Quote from: rdyoung on April 27, 2014, 07:11:29 PM

Quote from: Monkey1 on April 27, 2014, 06:06:08 PM

Above me, there are several accounts with hundreds of BTC and which still have a long way to go to be complete. As the whole Pyramining enterprise is generating a couple of BTC every few days, this will take literally years at current difficulty, and this makes no account for increasing difficulty or other accounts that are older than mine, which are not directly above mine (and mine date from mid 2012). This is why I did not agree with the concept of applying high hash rate to only 10 accounts and not across the board. Very few people will ever see any benefit from this.

I did some exploring in the accounts above me and I found a couple of 2000btc deposits, but they did have a decent % completed.
When I feel like delving into it, I am going to find a few hundred accounts and log their balance and completion %, but, even going off my initial unscientific math, and adding some fudge factor, its possible that the average completion is is 50% or so across the board.
I also ran some other #s and came up with an average account balance of 4.43 and average deposit size of 1.31.
Again, this is back of napkin math with publicly available #s.

I am fine with the hardware being split by X deposits, but considering the extremely large deposits still to finish, maybe he will see fit to increase the split to 20 or 30, that way there is a better chance of the smaller deposits getting some attention and as they finish then the hardware can be aimed at the early giant deposits, they have more than made a profit at the current exchange rate.

"huge" accounts are very few, fortunately, so the "10 oldest deposits" will not be filled by those ones. I am working on the new version of the site where there will be some stats available. However before dedicating too much time to the site, I want to finish installing new hardware. We are at ~23TH/s and in about ten days all 30TH/s will be deployed.