mining.BitcoinAffiliatenetwork.com-0% PPS + 1 Hour (or higher) Payout Interval

[flound1129]

You are right.  This IS becoming BS.  Lets look at the facts:

1. Several people who won FREE S3's have said they got them.
2. I have been charting ALL payouts since the 20th.  Even with two days of bad payouts (caused by the multipool)

Please explain how adding more hashrate can break payouts on a PPS pool.

Bottom line is we are still owed 2.4 BTC to be at 100% PPS, let alone 112.5% that was promised.

It seems that while you & Co. were here, EVERYONE lost coins, you as well. Not sure why though? I'm not a tech guy.

No idea, and not really my problem.  PPS is PPS.  Either this pool pays out correctly or it doesn't.

[rokroka]

You are right.  This IS becoming BS.  Lets look at the facts:

1. Several people who won FREE S3's have said they got them.
2. I have been charting ALL payouts since the 20th.  Even with two days of bad payouts (caused by the multipool)

Please explain how adding more hashrate can break payouts on a PPS pool.

Bottom line is we are still owed 2.4 BTC to be at 100% PPS, let alone 112.5% that was promised.

It seems that while you & Co. were here, EVERYONE lost coins, you as well. Not sure why though? I'm not a tech guy.

No idea, and not really my problem.  PPS is PPS.  Either this pool pays out correctly or it doesn't.

Most likely its your bad proxy script coding throwing rejects everywhere and breaking the vardiff overloading the databases but you can search for yourself too many pools and users hold you responsible for breaking pools... Perhaps there could be a coding issue on your end. Perhaps this could be the reason...

[MoreBloodWine]

Well, whatever reason I think we can all agree that whoevers fault it is needs to get it fixed. I know I've said and done a lot but as messed up as it sounds. The issues with pools does seem to follow multipool, so all bs aside. What harm would it come for you (flound) to hire someone who knows their shit to go over your backend. I know a lot of trust comes in to play but I'm sure doc from bitminer or eleuthria from btcguild would be willing to help and welome you in to their pools if the problems that seem to follow you can be fixed.

[flound1129]

Well, whatever reason I think we can all agree that whoevers fault it is needs to get it fixed. I know I've said and done a lot but as messed up as it sounds. The issues with pools does seem to follow multipool, so all bs aside. What harm would it come for you (flound) to hire someone who knows their shit to go over your backend. I know a lot of trust comes in to play but I'm sure doc from bitminer or eleuthria from btcguild would be willing to help and welome you in to their pools if the problems that seem to follow you can be fixed.

Let an admin of a pool we actually mined on come forward and state publicly that we caused a technical issue on their pool and I will address it.  I will not entertain rumors spread by trolls using one week old accounts.

Regarding the issue at hand, if you want to make the claim that payouts on a PPS pool can be affected by who's submitting shares and/or how many, then I'm sorry but that is an extraordinary claim and the burden of proof is on you.  In fact the PPS calculation is extraordinarily simple:

Shares accepted / difficulty * block reward = payout.

BAN accepted our shares, and we expect to be paid.  2.4 Bitcoins are owed.

[mcdougle]

Draft a Confidentially Agreement w/ Non Disclosure Clause and problem is fixed and no one will be the wiser...except  for you.

[Cactipsi]

Im with flound, PPS is as simple as it sounds guys, pay per share, 2.4 BTC (more with the promised bonus) are owed and i suggest it gets sorted, you need to accept the fact that whoever is running this is ripping all of us off, regardless of where your miners are pointed, and stop pulling stupid ideas out of your asses as to how more Hash means less Coin, if thats the way it worked GHASH would be a charitable organisation at this point, NO, more Hash means someone thinks its easier to stick there hand in the honey pot without any one noticing for a better reward than normal, i also like how this is a recurring problem with BAN along with many other problems, but no, its the multipool, lol, my bet is now that multipool is gone all of you will be paid its missing 2.4 bitcoin in intervals to cover the 12.5 percent bonus you where all promised by whomever is running BAN (or whomever organised the 'missing' coin)

[fire000]

Well, whatever reason I think we can all agree that whoevers fault it is needs to get it fixed. I know I've said and done a lot but as messed up as it sounds. The issues with pools does seem to follow multipool, so all bs aside. What harm would it come for you (flound) to hire someone who knows their shit to go over your backend. I know a lot of trust comes in to play but I'm sure doc from bitminer or eleuthria from btcguild would be willing to help and welome you in to their pools if the problems that seem to follow you can be fixed.

Let an admin of a pool we actually mined on come forward and state publicly that we caused a technical issue on their pool and I will address it.  I will not entertain rumors spread by trolls using one week old accounts.

Regarding the issue at hand, if you want to make the claim that payouts on a PPS pool can be affected by who's submitting shares and/or how many, then I'm sorry but that is an extraordinary claim and the burden of proof is on you.  In fact the PPS calculation is extraordinarily simple:

Shares accepted / difficulty * block reward = payout.

BAN accepted our shares, and we expect to be paid.  2.4 Bitcoins are owed.

Just a question where the share count based from the local MP pool or the BAN pool share count ??      Just trying to understand something here as has been running a few tests on a few things.....    Has picked something up but needs to run more testing to be 100 percent sure on something......    As there a common here in the forum re some comments about rented rigs via nice hash/west hash <<<<<<   that later also uses a proxy set up etc....   So A quick bit of info would be handy where the share count was from your end at your local pool  or BAN end on their pool stats ?

[flound1129]

Well, whatever reason I think we can all agree that whoevers fault it is needs to get it fixed. I know I've said and done a lot but as messed up as it sounds. The issues with pools does seem to follow multipool, so all bs aside. What harm would it come for you (flound) to hire someone who knows their shit to go over your backend. I know a lot of trust comes in to play but I'm sure doc from bitminer or eleuthria from btcguild would be willing to help and welome you in to their pools if the problems that seem to follow you can be fixed.

Let an admin of a pool we actually mined on come forward and state publicly that we caused a technical issue on their pool and I will address it.  I will not entertain rumors spread by trolls using one week old accounts.

Regarding the issue at hand, if you want to make the claim that payouts on a PPS pool can be affected by who's submitting shares and/or how many, then I'm sorry but that is an extraordinary claim and the burden of proof is on you.  In fact the PPS calculation is extraordinarily simple:

Shares accepted / difficulty * block reward = payout.

BAN accepted our shares, and we expect to be paid.  2.4 Bitcoins are owed.

Just a question where the share count based from the local MP pool or the BAN pool share count ??      Just trying to understand something here as has been running a few tests on a few things.....    Has picked something up but needs to run more testing to be 100 percent sure on something......    As there a common here in the forum re some comments about rented rigs via nice hash/west hash <<<<<<   that later also uses a proxy set up etc....   So A quick bit of info would be handy where the share count was from your end at your local pool  or BAN end on their pool stats ?

The share count is from my local end, I don't even know where BAN displays its share count but the hashrate it displayed was always accurate to within 5%.

[fire000]

Well, whatever reason I think we can all agree that whoevers fault it is needs to get it fixed. I know I've said and done a lot but as messed up as it sounds. The issues with pools does seem to follow multipool, so all bs aside. What harm would it come for you (flound) to hire someone who knows their shit to go over your backend. I know a lot of trust comes in to play but I'm sure doc from bitminer or eleuthria from btcguild would be willing to help and welome you in to their pools if the problems that seem to follow you can be fixed.

Let an admin of a pool we actually mined on come forward and state publicly that we caused a technical issue on their pool and I will address it.  I will not entertain rumors spread by trolls using one week old accounts.

Regarding the issue at hand, if you want to make the claim that payouts on a PPS pool can be affected by who's submitting shares and/or how many, then I'm sorry but that is an extraordinary claim and the burden of proof is on you.  In fact the PPS calculation is extraordinarily simple:

Shares accepted / difficulty * block reward = payout.

BAN accepted our shares, and we expect to be paid.  2.4 Bitcoins are owed.

Just a question where the share count based from the local MP pool or the BAN pool share count ??      Just trying to understand something here as has been running a few tests on a few things.....    Has picked something up but needs to run more testing to be 100 percent sure on something......    As there a common here in the forum re some comments about rented rigs via nice hash/west hash <<<<<<   that later also uses a proxy set up etc....   So A quick bit of info would be handy where the share count was from your end at your local pool  or BAN end on their pool stats ?

The share count is from my local end, I don't even know where BAN displays its share count but the hashrate it displayed was always accurate to within 5%.

thanks flound for that has a hunch on something but needs someone at ban end to watch something on their end    

[flound1129]

\

thanks flound for that has a hunch on something but needs someone at ban end to watch something on their end    

Yeah I checked their site again.  Share count is.. pretty much nowhere.  At least nowhere where it can be checked vs. payouts.   I asked s0br to have a share count for each payment on the "individual URL" but that was right before he went MIA.

[DrHaribo]

Well, whatever reason I think we can all agree that whoevers fault it is needs to get it fixed. I know I've said and done a lot but as messed up as it sounds. The issues with pools does seem to follow multipool, so all bs aside. What harm would it come for you (flound) to hire someone who knows their shit to go over your backend. I know a lot of trust comes in to play but I'm sure doc from bitminer or eleuthria from btcguild would be willing to help and welome you in to their pools if the problems that seem to follow you can be fixed.

I had no issues when Multipool was on Bitminter. CPU load on the server didn't move at all. Nothing.

If the pool has a bug where it stops paying users, then the bug needs to be fixed. That's where the focus should be, not on blaming people who were there at the time because it could be them that tripped over the bug.

[.....Really?]

Thank you DrHaribo for confirming that flound1129 is correct, very much appreciated. Now then, this is a job for the devs to get their teeth into and fix - no more insulting little comments from sock puppets who think they know better.

Just need to find a dev.....

EDIT: Anyone who is on the S3 win list & hasn't been contacted or not received anything - please drop me a PM. I'd like to go through a few things with you before going public. Thanks.  

Edit2: A pay per share system - with no share count..........that's a novelty  

[rokroka]

\

thanks flound for that has a hunch on something but needs someone at ban end to watch something on their end    

Yeah I checked their site again.  Share count is.. pretty much nowhere.  At least nowhere where it can be checked vs. payouts.   I asked s0br to have a share count for each payment on the "individual URL" but that was right before he went MIA.

That would be on the dashboard in plain sight:

https://i.imgur.com/VOYishU.png

[buy4crypto]

Well, whatever reason I think we can all agree that whoevers fault it is needs to get it fixed. I know I've said and done a lot but as messed up as it sounds. The issues with pools does seem to follow multipool, so all bs aside. What harm would it come for you (flound) to hire someone who knows their shit to go over your backend. I know a lot of trust comes in to play but I'm sure doc from bitminer or eleuthria from btcguild would be willing to help and welome you in to their pools if the problems that seem to follow you can be fixed.

I had no issues when Multipool was on Bitminter. CPU load on the server didn't move at all. Nothing.

If the pool has a bug where it stops paying users, then the bug needs to be fixed. That's where the focus should be, not on blaming people who were there at the time because it could be them that tripped over the bug.

Thanks for the input. Can you say for sure what is to blame? Do you have any likely scenarios? Or should people just focus on this pool operator?

I have a question. Why is the multipool.us guy not mining with you all still? And what is your motivation for coming here and pinning blame squarely on this pool operator when you have no clue what happened?


Maybe both the bitminter, and multipool operators should take a look at this post.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=722202.msg8588903#msg8588903

@flouder How many Antminer on old cgi'miners are you running in your proxy servers? Have you done ANYTHING to help adapt to this? Or do you keep shoving your same code down every real pools throat in an attempt to find something that works? And then when it doesn't, you blame the pool operators? Does this sound familiar? I know you already told me before "a sumbitted share is a submitted share" or whatever and dismissed me. But maybe if you can tell me this post is meaningless to this scenario, I will view things in a different light. But until then. It just looks like you haven't put in much time to find out your problems and fix them. Rather you blindly start pointing the finger. Shame on you.




tldr' Go fix your own pools and stop blaming this one without having technical evidence this pool shorted you, or anyone else on purpose. Likely its your own problem from your own doing of shotty coding. If your pools are so beneficial to each other, allow the multipool into bitminter, and lets see your 2 pools work seamlessly, and profitably together. The rest will be history, people will worry about all the future 51% attacks from you 2, capable, well informed pool operators.

[ThePhwner]

Well, whatever reason I think we can all agree that whoevers fault it is needs to get it fixed. I know I've said and done a lot but as messed up as it sounds. The issues with pools does seem to follow multipool, so all bs aside. What harm would it come for you (flound) to hire someone who knows their shit to go over your backend. I know a lot of trust comes in to play but I'm sure doc from bitminer or eleuthria from btcguild would be willing to help and welome you in to their pools if the problems that seem to follow you can be fixed.

I had no issues when Multipool was on Bitminter. CPU load on the server didn't move at all. Nothing.

If the pool has a bug where it stops paying users, then the bug needs to be fixed. That's where the focus should be, not on blaming people who were there at the time because it could be them that tripped over the bug.

Thanks for this information. Happy to gather actual factuals in the ongoing search to resolve flound's issue. Anything else you can share is appreciated, PM me if you wanna stay off the thread.

Also... how do we get stats and a UI like yours?

[Count_Frackula]

I mined there because i believed in you like i believe in s0br and you proved to be OTHER THAN A MINING POOL you are merely a proxy and why should i pay you for that? You mean to tell me you pass on all profit to your users? LIE!... You are using people to make you profit and paying them what you think they should have. As soon as i leave your Multipool all of a sudden I start making money and I'm donating over 2% explain that. You know exactly what im talking about why run a proxy and call it a pool, that in itself is misleading. Multipool.us = ProxyPool.usury

Yes we pass on all profits from our upstream pool to our users, minus the 1.5% fee.  In our help page it states clearly that we proxy Bitcoin hash to an upstream pool.  All other ~40 pools we host run on our own stratum instances.

And yes, our payouts from cex.io have been on the low side lately which was why I started looking for another pool to begin with, among other reasons.  I'm sorry you had a bad experience.  It doesn't mean I'm not entitled to earn a living.

Wow, I go away for a few days and missed a lot.  I gotta have Flound's back on this one - mostly.  I mined on MultiPool with my SHA-256 miners for a while, back when there were SHA-256 coins that occasionally had higher values than BTC.  These days, all of the altcoins seem to be less valuable, which means it's not worth it to spend the extra 1.5%, so I moved to ghash.io. 

When the coin values fluctuate, MultiPool can actually make more than mining a single coin.  I see the point of not being worth it any more.  As-is, it's just charging 1.5% to mine BTC all day, every day.

[rokroka]

I mined there because i believed in you like i believe in s0br and you proved to be OTHER THAN A MINING POOL you are merely a proxy and why should i pay you for that? You mean to tell me you pass on all profit to your users? LIE!... You are using people to make you profit and paying them what you think they should have. As soon as i leave your Multipool all of a sudden I start making money and I'm donating over 2% explain that. You know exactly what im talking about why run a proxy and call it a pool, that in itself is misleading. Multipool.us = ProxyPool.usury

Yes we pass on all profits from our upstream pool to our users, minus the 1.5% fee.  In our help page it states clearly that we proxy Bitcoin hash to an upstream pool.  All other ~40 pools we host run on our own stratum instances.

And yes, our payouts from cex.io have been on the low side lately which was why I started looking for another pool to begin with, among other reasons.  I'm sorry you had a bad experience.  It doesn't mean I'm not entitled to earn a living.

Wow, I go away for a few days and missed a lot.  I gotta have Flound's back on this one - mostly.  I mined on MultiPool with my SHA-256 miners for a while, back when there were SHA-256 coins that occasionally had higher values than BTC.  These days, all of the altcoins seem to be less valuable, which means it's not worth it to spend the extra 1.5%, so I moved to ghash.io. 

When the coin values fluctuate, MultiPool can actually make more than mining a single coin.  I see the point of not being worth it any more.  As-is, it's just charging 1.5% to mine BTC all day, every day.

That was my exact position BTC-ports were mining BTC all day long and LTC-ports mined LTC all day long the other alts i was mining are still there because of balances too low to withdraw because of the lack of sufficient switching. MP was one of my first pools because i wanted profitability that i didn't get there, so I moved to coinmine.pw and started making bank trading alts on cryptsy and poloniex. Now thats a profit switching pool that works, no old school mining pimp proxy that hasnt been updated since it was made for me...
-eof

[iglasses]

Thank you DrHaribo for confirming that flound1129 is correct, very much appreciated. Now then, this is a job for the devs to get their teeth into and fix - no more insulting little comments from sock puppets who think they know better.

Just need to find a dev.....

EDIT: Anyone who is on the S3 win list & hasn't been contacted or not received anything - please drop me a PM. I'd like to go through a few things with you before going public. Thanks.  

Edit2: A pay per share system - with no share count..........that's a novelty  

Calls for people to stop the insulting by insulting the majority of the posters in the thread...lol
Why are you still even here?  No one cares about anything you or the other IDs you are posting under have to say.

[MRBONG411]

Since there are so many people here with their own Bitcoin pool websites and there are so many here that have used rental sites I thought I would post this to see if anyone was interested.

I am kinda interested in trying to start a rental site but have no idea how to build a website.

I already registered a cool name I think that's kinda catchy for it and needed help making it happen.

www.sellyourhash.com



https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=755545.0

[flound1129]

tldr' Go fix your own pools and stop blaming this one without having technical evidence this pool shorted you, or anyone else on purpose. Likely its your own problem from your own doing of shotty coding. If your pools are so beneficial to each other, allow the multipool into bitminter, and lets see your 2 pools work seamlessly, and profitably together. The rest will be history, people will worry about all the future 51% attacks from you 2, capable, well informed pool operators.

I've posted my share counts from my DB.  No admin from BAN has stepped forward to say they're incorrect, and that back payments are in the works.  Instead we get only silence and finger pointing from new accounts.

Don't worry, I'll shut up and go away as soon as my miners receive the 2.4 BTC that we were shorted.