S9 Not Reporting In

[CSZiggy]

If you're trying to mine Teacoins, a common error would be that you're submitting too many stale shares, and therefore were banned. Since there are so many miners mining Teacoins, about 98% of the shares for that coin are stale because the blocks are coming faster than network latency.

Is TEACOIN actually being computed correctly?

I see this from time to time, a new coin we haven't mined or heard about for a while pops up, bitcoin is paying 29.2110 profit, while TEACOIN is paying 1,232.5435.

I can see why so many more people have been cherry picking TEACOIN for the past day or 3, its paying out 42 X more than the next lowest coin.

Is there any code in place to dis-allow or place a CAP on how high a coin's profit can go? 3 or 4 times higher than the next lowest coin I can understand, but when you get stuff like kittehcoin, AIB, bridgecoin and those type, they almost seem to be in error that they have computed 30-40X higher than the next lowest coin. When miners mine coins not 4X higher but 40X higher, does the pool EVER recap that money, or do those miners end up getting paid 20X+ more than what the pool ends up being able to sell those highly inflated coins at?

Maybe look at some kind of capping code, so the new/oddball coins that get added or computed have an upper limit?

[Steve Sokolowski]

If you're trying to mine Teacoins, a common error would be that you're submitting too many stale shares, and therefore were banned. Since there are so many miners mining Teacoins, about 98% of the shares for that coin are stale because the blocks are coming faster than network latency.

Is TEACOIN actually being computed correctly?

I see this from time to time, a new coin we haven't mined or heard about for a while pops up, bitcoin is paying 29.2110 profit, while TEACOIN is paying 1,232.5435.

I can see why so many more people have been cherry picking TEACOIN for the past day or 3, its paying out 42 X more than the next lowest coin.

Is there any code in place to dis-allow or place a CAP on how high a coin's profit can go? 3 or 4 times higher than the next lowest coin I can understand, but when you get stuff like kittehcoin, AIB, bridgecoin and those type, they almost seem to be in error that they have computed 30-40X higher than the next lowest coin. When miners mine coins not 4X higher but 40X higher, does the pool EVER recap that money, or do those miners end up getting paid 20X+ more than what the pool ends up being able to sell those highly inflated coins at?

Maybe look at some kind of capping code, so the new/oddball coins that get added or computed have an upper limit?

It is being computed correctly, and we aren't losing money on mining Teacoins.

What's happening is that the Teacoin blocks are being found several times per second. As soon as a miner finds a block, all other shares for that block are stale. Since Teacoins are so easy, that means that the first share for a block usually is paid at the 2292 cent rate and all the other shares are marked as stale.

We looked into some Teacoin miners and found that they are earning very small amounts of money because almost all the shares they find are stale. It's much less profitable than dynamic mining. The only time Teacoin miners are paid is when they find a block, or when they find a share that isn't a block before a block is found.

[CSZiggy]

Are they tieing up any resources that could be freed if people weren't pounding a coin that was worth so much and yet so easy to find/many stales?

Does having people mine many stale blocks add up to any loss for the pool or the rest of the miners?
With the block explorer performance down while battery test thingy happens, does having people hit a coin like that have any impact?

[CSZiggy]

It is being computed correctly, and we aren't losing money on mining Teacoins.

What's happening is that the Teacoin blocks are being found several times per second. As soon as a miner finds a block, all other shares for that block are stale. Since Teacoins are so easy, that means that the first share for a block usually is paid at the 2292 cent rate and all the other shares are marked as stale.

We looked into some Teacoin miners and found that they are earning very small amounts of money because almost all the shares they find are stale. It's much less profitable than dynamic mining. The only time Teacoin miners are paid is when they find a block, or when they find a share that isn't a block before a block is found.

**I think THIS is what is causing the pool a bit of headache.**

Nicehash miners check the web site, see that teacoin is paying out 2292 cents and they go ahead and rent 300 TH and point it at this pool.
Since it is being advertised at 2292, they are expecting to be paid like that for all the hash they sent here. The profit of the coins figures in difficulty and orphan rates correct? Can they be weighted some more based on number of stales in the past day or past hour or something so when the difficulty tanks and they are being found so often that most of the shares are stales and not counted that the price profit of the coin drops so its not being falsely advertised.

Or are coins like that that float up to the top and are falsely advertising higher profit than will ever be achieved a way to curtail people who are running bots against the pool rules to cherry pick totally staled coins? I see the list of the same 10 people always swapping to mine the top coins in each of the algos, even though there is a rule in place about using bots to switch coins on the pool, they still seem to be using them. If you are saying with all the stales they are actually earning LESS with their bots now than the auto miners, I find it very funny.