I want to leave this here so other miners are aware of what has been happening with **MKPOOL / mkpool.com**, operated by **Mecanik1337**.
The timeline is concerning.
At first the pool imposed a **mandatory 2% “donation”**. Users criticized the fact that something mandatory was being called a donation, and after that it was changed to a normal **2% pool fee**.
Later, some BCH blocks showed around **20% being deducted instead of 2%**.Proofs:https://bchexplorer.cash/block/00000000000000000025c72b25ffe2ba89773e5851d2ded9dcf68c9cabf93a60https://bchexplorer.cash/block/0000000000000000021d7c78a20ad3db4a42ab8c0cf96a120bb60b12890c565fThere were also reports from miners discussing strange behavior:https://www.facebook.com/groups/solominers/posts/1038703659064177/https://www.facebook.com/groups/bitaxeworldwide/posts/2141960799753062/When questioned about the ~20% issue, Mecanik reportedly said:
> “... possible bug since yesterday because I used AI for automatic deployment when I manage configs, and it messed up by mistake.”
https://talkimg.com/images/2026/08/19/U4pTFv.pngThat explanation does not make the situation better.
A mining pool handles real block rewards. If an AI-assisted or automatic deployment can change payout behavior without being caught before production, then there is clearly a problem with testing and deployment controls.
I also checked the public MKPOOL repository. I can see unit tests, fuzzing, sanitizers and BTC testing using **regtest**, but at the time of this review I could not find public evidence of real end-to-end BTC testing on **Testnet4** before exposing miners to mainnet.
If those tests exist, the operator can simply show them.
There is also the case of a miner known as **Empyre**, who lost a DOGE block while mining on MKPOOL.
https://talkimg.com/images/2026/08/19/U4ptoH.pngToday, August 18, 2026, Mecanik replied to him on Telegram:
> “As soon as I will catch a DOGE block, I will send it to you. You lost that block because it was right at the beginning of the pool and there was a bug in the code. It could have happened to anyone.”
https://talkimg.com/images/2026/08/19/U4pzlg.pngThis is important because the operator himself is now saying that the block was lost because of a **bug in the pool code**.
So miners were using real hashrate on software that apparently still had bugs capable of losing a block.
The compensation is also still pending, and according to that message it depends on Mecanik finding another DOGE block himself before paying Empyre. :/
There were also miners affected by the ~20% issue who were promised reimbursement.
One response from the operator was:
> “I will send today, I've been busy making blog posts and other things”
https://talkimg.com/images/2026/08/19/U4pN6I.pngI do not know if that miner was finally paid.
So the timeline is basically:
**mandatory 2% donation -> complaints -> 2% fee -> ~20% deductions -> AI/config deployment issue -> DOGE block lost because of a code bug admitted by the operator -> reimbursements still pending**
I cannot prove whether all of these problems were intentional or simply the result of unstable code, insufficient testing or poor deployment practices.
But from a miner's point of view, the result is the same: **the risk is on the miner**.
If MKPOOL wants to clear this up, it should provide:* an explanation for the ~20% deductions;
* TXIDs for all reimbursements;
* proof that Empyre was compensated;
* technical details about the bug that caused the DOGE block loss;
* evidence of the BTC Testnet4/end-to-end testing performed before mainnet deployment.
Until these issues are properly explained and resolved, I would personally not point serious hashrate at this pool.
