 |
August 22, 2015, 02:35:22 PM |
|
Hey Altnuts admins,
As I just posted on criptocointalk, this info you posted seems to be needing a big update....
Also, how can I contact you, ask for help and leave feedback? Twitter is too short and you don't offer an email address or official forum...
I had 2 mining tests with your pool, so far. First one using a USB SHA miner 1.6 GH/s. Was on for a few hours, the hashrate was displaying correctly in the miner status page and I did get some credit and coins delivered to my wallet. The difficulty is too high, though; can you configure the pool so it can accommodate for entry level ASICS?
Second test is going on now. I have 2 USB miners, the SHA I just mentioned and a Scrypt 220kH/s, both configured to contribute to the same wallet address. Scrypt difficulty is also too high, would it be possible to reduce it as well? Then, the graph for Scrypt is much more regular an believable than the graph for SHA. The app that generates and updates the pages seems to need other ports than 80, which took me a while to realize.
I'm connecting this time from behind a restrictive firewall. Once I started using a VPN things got a little better - I see more info, but though I see now a positive balance with the VPN on (before it was zero), the auto update seems to have a few problems and the information is not showing correctly. I suppose this is an issue for the Unomp guys. Although the SHA miner has been working for more than 12 hours, I only see a graph from since I turned on the VPN, and instead of showing value variation around 1.6 GH/s, it's show constant 14.66 GH/s. Before I connected through the VPN, I'd see sporadic peaks of SHA activity. I'm not sure the high difficulty has an impact on this, but the Scrypt graph was always much more regular and believable under the firewall, compared to the SHA.
Also, if you guys charge 0% fees, how do you pay yourselves and the server costs? Are we paying extra for the coin exchange? How does that work?
|
