NastyMining - Free Electricity, No Fees, NastyFans.org

[kroneko]

Voted my seats for 75%, and here's why - while paying off debt is a priority, I think it also speaks to long term viability of this operation, it's certainly ideal to get bigger payments now, but if we're reinvesting more over the long term it should help us in growing our operation and get us longer term sustainable profits.  I think going with loans right now was exactly what was needed to position us for the next generation of ASICs, but putting ourselves in a position to not need loans (but still have it as a funding option) for the next generation should help all seat holders in the longer term. 

[btcboston]

Is it possible to change a vote once it has been registered?  I voted 50% but it is getting so few votes that I would prefer to move my vote to 25% since 25%/75% are both running very close in the results.

[nonnakip]

Is it possible to change a vote once it has been registered?

Vote changing is not allowed.

I voted 50% but it is getting so few votes that I would prefer to move my vote to 25% since 25%/75% are both running very close in the results.

This is only opinion poll. If 25%/75% clearly lead and are so close that the 50%/100% votes could change 25%/75% outcome I will include 25% and 75% in fundraiser poll.

[plasticAiredale]

If we switch to 50 or 75% won't that put the weekly seat distribution pretty close to the dust level (obviously depending on how many seats one owns)? If so maybe we should consider switching to a bi-weekly or more payout schedule.

[Carnth]

This is only opinion poll.

I think a lot of people missed this. It is just an opinion pool. The results of this poll will not change anything. Although it will be a strong indicator of what Nasty Fans is likely to do.

[kroneko]

If we switch to 50 or 75% won't that put the weekly seat distribution pretty close to the dust level (obviously depending on how many seats one owns)? If so maybe we should consider switching to a bi-weekly or more payout schedule.

Good point - if we move to a vote to raise the percentage and it's passed this should go up for a poll vote as well, if anything should save us some on the transaction fees.

[smooth]

If we switch to 50 or 75% won't that put the weekly seat distribution pretty close to the dust level (obviously depending on how many seats one owns)? If so maybe we should consider switching to a bi-weekly or more payout schedule.

Good point - if we move to a vote to raise the percentage and it's passed this should go up for a poll vote as well, if anything should save us some on the transaction fees.

Maybe let people set their own payment schedule? There is already a mechanism to hold the donations for probation accounts. That could be extended to all accounts.

[nonnakip]

Maybe let people set their own payment schedule? There is already a mechanism to hold the donations for probation accounts. That could be extended to all accounts.

I like this idea. But it must be limited to choice. Maybe 1-week/2-week/4-week/8-week. Batch payments must happen to save tx fees.

Also realize that donation distributions do not care about auction. Who has the seat on the distribution gets all donations for that seat. If you use 8-week donation distribution and sell a seat 1 day before distribution all 8 week donations go to new owner. I will not implement logic so 7.2359 weeks donations go to old owner and 0.7641 weeks donations go to new owner. Such a feature introduces many complexity and corner cases. As example a seat changing owners many times within 1 week or old owners no longer members.

[OgNasty]

Maybe let people set their own payment schedule? There is already a mechanism to hold the donations for probation accounts. That could be extended to all accounts.

I like this idea. But it must be limited to choice. Maybe 1-week/2-week/4-week/8-week. Batch payments must happen to save tx fees.

Also realize that donation distributions do not care about auction. Who has the seat on the distribution gets all donations for that seat. If you use 8-week donation distribution and sell a seat 1 day before distribution all 8 week donations go to new owner. I will not implement logic so 7.2359 weeks donations go to old owner and 0.7641 weeks donations go to new owner. Such a feature introduces many complexity and corner cases. As example a seat changing owners many times within 1 week or old owners no longer members.

I'd rather see a system in place where the user could set a minimum payout threshold.

[smooth]

Maybe let people set their own payment schedule? There is already a mechanism to hold the donations for probation accounts. That could be extended to all accounts.

I like this idea. But it must be limited to choice. Maybe 1-week/2-week/4-week/8-week. Batch payments must happen to save tx fees.

Also realize that donation distributions do not care about auction. Who has the seat on the distribution gets all donations for that seat. If you use 8-week donation distribution and sell a seat 1 day before distribution all 8 week donations go to new owner. I will not implement logic so 7.2359 weeks donations go to old owner and 0.7641 weeks donations go to new owner. Such a feature introduces many complexity and corner cases. As example a seat changing owners many times within 1 week or old owners no longer members.

How about any unpaid distributions (just fully credited, but not yet paid, NOT partial weeks) associated with a seat are added to the sale price.

Example, you accept an offer to sell a seat for 0.05 but the seat has 0.001 of unpaid distributions from previous weeks. You have to pay 0.501 to buy the seat. The new owner inherits the 0.001 accrual so the net price paid is 0.05.

I'd rather see a system in place where the user could set a minimum payout threshold.

Yes that seems simpler.

[CumpsD]

The main concern is to keep them batched to avoid tx costs. Whatever system is used.

[pyra-proxy]

Maybe let people set their own payment schedule? There is already a mechanism to hold the donations for probation accounts. That could be extended to all accounts.

I like this idea. But it must be limited to choice. Maybe 1-week/2-week/4-week/8-week. Batch payments must happen to save tx fees.

Also realize that donation distributions do not care about auction. Who has the seat on the distribution gets all donations for that seat. If you use 8-week donation distribution and sell a seat 1 day before distribution all 8 week donations go to new owner. I will not implement logic so 7.2359 weeks donations go to old owner and 0.7641 weeks donations go to new owner. Such a feature introduces many complexity and corner cases. As example a seat changing owners many times within 1 week or old owners no longer members.

How about in addition to the 1 - 8 week options, have a pay out with next available distribution option, this should help alleviate the 8 week donations going to seat purchaser problem....?

Edit: And/Or an enable seat sell immediately or after the next distribution option when putting seats up for sale

[nonnakip]

Many great feedback!

How about any unpaid distributions (just fully credited, but not yet paid, NOT partial weeks) associated with a seat are added to the sale price.

I would do it different. I would add existing donations to seller payment.

I really like the idea of piggy-backing donations on payments to sellers. This is a clever way of avoiding tx fees. If auction volume was high enough this could eliminate distributions completely. But right now I do not feel comfortable mixing auction transactions and donation distribution transactions.

I'd rather see a system in place where the user could set a minimum payout threshold.

My problem with this idea is credited, but no yet paid, donations at seat sales.

Right now the distribution system is very simple. One time each week it uses policy formula to calculate seat price and creates transaction to send donations to seat owners.

Maybe I change it to a system that queues payments at any time and the queue is flushed one time per week. Then I think we could implement many interesting features to reduce tx fees and allow payment flexibility.

[nonnakip]

1 poll closed

[member opinion] take over 2 TH/s TerraMiner for 30 BTC
     no: 458 (6.3%)
     yes: 6770 (93.7%)
     abstain: 17772
     RESULT: NASTY MINING TAKES OVER 2 TH/S TERRAMINER FOR 30 BTC

[nonnakip]

Distribution 270968 is complete. nastyfans says thanks for the many donations!

[smooth]

We're already at the point where reliably spending the distributions involves prohibitive transaction fees. For someone with one seat the latest distribution is 0.00018967. The standard transaction fee is 0.0001 per KB and pulling the output of a transaction into a new one takes about 1/4 a KB. So spending the distributions will cost roughly 12%.  Of course you can gamble on not including a fee and hope your transaction goes through, but that's not really a solution.

Something needs to be done, maybe just include a check box for people to voluntarily put their seats into probation status?

[CumpsD]

We're already at the point where reliably spending the distributions involves prohibitive transaction fees. For someone with one seat the latest distribution is 0.00018967. The standard transaction fee is 0.0001 per KB and pulling the output of a transaction into a new one takes about 1/4 a KB. So spending the distributions will cost roughly 12%.  Of course you can gamble on not including a fee and hope your transaction goes through, but that's not really a solution.

Something needs to be done, maybe just include a check box for people to voluntarily put their seats into probation status?

Doesnt the tx fee lower when it ages?

[smooth]

We're already at the point where reliably spending the distributions involves prohibitive transaction fees. For someone with one seat the latest distribution is 0.00018967. The standard transaction fee is 0.0001 per KB and pulling the output of a transaction into a new one takes about 1/4 a KB. So spending the distributions will cost roughly 12%.  Of course you can gamble on not including a fee and hope your transaction goes through, but that's not really a solution.

Something needs to be done, maybe just include a check box for people to voluntarily put their seats into probation status?

Doesnt the tx fee lower when it ages?

Essentially no.

A transaction will be processed without fee (given sufficient block space, but that's becoming an issue) if it is "high priority" (and some other conditions, see link below). That requires a 1 BTC transaction that is only a day old or some equivalent combination of size and age. A transaction of 0.00018967 would need to be over 5000 days old to make it. Even then a combination of enough of these (~40) would fail because that would be >10000 bytes.

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Transaction_fees

[nonnakip]

We're already at the point where reliably spending the distributions involves prohibitive transaction fees. For someone with one seat the latest distribution is 0.00018967. The standard transaction fee is 0.0001 per KB and pulling the output of a transaction into a new one takes about 1/4 a KB. So spending the distributions will cost roughly 12%.

I disagree with this logic and I see this as the reason why dust is considered so evil. It is not. The main problem is bitcoin clients do not handle dust correctly. This is why I modify my bitcoind to handle dust without problems. I have communicated these changes to Bitcoin devs.

[smooth]

We're already at the point where reliably spending the distributions involves prohibitive transaction fees. For someone with one seat the latest distribution is 0.00018967. The standard transaction fee is 0.0001 per KB and pulling the output of a transaction into a new one takes about 1/4 a KB. So spending the distributions will cost roughly 12%.

I disagree with this logic and I see this as the reason why dust is considered so evil. It is not. The main problem is bitcoin clients do not handle dust correctly. This is why I modify my bitcoind to handle dust without problems. I have communicated these changes to Bitcoin devs.

Your solution only works when the dust coins are a small part of the value, but you have some bigger coins to spend. If someone is getting their coins by receiving small distributions from Nasty Fans, modest-hashrate pool payouts, etc. their entire wallet will be "dust"

Also, I'm not sure if this is a solution long term. There is an actual cost per KB to miners of including transactions (that is vaguely close to the current fees). Your suggestion increases their actual (average) cost per KB, so fees in that case would probably go up.

Another suggestion. Offer the option to take (small) distributions in a lower-value altcoin.