Quote from: iCEBREAKER on June 08, 2011, 08:08:55 PM

Quote from: simplecoin on June 08, 2011, 06:54:05 PM

Quote from: pete248 on June 08, 2011, 06:40:44 PM

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.

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.

Doesn't this just change the incentive for pool hoppers from exploiting the first half of the round, to exploiting the second one?

*joins for first 1/3 of round, hops pools, re-joins for last 1/3 of current difficulty* Tongue

Well... you never know when you are going to find a block though. So you can't know when to rejoin. It's just good to be there right before it is found.