Prohashing Mining Pool Forums

A few months ago, as I was describing our focus on the quality of our services, I pointed out a conundrum. Compared to several months ago, the system is more stable than ever, mining profitability is higher, prices of coins are higher, more payout coins are offered, orphan rates are down by almost 9%, the number of support tickets has decreased to 33% of what they used to be, and two weeks ago we even made the system 1% more relatively profitable by being less conservative on pricing. Despite all that, it seems that market share of the major algorithms' hashrate has not increased.

Back then, I asked what we were missing, but I wonder now if the wrong question was asked because I assumed that the statements above were true. While the other statements can be proved to be true, the one statement that we can't be 100% sure of is that the system is more stable than ever. If there are bugs that cause miners issues, then some miners may simply disappear without reporting them.

I was hoping that some loyal customers might be able to offer their opinions on the topic of bugs. Are there system issues that we are not aware of because they are difficult to reproduce that bother you? If so, what are they?

Steve Sokolowski wrote:Despite all that, it seems that market share of the major algorithms' hashrate has not increased.

It might help if you narrowed down the statics of the hash rate you have, and what did not grow (who left)?

Which algorithms have not responded the way to expected? Do they track the dominant coin's hash rate?
Has the hash vs "automatic" miners, or "solo" miners changed?
Did a few large contributors of hash leave, or many smaller contributors of hash?
Was it long standing miners who left, or just a statistic change in the amount of "externally automated hash rate" (dynamic)?
ASIC miners who were locked into a algorithm, or GPU miners who may have shifted to a different algorithm you don't offer?

The answers here might help us focus in on the hash rate that is nor responding correctly, and hypothesize what might have caused your has hash to have not responded as you think.

Steve Sokolowski wrote:Are there system issues that we are not aware of because they are difficult to reproduce that bother you? If so, what are they?

I have not noticed an increased instability, yet I have noticed additional complaining on this message board. Often user error, or a coin that changed or failed, or a believer wanting the latest higher profit coin added today. This is only anecdotal as only a small percentage are active not his forum, and it is naturally skewed to the negative.

ajs wrote:

Steve Sokolowski wrote:Despite all that, it seems that market share of the major algorithms' hashrate has not increased.

It might help if you narrowed down the statics of the hash rate you have, and what did not grow (who left)?

Which algorithms have not responded the way to expected? Do they track the dominant coin's hash rate?
Has the hash vs "automatic" miners, or "solo" miners changed?
Did a few large contributors of hash leave, or many smaller contributors of hash?
Was it long standing miners who left, or just a statistic change in the amount of "externally automated hash rate" (dynamic)?
ASIC miners who were locked into a algorithm, or GPU miners who may have shifted to a different algorithm you don't offer?

The answers here might help us focus in on the hash rate that is nor responding correctly, and hypothesize what might have caused your has hash to have not responded as you think.

Steve Sokolowski wrote:Are there system issues that we are not aware of because they are difficult to reproduce that bother you? If so, what are they?

I have not noticed an increased instability, yet I have noticed additional complaining on this message board. Often user error, or a coin that changed or failed, or a believer wanting the latest higher profit coin added today. This is only anecdotal as only a small percentage are active not his forum, and it is naturally skewed to the negative.

Given that a few days has passed and nobody has posted here complaining about bugs, I think that's a good sign. If there were major bugs, like there used to be, customers would be very vocal in bringing things to our attention. There are also few customers asking for us to add payout coins and add website features, because we have already done that.

There doesn't seem to be any particular statistic that has changed dramatically. The ratio of solo to automatic miners seems to be the same as always. There were a few long-standing miners who left, but nothing out of the ordinary. GPU mining has simply been slow to take off, rather than there being any losses. There are new customers to replace old customers, but not to significantly increase the number of customers.

The lack of response, rather than a decline, is what the question is about. Given the hundreds of thousands of dollars invested into adding features and making the system more stable, one would expect that a few customers would leave the very simple pools that have not changed very much, like litecoinpool.org, and come here, because the gap in features and stability has widened.