[CLOSED] BTC Guild - Pays TxFees+NMC, Stratum, VarDiff, Private Servers

[os2sam]

What does "KYC" mean?

Know Your Customer - Where it would be a requirement by law to collect personal identifiable information from the users.

Thanks.

That would seem to go against the principles of a CyrptoCurrency.

[1714019860]

1714019860

[1714019860]

1714019860

[1714019860]

1714019860

[1714019860]

1714019860

[Icon]

yep sun = oracle same, stay away from , or at the very lest don't allow java to run in the browser.


Icon

Interesting. Sorry for offtopic, so what do you suggest to use instead of it? Like if you want to do pingtest or any other numerous tools online (which require Java)? My browser asks me everytime Java needs to run...

Thanks

Well if you're really just wanting a ping you can open a command prompt and type "ping microsoft.com"  or any web/ip address and it'll run a ping test, no need for java.

Really? What about packet loss and jitter? How are you going to find that out from the CMD? I guess, you would do the calculations yourself I am to lazy to do that....

O that 1 is easy simply use trace route

ie:
tracert  www.xxx.com 

will give ttl and where congestion was found in a command prompt on windows based pc's

Icon

[psahx]

O that 1 is easy simply use trace route

ie:
tracert  www.xxx.com 

will give ttl and where congestion was found in a command prompt on windows based pc's

Icon

Thanks

Believe me, I know that commands very well. Still it won't give me enough info about my connections quality, to have a proof for complaining to my ISP. I just use speedtest.net and pingtest.net for the later, I need Java. But I guess I will have to find another way to satisfy my needs, without using Java.

Appreciated a lot.

[Icon]

well tracrt is a good and complete detail connection has each hop from 1 router to the next and its latency, it was designed to help trouble shoot problems

icon

[fivejonnyfive]

This is one of the ways BTC Guild *could* be forced to shut down as well.  Just like dooglus, I would not keep the site running in the face of new legislation that was too vague as to who it is aimed at.  The problem with JustDice and mining pools is that there is no reason for a user to comply with any type of KYC rules.  There are plenty of other sites they can go to hosted in other countries which wouldn't require it, so the moment a US law comes in that threatens the need for KYC it would immediately kill any US-based pool.  There's simply nobody that would volunteer that information when there is absolutely nothing preventing them from moving to ghash.io/slush/bitminter, which are all run by people not in the United States.

I feel like most of the US KYC laws are only going to be targeted at BTC/USD conversions and possibly vice versa.

Regardless - it's a fair warning to make even though it seems based on an incredible abundance of caution rather than an indication of a forthcoming policy shift.

[eleuthria]

This is one of the ways BTC Guild *could* be forced to shut down as well.  Just like dooglus, I would not keep the site running in the face of new legislation that was too vague as to who it is aimed at.  The problem with JustDice and mining pools is that there is no reason for a user to comply with any type of KYC rules.  There are plenty of other sites they can go to hosted in other countries which wouldn't require it, so the moment a US law comes in that threatens the need for KYC it would immediately kill any US-based pool.  There's simply nobody that would volunteer that information when there is absolutely nothing preventing them from moving to ghash.io/slush/bitminter, which are all run by people not in the United States.

I feel like most of the US KYC laws are only going to be targeted at BTC/USD conversions and possibly vice versa.

Regardless - it's a fair warning to make even though it seems based on an incredible abundance of caution rather than an indication of a forthcoming policy shift.

Yes, so far the US has been very focused on simply regulating the point where virtual currencies are converted into fiat currency.  However, depending on how widely accepted Bitcoin becomes, that may end up being changed.

But still, the warning is mostly just to try to get people to keep their balances lower.  It's a big headache/liability to have to constantly play this balancing act between the hot and cold wallet.  There shouldn't be single users that have balances in excess of 10-20% of the hot wallet balance.

[MoreBloodWine]

This is one of the ways BTC Guild *could* be forced to shut down as well.  Just like dooglus, I would not keep the site running in the face of new legislation that was too vague as to who it is aimed at.  The problem with JustDice and mining pools is that there is no reason for a user to comply with any type of KYC rules.  There are plenty of other sites they can go to hosted in other countries which wouldn't require it, so the moment a US law comes in that threatens the need for KYC it would immediately kill any US-based pool.  There's simply nobody that would volunteer that information when there is absolutely nothing preventing them from moving to ghash.io/slush/bitminter, which are all run by people not in the United States.

I feel like most of the US KYC laws are only going to be targeted at BTC/USD conversions and possibly vice versa.

Regardless - it's a fair warning to make even though it seems based on an incredible abundance of caution rather than an indication of a forthcoming policy shift.

Yes, so far the US has been very focused on simply regulating the point where virtual currencies are converted into fiat currency.  However, depending on how widely accepted Bitcoin becomes, that may end up being changed.

But still, the warning is mostly just to try to get people to keep their balances lower.  It's a big headache/liability to have to constantly play this balancing act between the hot and cold wallet.  There shouldn't be single users that have balances in excess of 10-20% of the hot wallet balance.

So why not set a forced withdraw if / when a users account balance gets to something like .2 since I assume what your talking about is people saving up with .5 or higher.

Edit: Or just impose higher fees on these people to try and deter them from doing it.

[philipma1957]

okay I am set at 0.1

 do you want it to be lower?

I can set at .05 >

by your request I will do that.


I made it .05 for btc and .2 for nmc

[eleuthria]

So why not set a forced withdraw if / when a users account balance gets to something like .2 since I assume what your talking about is people saving up with .5 or higher.

Edit: Or just impose higher fees on these people to try and deter them from doing it.

I don't do forced withdraws because there is always a chance that somebody has a wallet on their account that is no longer valid (lost keys, online wallet, defunct exchange, etc).  And if the wallet is locked, there is a chance in the case of old+inactive accounts that the wallet points to something like MtGox or one of the many online wallet scams, meaning sending the payout would just give the coins to a thief.

okay I am set at 0.1

 do you want it to be lower?

I can set at .05 >

by your request I will do that.


I made it .05 for btc and .2 for nmc

The post is mostly targeted at users who have balances in excess of 1 BTC.  Some even have balances in excess of 100 BTC, which are the ones that really scare me due to the fact that if multiple users like that withdraw at once the hot wallet will be empty and cause withdrawal delays for the entire pool.

If you already receive payouts at least once a week, there is no need to tweak your withdrawal settings, unless 1 week of mining is 25+ BTC, in which case you should probably target daily withdrawals.

[kendog77]

So why not set a forced withdraw if / when a users account balance gets to something like .2 since I assume what your talking about is people saving up with .5 or higher.

Edit: Or just impose higher fees on these people to try and deter them from doing it.

I don't do forced withdraws because there is always a chance that somebody has a wallet on their account that is no longer valid (lost keys, online wallet, defunct exchange, etc).  And if the wallet is locked, there is a chance in the case of old+inactive accounts that the wallet points to something like MtGox or one of the many online wallet scams, meaning sending the payout would just give the coins to a thief.

Why not make everyone login to their account and confirm their BTC address, and then do forced withdraws once their balance goes over a certain amount?

Accounts that are not confirmed within a reasonable period of time (say 30 days) can be suspended.

[MoreBloodWine]

So why not set a forced withdraw if / when a users account balance gets to something like .2 since I assume what your talking about is people saving up with .5 or higher.

Edit: Or just impose higher fees on these people to try and deter them from doing it.

I don't do forced withdraws because there is always a chance that somebody has a wallet on their account that is no longer valid (lost keys, online wallet, defunct exchange, etc).  And if the wallet is locked, there is a chance in the case of old+inactive accounts that the wallet points to something like MtGox or one of the many online wallet scams, meaning sending the payout would just give the coins to a thief.

Why not make everyone login to their account and confirm their BTC address, and then do forced withdraws once their balance goes over a certain amount?

Accounts that are not confirmed within a reasonable period of time (say 30 days) can be suspended.

Not a bad idea but I say the higher fees for these accounts would be the best deterrent.

Say anything over 1 BTC incurs a 5-10% extra daily "maintenance" fee which is deducted from the accounts balance.

[eleuthria]

Why not make everyone login to their account and confirm their BTC address, and then do forced withdraws once their balance goes over a certain amount?

Accounts that are not confirmed within a reasonable period of time (say 30 days) can be suspended.

Not a bad idea but I say the higher fees for these accounts would be the best deterrent.

Say anything over 1 BTC incurs a 5-10% extra daily "maintenance" fee which is deducted from the accounts balance.
[/quote]

That is essentially theft in my mind.  The same with suspending accounts for inactivity.  Every coin earned should be capable of being withdrawn, up until the site is no longer operational.  Even then, the stated policy is *at least* a 3 month window for inactive users to come back and get their coins out.

[MoreBloodWine]

Why not make everyone login to their account and confirm their BTC address, and then do forced withdraws once their balance goes over a certain amount?

Accounts that are not confirmed within a reasonable period of time (say 30 days) can be suspended.

Not a bad idea but I say the higher fees for these accounts would be the best deterrent.

Say anything over 1 BTC incurs a 5-10% extra daily "maintenance" fee which is deducted from the accounts balance.

That is essentially theft in my mind.  The same with suspending accounts for inactivity.  Every coin earned should be capable of being withdrawn, up until the site is no longer operational.  Even then, the stated policy is *at least* a 3 month window for inactive users to come back and get their coins out.

So with all due respect then, just because you "complain" about these users doesn't mean they have to make any changes. They may just figure, well hell, if he's not gonna do anything about it then I'll just keep doing my old tried and true of using the pool as a bank and withdrawing when I feel the need to.

Seriously though, unless you willing to actually do something about this "problem" then you might be lucky if only a third of these people actually give a damn and make a change.

[hurricandave]

I think setting a 90 days to change your setting deadline followed by a (per hour/payout round) max withdraw from an individual account amount, that says (overages/requested) will roll over to the next round of payouts till the request is complete would work.

[Bitsaurus]

I think if a user's account rolls beyond something 5 or 10BTC they should be notified that withdrawals will be limited to manual intervention.  Using the pool as a bank puts all the other users at more risk since it takes away the valuable resource of Eleuthria's time.

Apparently people haven't learned from 50BTC to not use a pool as a bank.

[ManeBjorn]

Any more fees and people will keep leaving for the evil ghash.
Just setup an email reminder that is triggered at a set amount of BTC to remind them to withdraw.

[eleuthria]

I've been noticing a big surge in emails attempting to distribute a virus, using Bitcoin related subject lines.  Emails pretending to be from various manufacturers with "invoices" attached (virus in a .jar), others pretending to be from cex.io and ghash.io as well.  While I know at least some of these are likely targeting me specifically (I've had some pretending to be from pool users), some of them look much more generic.

So this is just going out there as a reminder that you shouldn't click links in email or download attachments you were not expecting.  There is absolutely no reason for a Bitcoin company to send you an invoice as an attachment.  Summer time has always seen a big surge in phishing attempts, and another surge in account compromises from users who got tricked by them.  Luckily there hasn't been any noticeable surge in "my account as hacked" type emails over the last few months.

[MoreBloodWine]

Any more fees and people will keep leaving for the evil ghash.
Just setup an email reminder that is triggered at a set amount of BTC to remind them to withdraw.

Still no reason for them to comply, so unless Michael adds some sort of a preventative measure then chances are at least half or more of the people using the guild as a bank will continue to do so and Michael will just continue to make a post every so often asking people to stop doing this knowing that they have no reason to listen.

Edit: Basically what it comes down to for me is this... why "complain" about something that will most likely never stop unless your willing to actually do something about it.

I know this seems like a direct poke at Michael, while that's not my intention I do feel that unless something is actually done about it then the practice of people using the guild as a bank will most likely never end thus causing thee continuous wallet issues he talks about.

[os2sam]

Edit: Basically what it comes down to for me is this... why "complain" about something that will most likely never stop unless your willing to actually do something about it.

A friendly suggestion with a thorough explanation is not the same thing as a complaint.

[MoreBloodWine]

Edit: Basically what it comes down to for me is this... why "complain" about something that will most likely never stop unless your willing to actually do something about it.

A friendly suggestion with a thorough explanation is not the same thing as a complaint.

A suggestion that may or may not bare any actual fruit because it is just that, a suggestion.