Bitcoin Forum
April 25, 2017, 10:47:12 PM *
News: If the forum does not load normally for you, please send me a traceroute.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 ... 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 [248] 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [14000Th] Eligius: 0% Fee BTC, 105% PPS NMC, No registration, CPPSRB  (Read 873869 times)
This is a self-moderated topic. If you do not want to be moderated by the person who started this topic, create a new topic.
wizkid057
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1198


View Profile
May 10, 2016, 06:48:51 AM
 #4941

266.16936134 BTC in manual payments applied to balances from tx fae760f4fcab13ab5f596b61167ded5dc823ee624a6f6a59fa6d42f11ed2bb18

Tips: 1LDQrLr6dPVqNJmpZm82eZVKqDFRk7ERW8
Operator of the Eligius Mining Pool - 0% Fee, SAPPLNS, GBT, Stratum, IRC+Phone Support, Share Market (coming soon), Generation payouts, and more.
Don't feed the trolls. Science Confirms: Internet Trolls Really Are Narcissistic, Psychopathic, and Sadistic (1)
1493160432
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1493160432

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1493160432
Reply with quote  #2

1493160432
Report to moderator
1493160432
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1493160432

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1493160432
Reply with quote  #2

1493160432
Report to moderator
1493160432
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1493160432

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1493160432
Reply with quote  #2

1493160432
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1493160432
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1493160432

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1493160432
Reply with quote  #2

1493160432
Report to moderator
canford
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 87


View Profile
May 10, 2016, 08:28:42 AM
 #4942

Thanks wk.  Sorry you get besieged every time the queue gets long.  I'm still mining with Eligius, even though with my electric rate it doesn't make financial sense.  But I like supporting bitcoin, and I like supporting Eligius, so what the heck.
luffy
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 606



View Profile
May 10, 2016, 11:07:02 AM
 #4943

266.16936134 BTC in manual payments applied to balances from tx fae760f4fcab13ab5f596b61167ded5dc823ee624a6f6a59fa6d42f11ed2bb18
this was a big trust booster  Grin
and the queue has one block, nice!
Xevious75
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 14


View Profile
May 11, 2016, 10:44:34 AM
 #4944

Congratulations on keeping positive Whizkid!

Ignore the whiners, you have proved yourself as both honourable and trustworthy too many times. The veteran/supporting miners and those that understand that variance means 'have multiple miners at more than one pool dumb arse!' will still be around for the next manual pay out.

My thanks and keep up the good work!



I totally support that.
I'm not quite a veteran or a business-oriented miner, yet even as a small, hobby-oriented miner I care and find wiz's efforts and attitude to be superlative.
Keep up the good work!
BCwinning
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 616


View Profile
May 13, 2016, 12:19:14 PM
 #4945

Modify the subject to show what the actual hashrate is on your pool.
It hasn't been 14000TH in 3 plus months. more like 5.
Quite deceptive. But you'll delete this too because it doesn't have anything to do with your pool or thread.

https://www.rixty.com?ref=1337507 sign up for rixty
privacy, it does the body good.
Official Bitcoin Foundation Secretariat
The New World Order thanks you for your support of Bitcoin and encourages your continuing support so that they may track your expenditures easier.
noobtrader
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1036



View Profile
May 14, 2016, 05:41:54 PM
 #4946

i wish i can stay mining, but im afraid after halving i will have to retire and repurpose my btc miner...   btw Thanks to Whizkid and Luke jr  for this awesome mining pool.


"...I suspect we need a better incentive for users to run nodes instead of relying solely on altruism...",  satoshi@vistomail.com
klondike_bar
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1470

ASIC wannabe


View Profile
May 14, 2016, 05:54:38 PM
 #4947

I've asked before, and i understand its not necessarily the perogative of whizkid, but I think this pool should have a voting mechanism like slush/mining.cz

Id like to be able to show support (even if its only ~20TH) for a larger blocksize, via btc-classic or a blocksize-supportive BIP, without the mess of an account such as on slush's pool

ps: is it possible to get hashrate charts that are more than just 7 days long? It would be really cool to see my hashrate for a few months (better to judge hydro bills and downtime), if not the entire duration of mining at eligius

24" PCI-E cables with 16AWG wires and stripped ends - great for server PSU mods, best prices https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=563461 also selling 6" M-F-M PCIe splitters and PCIe-PCIe
No longer a wannabe - now an ASIC owner!
Luke-Jr
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2142



View Profile
May 14, 2016, 08:08:14 PM
 #4948

Miners simply do NOT vote on hardforks, no matter how much some might pretend they do.

klondike_bar
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1470

ASIC wannabe


View Profile
May 14, 2016, 09:42:18 PM
 #4949

Miners simply do NOT vote on hardforks, no matter how much some might pretend they do.

welp, this is the point where the thread veers off topic.  Undecided

lets start with what i said i wanted to do, which is to have the option of mining blocks with specific flags (lets call it a sub-pool) if the block is solved with my specific hash:   
Id like to be able to show support ... for a larger blocksize, via btc-classic or a blocksize-supportive BIP
I'm not sure how technically easy it is to do, or if it can be implemented without having to break eligius into two even-smaller pools - but if its possible id like to, because:

Transaction volume is rising, and blocks are full (even if that includes no-fee/tiny-fee "dust/spam/micropayments/junk/etc") and the recommended fees are slowly increasing. Thats natural and I beleive a fee market will exist whether implemented through a small "maxblocksize" or by some miners simply refusing to process anything below a fee threshold. Common sense says that over time a larger TPS is needed to provide fees to miners and handle an internet worth of daily transactions/settlements. The assumption (reality?) is that a blocksize increase *should* be implemented via hardfork, and tat is done by mining either through a different client (such as classic and its 2MB code) or by implementing the relevant BIP into the BTC/Core thats running.

Ergo, it appears that by solving blocks with the desired client/BIP, you increase the "percentage of global hashrate" that supports the rule by 0.1% (assuming its based on 1000 blocks). If enough blocks are solved this way (a supermajority, be it 750/1000 or 950/1000) a change is triggered. Thats the change I want to make happen if i solve any blocks with my hashrate

Assuming the above is all tecnically correct (please let me know if not), then "hashrate = a say in the matter". It might not technically be a "vote" because its an ongoing system with no specific start or end that could enable a final, specific tally or "vote", but it seems that solved blocks are what determines the future of the protocol.

Miners=hashrate=solved blocks=supermajority=hardfork


I also want to add that pools are not miners, as any control they have over the pooled hashrate is temporary based on which pool the equipment owner (miner) decides to connect to. As such, it is brash to assume that pool operators are miners/"votes" except through hardware they personally own.

I like eligius - its simple, requires no login, and has never given me problems. But I think what slush/mining.cz is doing with its OPTIONAL voting is smart and something eligius might benefit from

24" PCI-E cables with 16AWG wires and stripped ends - great for server PSU mods, best prices https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=563461 also selling 6" M-F-M PCIe splitters and PCIe-PCIe
No longer a wannabe - now an ASIC owner!
wizkid057
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1198


View Profile
May 14, 2016, 09:53:50 PM
 #4950

The point is that it doesn't matter what miners "vote" on for a hardfork. All miners could decide that we're going back to 50 BTC block rewards and mine away... Unfortunately no client will be on that chain.  Its the network as a whole that needs to accept a hardfork, not just miners.

In short, I have no intention of wasting resources implementing pointless miner voting on hardfork stuff. Its misinformation publicity nonsense to get attention which I want no part of.

Tips: 1LDQrLr6dPVqNJmpZm82eZVKqDFRk7ERW8
Operator of the Eligius Mining Pool - 0% Fee, SAPPLNS, GBT, Stratum, IRC+Phone Support, Share Market (coming soon), Generation payouts, and more.
Don't feed the trolls. Science Confirms: Internet Trolls Really Are Narcissistic, Psychopathic, and Sadistic (1)
smaxz
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 340


VeganAcademy


View Profile
May 15, 2016, 12:49:44 AM
 #4951

why not just use a pool running a classic client?

its like going to a ford dealership to buy a car but asking them to put fiat badges on it before driving off the lot.

- NGdTwHRSdnThdi1drQuHGT3khAHRtZ1HMq -
klondike_bar
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1470

ASIC wannabe


View Profile
May 15, 2016, 12:53:43 AM
 #4952

The point is that it doesn't matter what miners "vote" on for a hardfork. All miners could decide that we're going back to 50 BTC block rewards and mine away... Unfortunately no client will be on that chain.  Its the network as a whole that needs to accept a hardfork, not just miners.

In short, I have no intention of wasting resources implementing pointless miner voting on hardfork stuff. Its misinformation publicity nonsense to get attention which I want no part of.

Thats fair enough - though i dont necessarily agree. Unfortunately, the software puts miners in the drivers seat whether people like it or not now that it shows signs of centralization. but they are the only ones who can cause a hardfork, wallets dont get a [mathematically-demonstrated/enforced] vote

24" PCI-E cables with 16AWG wires and stripped ends - great for server PSU mods, best prices https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=563461 also selling 6" M-F-M PCIe splitters and PCIe-PCIe
No longer a wannabe - now an ASIC owner!
wizkid057
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1198


View Profile
May 15, 2016, 01:16:32 AM
 #4953

The point is that it doesn't matter what miners "vote" on for a hardfork. All miners could decide that we're going back to 50 BTC block rewards and mine away... Unfortunately no client will be on that chain.  Its the network as a whole that needs to accept a hardfork, not just miners.

In short, I have no intention of wasting resources implementing pointless miner voting on hardfork stuff. Its misinformation publicity nonsense to get attention which I want no part of.

Thats fair enough - though i dont necessarily agree. Unfortunately, the software puts miners in the drivers seat whether people like it or not now that it shows signs of centralization. but they are the only ones who can cause a hardfork, wallets dont get a [mathematically-demonstrated/enforced] vote

A the risk of derailing the thread, I really think you, and many many others, completely misunderstand how a hard fork actually works.

In the past there have been several "soft" forks in which miners could actually "vote" per se.  The reason this works is because pretty much all clients/merchants/services/etc could work with the new changes one way or another regardless of whether or not they upgraded.

A hard fork is something completely different.  *EVERYONE* participating in the functions of the network must change their client software for a hard fork to take effect.  Not just miners, not just merchants/users/services/etc.  *EVERYONE*.  I'll restate the same example again to clarify a bit.  Let's say miners all vote and 85% of miners decide we're not halving the block reward at block 420000 and we're staying at 25 BTC for another four years.  OK, fine.  85% of the miners setup their code to do this, and they mine the first block that doesn't match the current chain.  Well, the other 15% of miners now control the network if every merchant/user/service/exchange/etc did not agree with the hard fork the miners had, and the difficulty will adjust downward on that side of the fork to compensate for the real network mining losing a substantial amount of hash power.  The original 85% of miners that voted on and adopted this miner-voted hard fork would basically be mining nothing since merchants and users aren't accepting their chain.

Again, for a hard fork it really makes zero difference what the miners decide.  A hard fork needs virtually 100% community consensus or things will go very wrong.  The propaganda spread by the various Bitcoin-altcoins (like XT and Classic) about miners somehow having a real say in this is just pure BS, plain and simple.  For a hard fork miners must adopt what the entire community adopts, meaning miners must mine what the users are using.  If they're not, they're just spinning their wheels pointlessly mining a coin and chain that no one will use.

The fact that other pools are using this as a way to attract people who don't know any better just shows either their own ignorance about the matter or their willingness to prey on the ignorant.  Either way, I'd steer clear, and Eligius will not be participating in such nonsense.

Tips: 1LDQrLr6dPVqNJmpZm82eZVKqDFRk7ERW8
Operator of the Eligius Mining Pool - 0% Fee, SAPPLNS, GBT, Stratum, IRC+Phone Support, Share Market (coming soon), Generation payouts, and more.
Don't feed the trolls. Science Confirms: Internet Trolls Really Are Narcissistic, Psychopathic, and Sadistic (1)
Luke-Jr
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2142



View Profile
May 15, 2016, 02:00:18 AM
 #4954

Unfortunately, the software puts miners in the drivers seat whether people like it or not now that it shows signs of centralization. but they are the only ones who can cause a hardfork, wallets dont get a [mathematically-demonstrated/enforced] vote
No. The software doesn't put miners in control of this, and they cannot cause nor enforce a hardfork.
If miners try to do that, they're just mining invalid blocks.

wizkid057 gets it.

TooDumbForBitcoin
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1096


View Profile
May 16, 2016, 10:00:51 AM
 #4955

 Well, the other 15% of miners now control the network if every merchant/user/service/exchange/etc did not agree with the hard fork the miners had, and the difficulty will adjust downward on that side of the fork to compensate for the real network mining losing a substantial amount of hash power.  The original 85% of miners that voted on and adopted this miner-voted hard fork would basically be mining nothing since merchants and users aren't accepting their chain.



I did not know that one merchant or user or service or exchange could forestall a hard fork approved of by all remaining parties.  Quite the concentration of power.

Universal veto.


I put Satoshi on "ignore".
klondike_bar
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1470

ASIC wannabe


View Profile
May 16, 2016, 02:28:47 PM
 #4956

 Well, the other 15% of miners now control the network if every merchant/user/service/exchange/etc did not agree with the hard fork the miners had, and the difficulty will adjust downward on that side of the fork to compensate for the real network mining losing a substantial amount of hash power.  The original 85% of miners that voted on and adopted this miner-voted hard fork would basically be mining nothing since merchants and users aren't accepting their chain.

I did not know that one merchant or user or service or exchange could forestall a hard fork approved of by all remaining parties.  Quite the concentration of power.

Universal veto.

miners provide security for economic incentive, and it is in their best interest to make a profit on "work" (hashrate). They have TOTAL control over hardforking the blockchain by the very definition that only a miner can create blocks. Merchants, users, exchanges, services that do not mine blocks ave zero ability to create blocks and must follow the rules set by miners in order to have a transaction confirmed or marked valid.

obviously, merchants/users may not agree with a fork implemented by miners and may stay on the unforked ruleset, with transations mined by those miners. If they decide to send the same coins on both sides of the fork, that would also be fairly easy to do. But if a majority of hasrate in on the new chain, the older chain becomes vulnerable to hashrate attacks and using it for transacting becomes unsafe or unpredictable.

In this situation, fees become important. If all the transactions (and thus fees) are on the minority blockchain, miners would have economic incentive to return to that ruleset.

24" PCI-E cables with 16AWG wires and stripped ends - great for server PSU mods, best prices https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=563461 also selling 6" M-F-M PCIe splitters and PCIe-PCIe
No longer a wannabe - now an ASIC owner!
wizkid057
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1198


View Profile
May 16, 2016, 11:35:14 PM
 #4957

Well, the other 15% of miners now control the network if every merchant/user/service/exchange/etc did not agree with the hard fork the miners had, and the difficulty will adjust downward on that side of the fork to compensate for the real network mining losing a substantial amount of hash power.  The original 85% of miners that voted on and adopted this miner-voted hard fork would basically be mining nothing since merchants and users aren't accepting their chain.

I did not know that one merchant or user or service or exchange could forestall a hard fork approved of by all remaining parties.  Quite the concentration of power.

Universal veto.

miners provide security for economic incentive, and it is in their best interest to make a profit on "work" (hashrate). They have TOTAL control over hardforking the blockchain by the very definition that only a miner can create blocks. Merchants, users, exchanges, services that do not mine blocks ave zero ability to create blocks and must follow the rules set by miners in order to have a transaction confirmed or marked valid.

obviously, merchants/users may not agree with a fork implemented by miners and may stay on the unforked ruleset, with transations mined by those miners. If they decide to send the same coins on both sides of the fork, that would also be fairly easy to do. But if a majority of hasrate in on the new chain, the older chain becomes vulnerable to hashrate attacks and using it for transacting becomes unsafe or unpredictable.

In this situation, fees become important. If all the transactions (and thus fees) are on the minority blockchain, miners would have economic incentive to return to that ruleset.

Again, it's just like if I decided to start mining blocks with a 1,000,000 BTC block reward.  Sure, I could mine as many as I want, even if I have 99% of the network hash rate.... but no one is going to accept them, so it's pointless to do so.   A hard fork doesn't need universal consensus, but it needs a super majority of miners, merchants, and users for sure... otherwise it doesn't make sense.

As a simple example (and I'm in no way affiliated with these entities, just well known examples):  Let's say miners decide to hard fork, but Bitstamp, Coinbase, and Bitpay decide not to follow along and continue using normal clients.  Well, no one mining coins generated by the hard forked chain could sell coins on those exchanges, but the miners who stayed on the normal chain could easily do so (and would be making a bunch more since their side difficulty would have dropped).  It doesn't matter transaction volume, fees, whatever... if the miners can't sell or use their coins... what good are they?

So again, miners have zero control over the implementation and adoption of a hard fork.  They sure have control over execution once the community agrees on one, but miners have no authority to make such changes on their own without the rest of the community (users/merchants/etc).

It may seem difficult to grasp and accept, but it's the way it is.  And, IMO, is quite an excellent design.  If it were any other way miners could decide to hard fork and do completely crazy things.  A hard fork could be virtually any change to the system, even ones that are completely irrational.  I mean, if it were that simple then miners could have decided a while back something crazy like, every transaction included in a block entitles the miner to 1 BTC in additional subsidy.  Or, any output not spent after X days is spendable by anyone.  Etc etc.  This is why a HARD fork is not possible with JUST miner involvement.  Essentially, any hard fork converts bitcoin into a new coin, requiring new clients and all for EVERYONE in order for it to be utilized... just like if you decided to mine some random altcoin, you can't treat your altcoins as bitcoin and vice versa.

---

On pool news, I've been making steady progress on the new changes that are coming soon to the pool.  I'm running over my initial time estimates a bit due to other unrelated work running a bit into overtime, but I'm doing my best to catch up and get things finished here.

I'll try to do a better update soon, once I have some more to share. Smiley

Tips: 1LDQrLr6dPVqNJmpZm82eZVKqDFRk7ERW8
Operator of the Eligius Mining Pool - 0% Fee, SAPPLNS, GBT, Stratum, IRC+Phone Support, Share Market (coming soon), Generation payouts, and more.
Don't feed the trolls. Science Confirms: Internet Trolls Really Are Narcissistic, Psychopathic, and Sadistic (1)
OgNasty
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2156


Follow @NastyMining


View Profile WWW
May 17, 2016, 11:25:35 AM
 #4958

Does Eligius have a public NMC address or is there any way to see any info on the NMC being mined?

BITSLER                 ▄███
               ▄████▀
             ▄████▀
           ▄████▀  ▄██▄
         ▄████▀    ▀████▄
       ▄████▀        ▀████▄
     ▄████▀            ▀████▄
   ▄████▀                ▀████▄
 ▄████▀ ▄████▄      ▄████▄ ▀████▄
█████   ██████      ██████   █████
 ▀████▄ ▀████▀      ▀████▀ ▄████▀
   ▀████▄                ▄████▀
     ▀████▄            ▄████▀
       ▀████▄        ▄████▀
         ▀████▄    ▄████▀
           ▀████▄▄████▀
             ▀██████▀
               ▀▀▀▀
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▄            
▄▄▄▄▀▀▀▀    ▄▄█▄▄ ▀▀▄         
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▄      
█  ▀▄▄  ▀█▀▀ ▄      ▀████   ▀▀▄   
█ █▄  ▀▄   ▀████       ▀▀ ▄██▄ ▀▀▄
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
█  ▀▀       ▀▄▄ ▀████      ▄▄▄▀▀▀  █
█            ▄ ▀▄    ▄▄▄▀▀▀   ▄▄  █
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
█ ▄▄   ███   ▀██  █           ▀▀  █ 
█ ███  ▀██       █        ▄▄      █ 
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀  
▀▄            █        ▀▀      █  
▀▀▄   ███▄  █   ▄▄          █   
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀    
▀▀▄   █   ▀▀▄▄▄▀▀▀         
▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█▄▄▀▀▀▀              
              ▄▄▄██████▄▄▄
          ▄▄████████████████▄▄
        ▄██████▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀██████▄
▄     ▄█████▀             ▀█████▄
██▄▄ █████▀                ▀█████
 ████████            ▄██      █████
  ████████▄         ███▀       ████▄
  █████████▀▀     ▄███▀        █████
   █▀▀▀          █████         █████
     ▄▄▄         ████          █████
   █████          ▀▀           ████▀
    █████                     █████
     █████▄                 ▄█████
      ▀█████▄             ▄█████▀
        ▀██████▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄██████▀
          ▀▀████████████████▀▀
              ▀▀▀██████▀▀▀
            ▄▄▄███████▄▄▄
         ▄█▀▀▀ ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄ ▀▀▀█▄
       █▀▀ ▄█████████████▄ ▀▀█
     █▀▀ ███████████████████ ▀▀█
    █▀ ███████████████████████ ▀█
   █▀ ███████████████▀▀ ███████ ▀█
 ▄█▀ ██████████████▀      ▀█████ ▀█▄
███ ███████████▀▀            ▀▀██ ███
███ ███████▀▀                     ███
███ ▀▀▀▀                          ███
▀██▄                             ▄██▀
  ▀█▄                            ▀▀
    █▄       █▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█
     █▄      ▀█████████▀
      ▀█▄      ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
        ▀▀█▄▄  ▄▄▄
            ▀▀█████
[]
Flippout
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 17


View Profile
May 18, 2016, 05:13:21 PM
 #4959

Wizkid057,
First I’d like to say that I very much appreciate the work you have done and the dedication to the pool.
I understand that a voting system was been brought up a number of times on this forum. How do you feel about a voting system where we vote in BTC. Basically paying for new features? I know you do this on your own time and would like to see you compensated in some form, since it seems donations aren’t cutting it.
cloh76
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 280



View Profile
May 23, 2016, 08:50:44 AM
 #4960

Is the site working properly?  Reason I ask is the Round Time stays the same and backtracks everytime i refresh the page.  Also my earnings have been stuck at 3 days and 15 hours to enter the payout queue for the earning threshhold i set.  My earnings have not changed much if at all over the past week.

[ BTC Donations: 13RNJdT72WEd1FsT3CwdJ6jy9NAa7Hsb54 ]
Pages: « 1 ... 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 [248] 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!