Re: [Mining Pool] SIMPLECOIN.US (0% fee, Instant Pay, LP, JSON, Opensource!)
So if i understand correctly, a simple situation would be this:
If Person 2 joined the pool at when the weighting was 5.
And the number means how many shares have been submitted at that weighting (would decrease within a given time period).
Person 1 Person 2 Share Weighting (Decreases with time until block is solved)
1 10
1 9
1 8
1 6
1 3 5
1 3 4
1 3 3
1 3 2
1 3 1
Person 1 submitted 10 shares. Has a total weighting of 55.
Person 2 submitted 15 shares. Has a total weighting of 45.
This means that Person 1 minimises their losses (or even equals or gets more than) Person 2 as he started mining earlier in the pool, and so the weighting starts canceling out the fact that Person 2 has a higher share of the reward.
If Person 2 joined the pool at when the weighting was 5.
And the number means how many shares have been submitted at that weighting (would decrease within a given time period).
Person 1 Person 2 Share Weighting (Decreases with time until block is solved)
1 10
1 9
1 8
1 6
1 3 5
1 3 4
1 3 3
1 3 2
1 3 1
Person 1 submitted 10 shares. Has a total weighting of 55.
Person 2 submitted 15 shares. Has a total weighting of 45.
This means that Person 1 minimises their losses (or even equals or gets more than) Person 2 as he started mining earlier in the pool, and so the weighting starts canceling out the fact that Person 2 has a higher share of the reward.
No, that's what the scoring is meant to prevent.
Share # Person a (Pool Hopper) Person b (loyal member) Share weight
1 1mh 1mh 1
100 1mh 1mh 1.1
10000 1mh 1mh 2
100000 0mh 1mh 4
1000000 0mh 1mh 10
Please note these numbers are purely made up, but they might help get the point across. Since you never know when a block will end and pool hopping exploits the start of a new block, it causes anyone trying to cheat to not get a disproportionate reward on short rounds.
The share weights are not 1-1, and reset with each block, creating a constant sliding scale. Your rewards should be the same or better than a proportional share if you are not trying to exploit pool hopping.
Oh right, i get it
thanks for explaining!