• Other - any other unique/special features of their tx selection process

Only other thing that would be interesting would be some stats that the pool operators might collect:
Average min priority to be included.
Average fee to be included.
etc...

Everyone agree with this list?

Sounds good, although feedback from pool ops is paramount since we need their input. We'll see how it goes here - if you get no responses I'll post a thread addressed to the pool ops.