Quote from: DarkStar_ on February 17, 2017, 10:36:26 PM

yakuza is wrong. 101 satoshis per byte isn't too small, just below the recommended.

And that's exactly what I meant. Though if the fees are below recommended and mempool's size does not decrease the transaction wouldn't have been confirmed.

Quote from: LoyceV on February 17, 2017, 10:58:32 PM

I did read the thread, and I think you were wrong here:

Quote from: yakuza699 on February 17, 2017, 05:26:44 PM

ViaBtc rejects all transactions that have a fee of less than 10 sat/B. And since his second transaction spends an unconfirmed output from his first transaction he cannot push it to ViaBtc because that transaction simply doesn't exist in their mempool.

That statement is correct though it wasn't the case since his second transaction did not spend outputs from first transaction. It double-spent first transaction.

Quote from: LoyceV on February 17, 2017, 10:58:32 PM

Since that one had a high enough fee, ViaBTC could pick it up. Unless ViaBTC rejects transactions that are double spends, but I see no reason why any miner would do that. And yes, I checked the txid.
If I'm wrong here - which I doubt - I'd like to know where I'm wrong. I now want to test it by myself.

You are 100% correct on this one. Probably ViaBtc has some checks to see if it's double-spend or not. Though it's strange that they monitor even transactions with a fee of 1sat/B.

Quote from: LoyceV on February 17, 2017, 10:58:32 PM

BTW, if you think I'm sig spamming: my campaign manager has a small reward for you if you report me. No need to mention that in any threads.

I apologize you are not spamming. It's just that his second transaction couldn't have been accepted by ViaBtc.