[POT]PotCoin - Banking for the Legal Cannabis Industry ✦ ✦ ✦Grow With Us ✦ ✦ ✦

[rdyoung]

Ok im not really getting this. First I fully understand standard POS. But I clearly dont understand POSV. So I create 40 addresses , and then evenly divide my balance between them. So, then do I need to keep moving the coins around? IS more wallets better with much smaller balance in each one? Is 100 wallet addresses better than 40?  Im not getting this at all. I have about 20,000 POT, what should I do to get max rewards on this system, as I didnt get hardly any, and I hadnt unlocked it to stake in months.

Vegas

Ideally the wallet would split the coins for you. We are doing the manual splitting in multiple addresses to account for something the devs overlooked.
NO, you don't want to actively move coins around, let them sit and do their thing, everytime you move them you burn their coin age and the clock starts over.
Right now the network is still getting up to speed, if the code isn't borked, we should soon be seeing the correct stake rate.

[1714025192]

1714025192

[1714025192]

1714025192

[1714025192]

1714025192

[1714025192]

1714025192

[1714025192]

1714025192

[1714025192]

1714025192

[vegasguy]

Thank you for that!!! My only concern is those that are splitting manually have a major advantage over those of us that keep our funds in 1 wallet address. While guys like me wait for this fix, if I wanted to manually spilt the coins into many different wallets, I know how to make loads of new wallet addresess and move coins, but what else? Thats the part I dont get. People that are making 40 wallet addresses and moving their coins are losing all of their coin age and weight, so I dont see how they are making this work!??!?

I know that POSV is "proof of stake velocity" as has to do with moving coins to generate stake, but then at the same time , the coin weight resets back to 0 when moved. Very confusing.

Vegas

[rdyoung]

Thank you for that!!! My only concern is those that are splitting manually have a major advantage over those of us that keep our funds in 1 wallet address. While guys like me wait for this fix, if I wanted to manually spilt the coins into many different wallets, I know how to make loads of new wallet addresess and move coins, but what else? Thats the part I dont get. People that are making 40 wallet addresses and moving their coins are losing all of their coin age and weight, so I dont see how they are making this work!??!?

I know that POSV is "proof of stake velocity" as has to do with moving coins to generate stake, but then at the same time , the coin weight resets back to 0 when moved. Very confusing.

Vegas

The velocity has to do with the rate at which the coins age after they are moved. They mature at a faster rate than the standard 1:1 of other POS algos.
The first 2 weeks the coins gain age faster, after which they start to slowdown. This is incentive to actually transact in the coin as you know that your coins will age faster if they are moved.

Those of us that are doing a ton of individual addresses are NOT doing it for our gain, IE, we don't expect to make more coins staking this way from the beginning. We are doing to help get the network up to speed and minting a block every 40s on average like it should be.

POSv1.0 was designed so that the base rate was 5% with upwards of 6% possible if you staked 24/7/365. POSv2.0 splits the the total 5-6% of the total money supply with the coins actively staking. If 50% of the coins are active then the stake rate is 10%+.

[Cogitorium]

As a non tech guy who is in for the long haul, I'v learned a bunch about POSV from you guys, Thanks. I'm sure you can fill me in on my situation. I tried for quit a while to get a new wallet up and running before the official transition but was unsuccessful (not for lack of trying - to much teck speak for an idiot..bootstraps, dat files, deleting shit, ect). Finally,with the last wallet update it downloaded without incident. Of course by that time all my coins (1m+) were/are locked up on Cryptsy. My questions: 1) when does the coin age begin, when they are put into the wallet or when they were acquired. 2) when exchanges open again would it be best to stake my coins in one lump sum? I just keep wondering if all this turmoil is/was caused for the benefit of Devs and Major coin holders to get a staking advantage over the majority of coins in the system that can't stake.

[rdyoung]

As a non tech guy who is in for the long haul, I'v learned a bunch about POSV from you guys, Thanks. I'm sure you can fill me in on my situation. I tried for quit a while to get a new wallet up and running before the official transition but was unsuccessful (not for lack of trying - to much teck speak for an idiot..bootstraps, dat files, deleting shit, ect). Finally,with the last wallet update it downloaded without incident. Of course by that time all my coins (1m+) were/are locked up on Cryptsy. My questions: 1) when does the coin age begin, when they are put into the wallet or when they were acquired. 2) when exchanges open again would it be best to stake my coins in one lump sum? I just keep wondering if all this turmoil is/was caused for the benefit of Devs and Major coin holders to get a staking advantage over the majority of coins in the system that can't stake.

To answer your questions 1 at a time.

1) Coin age begins when you receive them in your local wallet.
2)Until the devs have addresses the split issue, this a moot point, any splitting done by you will eventually be undone by the wallet in up to 2mill chunks.

The only people who really benefit from this are the ones who are currently staking coins. As the # of coins actively staking grows, that early benefit will dwindle.
As for the major coin holders, look at the rich list on cryptoid, there is a good 25%+ of the supply that hasn't moved in so long we can only assume they are lost or in cold storage.

[jheaton]

in 1 chunk, 1mill was staking maybe 2pot/day... on the 31st made 15 addy's with 30 transactions (coin1, coin2, coin3 etc.), now 30-50 blocks/day and 10x the pot. Just sayin

[CartmanSPC]

Another update. I have mined a block on the old chain. It needs to mature, but its in my wallet
Now what do I with it?

I suppose the argument could be made that people are rejecting the change to PoSv. The POW chain is longer....I think it only has about 8Mh/s on it though? Not a whole lot...but their chain is longer. Only because it took a while to get PoSv working and now because of the splitting issue but still.

[rdyoung]

in 1 chunk, 1mill was staking maybe 2pot/day... on the 31st made 15 addy's with 30 transactions (coin1, coin2, coin3 etc.), now 30-50 blocks/day and 10x the pot. Just sayin

yeah, this is something the devs will have to look at. I am noticing the same thing, I have 2 addresses staking, aside from my mega wallet. 1 is 21k the other is 100k, the 21k is earning more % wise than the 100k. This is reason enough to adjust the split threshold. If we can get someone else aside from the devs to compile a wallet, we can start getting people to use it and get things moving like they should be.

[rdyoung]

Another update. I have mined a block on the old chain. It needs to mature, but its in my wallet
Now what do I with it?

I suppose the argument could be made that people are rejecting the change to PoSv. The POW chain is longer....I think it only has about 8Mh/s on it though? Not a whole lot...but their chain is longer. Only because it took a while to get PoSv working and now because of the splitting issue but still.

Spindoctor anyone

That argument could be made, but the truth is that there are like 10 wallets that didn't get the message and based on the hashrate, I would say that 1 or 2 tops are mining on it intentionally, everyone else is just unaware of the change, along with the 2-3 days that we were offline + the 600-800blocks/day we have been short.

[fonzerrellie]

Another update. I have mined a block on the old chain. It needs to mature, but its in my wallet
Now what do I with it?

I suppose the argument could be made that people are rejecting the change to PoSv. The POW chain is longer....I think it only has about 8Mh/s on it though? Not a whole lot...but their chain is longer. Only because it took a while to get PoSv working and now because of the splitting issue but still.

Spindoctor anyone

That argument could be made, but the truth is that there are like 10 wallets that didn't get the message and based on the hashrate, I would say that 1 or 2 tops are mining on it intentionally, everyone else is just unaware of the change, along with the 2-3 days that we were offline + the 600-800blocks/day we have been short.

 it only has 8 m/h's and cartman is saying "people are rejecting it"  lol trying to cause a dump much? there might be nobody intentionally mining it they might all be "on auto pilot"

on another note my 60 addresses are humming along nicely, at any given time I have 15+ pos finds confirming

[CartmanSPC]

If we can get someone else aside from the devs to compile a wallet, we can start getting people to use it and get things moving like they should be.

I could real quick but your the only one who responded with what we should change the values to 

[rdyoung]

If we can get someone else aside from the devs to compile a wallet, we can start getting people to use it and get things moving like they should be.

I could real quick but your the only one who responded with what we should change the values to  

10k is a good value to start. As I said above, my 21k address is doing better than my 100k % wise.
Not sure why, theoretically speaking, it should be the same.

We do also need a windows wallet compiled to be distributed. When I have time, I will see if I can't work out how to compile an exe myself and get it running for my own coins. If that works, we can start letting people know that we have linux and windows wallets available with a lower threshold.

[rdyoung]

Another update. I have mined a block on the old chain. It needs to mature, but its in my wallet
Now what do I with it?

I suppose the argument could be made that people are rejecting the change to PoSv. The POW chain is longer....I think it only has about 8Mh/s on it though? Not a whole lot...but their chain is longer. Only because it took a while to get PoSv working and now because of the splitting issue but still.

Spindoctor anyone

That argument could be made, but the truth is that there are like 10 wallets that didn't get the message and based on the hashrate, I would say that 1 or 2 tops are mining on it intentionally, everyone else is just unaware of the change, along with the 2-3 days that we were offline + the 600-800blocks/day we have been short.

 it only has 8 m/h's and cartman is saying "people are rejecting it"  lol trying to cause a dump much? there might be nobody intentionally mining it they might all be "on auto pilot"

on another note my 60 addresses are humming along nicely, at any given time I have 15+ pos finds confirming

Thats not what he is saying at all. Thats why I referenced "spin doctors".  He said that the argument could be made that that is the case, just as I could argue that john lennon was the devil, you can make any argument you want if you have facts to twist to meet your point of view and the skill level to do it.

Notice he also said that the chain is longer simply because of the time it took to get POSv up and running properly. If we had transitioned smoothly and the network was averaging 40s/block, the 2 chains would be in a close race.

[CartmanSPC]

Based on simple division/ratios. I would say that 10k is a good round # for the split threshold. How did I get there? 2million split for a coin with 21billion in circulation, pot has 211million, 1/100th of reddcoin, take the 2million divide by 100 gives you 20k, drop it to 10k because it sounds like a better # .

I can attempt to compile for windows if I can get cygwin installed, I tried the other day and it kept failing, I think win10's networking drivers are borked.

Wait...doesn't POT have a Max supply of: 420 million

...at least that's what it says on the OP.

[rdyoung]

Based on simple division/ratios. I would say that 10k is a good round # for the split threshold. How did I get there? 2million split for a coin with 21billion in circulation, pot has 211million, 1/100th of reddcoin, take the 2million divide by 100 gives you 20k, drop it to 10k because it sounds like a better # .

I can attempt to compile for windows if I can get cygwin installed, I tried the other day and it kept failing, I think win10's networking drivers are borked.

Wait...doesn't POT have a Max supply of: 420 million

...at least that's what it says on the OP.

The max supply is just a # in the code, that # can be changed at will by the devs.
The max supply is also not what we need to base the split on, it needs to be based on the coins currently in circulation. That is why I used rdd as the basis, 21billion SUPPLY versus 211million supply for pot.

I still say 10k is a good round # to start with. It will give us room to figure out if it should be raised or lowered.

[CartmanSPC]

Made a change in the source to reduce the max split from 2mil to 20K:

https://github.com/CartmanSPC/Potcoin/commit/2565767d115867bcc37fe20963f41ce305558630

Heading out for a few hours but will post a compiled Linux wallet upon my return. If someone has instructions on how to compile a Windows version please post.

Note: This is a test. Although it should not cause any problems or lost coin be warned that you are using it at your own risk.

If we find the new value works then I will issue a pull request to the main code.

[jheaton]

Made a change in the source to reduce the max split from 2mil to 20K:

https://github.com/CartmanSPC/Potcoin/commit/2565767d115867bcc37fe20963f41ce305558630

Heading out for a few hours but will post a compiled Linux wallet upon my return. If someone has instructions on how to compile a Windows version please post.

Note: This is a test. Although it should not cause any problems or lost coin be warned that you are using it at your own risk.

If we find the new value works then I will issue a pull request to the main code.

it was that easy? so what should we expect with the new #'s?

[rdyoung]

Made a change in the source to reduce the max split from 2mil to 20K:

https://github.com/CartmanSPC/Potcoin/commit/2565767d115867bcc37fe20963f41ce305558630

Heading out for a few hours but will post a compiled Linux wallet upon my return. If someone has instructions on how to compile a Windows version please post.

Note: This is a test. Although it should not cause any problems or lost coin be warned that you are using it at your own risk.

If we find the new value works then I will issue a pull request to the main code.

it was that easy? so what should we expect with the new #'s?

You need to be running a wallet that has those #s as part of the source, we all don't benefit just because he will test a local wallet he compiled himself.

As to what can be expected, we should see those with 40k+ balances staking multiple blocks rather than 1 giant one. This means that people with 1million+ balances should see 50+ blocks actively staking, this will make the network more secure and smooth out the block times.

[jheaton]

oh, i didn't realize.

[fher98]

Made a change in the source to reduce the max split from 2mil to 20K:

https://github.com/CartmanSPC/Potcoin/commit/2565767d115867bcc37fe20963f41ce305558630

Heading out for a few hours but will post a compiled Linux wallet upon my return. If someone has instructions on how to compile a Windows version please post.

Note: This is a test. Although it should not cause any problems or lost coin be warned that you are using it at your own risk.

If we find the new value works then I will issue a pull request to the main code.

it was that easy? so what should we expect with the new #'s?

You need to be running a wallet that has those #s as part of the source, we all don't benefit just because he will test a local wallet he compiled himself.

As to what can be expected, we should see those with 40k+ balances staking multiple blocks rather than 1 giant one. This means that people with 1million+ balances should see 50+ blocks actively staking, this will make the network more secure and smooth out the block times.

Is it possible for the devs to merge this hack? Or will they just ignore it?