how MineBitShares works? worth 7 100% delegate???

[sudo]

use bts‘s  100% delegate income to  pay  POW miners,more high than direct pow altcoins
precious bitUSD!!!
do not forget there still    58,217.5892  overdue bitUSD  short orders  can't  cover

[sudo]

look at  LimeWallet   that is user needed

https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,17900.0.html
android &ios mobile  bts wallet apps

[sudo]

see  what  giantcrab did  ：bitCNY gateway！！！！
and now  bitUSD is on sale  on weidian app

https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,18283.msg233818.html#msg233818
TRANFUND - a fund for running BitCNY gateway
provide liquid  for bitCNY

[santaclause102]

Whatever % of this or that he gives now will be different after 2.0 comes out because we don't know exactly how 2.0 will change the metrics, so he can't give an exact number until 2.0 comes out. How hard is that to understand??? Anything given now is an estimate based on how 1.0 would perform with new features.

How would 2.0 chance that?

[Pheonike]

Whatever % of this or that he gives now will be different after 2.0 comes out because we don't know exactly how 2.0 will change the metrics, so he can't give an exact number until 2.0 comes out. How hard is that to understand??? Anything given now is an estimate based on how 1.0 would perform with new features.

[santaclause102]

You said this

Without getting into specific breakdowns, the answer implies that not 100% goes to the referring miner. It is obviously in our interest to want to have the refer be attractive, but in order to generate a margin in order to maintain payouts and bonuses that are competitive we need this as another source. We still don't know what the metrics will be like after 2.0 launch. So until then, I can't even give an accurate breakdown of what % of refer bonus makes it viable to the pool. It is just one source of potential income as another way to squeeze profits out of the pool for bonuses without a network fee.

I simply don't understand what you are saying there! A plain straightforward answer, is that that difficult?

Apparently it is.

Why don't you tell me specifically you don't understand from this so we can get some traction on what you are trying to get at?

Please also refer to some of my other recent posts in this thread... maybe there is some gold'en nugget I worded in some way that will make more sense for you.

I didn't find an answer in there to my question "who gets the profits if any are made?".Just an example: "It is obviously in our interest to want to have the refer be attractive, but in order to generate a margin in order to maintain payouts and bonuses that are competitive we need this as another source" <- I just don't know what you are saying I broke this question up into a set of more detailed questions here https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,18362.msg235704.html#msg235704
An answer could look something like this:

-  I need x amount to deliver (of that x, y is paid to me, w is paid to server costs, z is paid to hired developers).
-  All of the profits made from the service I want to deliver is paid back to BTS holders OR r % is going to me and t % to BTS holders OR I see the delegate pay as a kickstarter for a net positive service for BTS holders and all profits will go to me.
-  In case I can not acquire the necessary x amount to deliver the service I propose I will give everything back to BTS holders (burn it) OR I will finance the rest out of my own pocket and therefore adjust the distribution of the profits.

[BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode]

You said this

Without getting into specific breakdowns, the answer implies that not 100% goes to the referring miner. It is obviously in our interest to want to have the refer be attractive, but in order to generate a margin in order to maintain payouts and bonuses that are competitive we need this as another source. We still don't know what the metrics will be like after 2.0 launch. So until then, I can't even give an accurate breakdown of what % of refer bonus makes it viable to the pool. It is just one source of potential income as another way to squeeze profits out of the pool for bonuses without a network fee.

I simply don't understand what you are saying there! A plain straightforward answer, is that that difficult?

Apparently it is.

Why don't you tell me specifically you don't understand from this so we can get some traction on what you are trying to get at?

Please also refer to some of my other recent posts in this thread... maybe there is some gold'en nugget I worded in some way that will make more sense for you.

[BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode]

I have said this several times over but I am guessing people are set in their own perceptions and opinions of what is actually happening in the market so I will say it again for clarify.

Well you could use hard numbers and put them in one place and reference that. Thats what would shut-up guys like me.

It took me quite a long time to come up with this plan, primarily because I identified all the same old things that have been mentioned by gamey regarding coins, miners etc.

This is why the only solution is innovation

I wish I could go into this in my details right now but I am piled on with work atm.

Answering once in concise answers is all you need to do.

Most innovation is going to come from a client that switches GPUs to the most profitable coin. This requires a client-side aspect. Other innovation is that fact you pay out in bitassets?

Bottom line.. initially our first phases does operate with the expectation to attract existing miners.

It would be foolish to think that you'll have phases to bring in *new* miners. All the spergs have been spent. Maybe some kids running GPUs off their parents electrical bill will enter the market.

Following this though, we begin to reach beyond the mining community and then get into expanding into new markets.

What are these "new markets" ? I don't want to come across as a big asshole but your answers serve up more questions from me than they answer.

The only way to do that is to make mining more accessible. Some operations in the past have done this successfully. They attracted miners far beyond the current scope, but operated on a faulty business model and bad management that resulted in their closure.

Which pools? Mining more accessible? What do you mean accessible? It is all cli and tweaking out weird parameters few understand. You think you'll inspire people to enter the mining game in this day and age with your pool? The pool I worked on had a frontend client that polled an API for profitability and could switch between mining software. I'm sure even if it got working, it would have been a lot of work for the miners.

The launch of ethereum has gotten people pulling out their old GPUs again..

Also it was mentioned we don't support sha256.. that's right.. we don't at present.. part of the updates being done right now that these delegates are paying for will include supporting sha256 among other algos that are actually worth working with contrary to the believe. Not all profitably in mining takes place on coinmarketcap. Actually some of the best opportunities often are not there.

I know other algos are worth working on, but in terms of actual mining $$ volume, BTC clobbers them all. In terms of how to make your GPU profitable, all those other algos are needed.

Anyways.. I could go on but the point is.. there is a much bigger market we are expanding into.. and with that I found the possibility to move forward.. otherwise.. I would have folded probably after the 1st month and just shut down the pool.

What is this 'bigger market'? I read your proposal and a lot of the thread, but I missed something.

I have asked this question before and I will ask it again... by not wanting to support all these delegates so we can get the dev done and create a sustainable pool that grows bitshares.. the alternative is just to stop it dead.. shut it down.. and kill all the delegates instantly. Ask yourselves.. will that be of more benefit to bitshares than what this is offering? I think the numbers shout a resounding no.

What numbers? And there is another side, and that is could the $ be spent better otherwise which requires a second set of numbers.

As the delegate dropping out.. that has been happening for days now. It happens everytime Chinese markets open.. what I think it says is that there are Chinese who are opening their wallets now that were not before and are not updating their vote. The trend has been pretty consistent like that.

I'll drop it after this post and hope to see some enlightening answers. I have nothing against you or the project. I just see all the delegates and have thought about this area a lot in the past. I am a bit skeptical. Since volume is definitely needed, it is easy to fall back as the main reason. Yet it also should be something easy to quantify.

You say you've considered everything I say then answer with a solution of innovation but where have you specified that innovation? If it is somewhere else, just post a link to it.

I think you are over analyzing it ( and/or asking for too much... so much   he can say something he do not want to!)
The problem is  - he is building a private pool with BTS (read mine and yours money). All economic inefficiencies can be overcome (paid for) with other peoples money. All those are no biggies if you pay for the software development and subsidizing the miners profit with BTS funds ...and after 2.0 comes around he can pocket all referral fees(among other mays of monetizing the pool).

What I am saying is - later on he will let BTS benefit from the pool....well benefit 20% from it. Pocketing the 80% for himself and being paid upfront for the expenses by the 'main' (but actual 20%) beneficiaries.

PS
 Actually it is not a bad deal for 7-8 delegates. We could have selected 3-4 bit/road*scape pairs of delegates and could have gotten nothing! And I mean nothing! Not even an useless video. So, all is relative.

I had actually answered this question in regards to the refer program a while back and referenced it again.

However your characterization of me or my ethical and moral disposition here are not warranted. I have been one of the most transparent, open, and upfront delegate of all delegates. I don't hide behind aliases, everyone knows who I am, and my business for years has been operating in various positions of trust and reliability.

BTS is benefiting NOW.. and has been for months since I have taken over the pool and prior. Investing a little bit into it so it can produce more benefits and become self sustaining is just good sense.

BTS will continue to benefit in the future that way.

I have already stated that the refer program will be used to help with the network effect to attract new miners.

This means that IF 80% in fees are collected (which is an exaggeration actually).. a good portion of that goes to the referrers while the other portion has to be divided between bonuses to help maintain pool profitability, and all the other expenses in maintaining and developing the pool. Specifics on how much that works out to are going to depend on a lot of factors that are not yet clear UNTIL we are in 2.0. Characterizing it as some kind of raw deal for BTS though is just plain false.

I appreciate the 'not a bad deal' comment though... that's very true.

[santaclause102]

I have said this several times over but I am guessing people are set in their own perceptions and opinions of what is actually happening in the market so I will say it again for clarify.

It took me quite a long time to come up with this plan, primarily because I identified all the same old things that have been mentioned by gamey regarding coins, miners etc.

This is why the only solution is innovation

I wish I could go into this in my details right now but I am piled on with work atm.

Bottom line.. initially our first phases does operate with the expectation to attract existing miners.

Following this though, we begin to reach beyond the mining community and then get into expanding into new markets.

The only way to do that is to make mining more accessible. Some operations in the past have done this successfully. They attracted miners far beyond the current scope, but operated on a faulty business model and bad management that resulted in their closure.

The launch of ethereum has gotten people pulling out their old GPUs again..

Also it was mentioned we don't support sha256.. that's right.. we don't at present.. part of the updates being done right now that these delegates are paying for will include supporting sha256 among other algos that are actually worth working with contrary to the believe. Not all profitably in mining takes place on coinmarketcap. Actually some of the best opportunities often are not there.

Anyways.. I could go on but the point is.. there is a much bigger market we are expanding into.. and with that I found the possibility to move forward.. otherwise.. I would have folded probably after the 1st month and just shut down the pool.

I have asked this question before and I will ask it again... by not wanting to support all these delegates so we can get the dev done and create a sustainable pool that grows bitshares.. the alternative is just to stop it dead.. shut it down.. and kill all the delegates instantly. Ask yourselves.. will that be of more benefit to bitshares than what this is offering? I think the numbers shout a resounding no.

As the delegate dropping out.. that has been happening for days now. It happens everytime Chinese markets open.. what I think it says is that there are Chinese who are opening their wallets now that were not before and are not updating their vote. The trend has been pretty consistent like that.

What are these markets you mentioned?

You may also be inspired by this:

I still think that it would be reasonable to point out whether profits (if any are made) will go to you or to BTS holders. I think that IN GENERAL delegate proposals are WAY TO VAUGUE. A delegate proposal imo should look like this:
-  I need x amount to deliver (of that x, y is paid to me, w is paid to server costs, z is paid to hired developers).
-  All of the profits made from the service I want to deliver is paid back to BTS holders OR r % is going to me and t % to BTS holders OR I see the delegate pay as a kickstarter for a net positive service for BTS holders and all profits will go to me.
-  In case I can not acquire the necessary x amount to deliver the service I propose I will give everything back to BTS holders (burn it) OR I will finance the rest out of my own pocket and therefore adjust the distribution of the profits.
Naturally these numbers can only be estimates.

I can't say whether you ignored the question about where profits go but you def. haven't answered it despite all the long answers you gave.

This is the 3rd time I am now referencing you to my answer here: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,18253.msg233626.html#msg233626

It's a paragraph.. wouldn't call that long.

You said this

Without getting into specific breakdowns, the answer implies that not 100% goes to the referring miner. It is obviously in our interest to want to have the refer be attractive, but in order to generate a margin in order to maintain payouts and bonuses that are competitive we need this as another source. We still don't know what the metrics will be like after 2.0 launch. So until then, I can't even give an accurate breakdown of what % of refer bonus makes it viable to the pool. It is just one source of potential income as another way to squeeze profits out of the pool for bonuses without a network fee.

I simply don't understand what you are saying there! A plain straightforward answer, is that that difficult?

[BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode]

I have said this several times over but I am guessing people are set in their own perceptions and opinions of what is actually happening in the market so I will say it again for clarify.

Well you could use hard numbers and put them in one place and reference that. Thats what would shut-up guys like me.

It took me quite a long time to come up with this plan, primarily because I identified all the same old things that have been mentioned by gamey regarding coins, miners etc.

This is why the only solution is innovation

I wish I could go into this in my details right now but I am piled on with work atm.

Answering once in concise answers is all you need to do.

Most innovation is going to come from a client that switches GPUs to the most profitable coin. This requires a client-side aspect. Other innovation is that fact you pay out in bitassets?

Bottom line.. initially our first phases does operate with the expectation to attract existing miners.

It would be foolish to think that you'll have phases to bring in *new* miners. All the spergs have been spent. Maybe some kids running GPUs off their parents electrical bill will enter the market.

Following this though, we begin to reach beyond the mining community and then get into expanding into new markets.

What are these "new markets" ? I don't want to come across as a big asshole but your answers serve up more questions from me than they answer.

The only way to do that is to make mining more accessible. Some operations in the past have done this successfully. They attracted miners far beyond the current scope, but operated on a faulty business model and bad management that resulted in their closure.

Which pools? Mining more accessible? What do you mean accessible? It is all cli and tweaking out weird parameters few understand. You think you'll inspire people to enter the mining game in this day and age with your pool? The pool I worked on had a frontend client that polled an API for profitability and could switch between mining software. I'm sure even if it got working, it would have been a lot of work for the miners.

The launch of ethereum has gotten people pulling out their old GPUs again..

Also it was mentioned we don't support sha256.. that's right.. we don't at present.. part of the updates being done right now that these delegates are paying for will include supporting sha256 among other algos that are actually worth working with contrary to the believe. Not all profitably in mining takes place on coinmarketcap. Actually some of the best opportunities often are not there.

I know other algos are worth working on, but in terms of actual mining $$ volume, BTC clobbers them all. In terms of how to make your GPU profitable, all those other algos are needed.

Anyways.. I could go on but the point is.. there is a much bigger market we are expanding into.. and with that I found the possibility to move forward.. otherwise.. I would have folded probably after the 1st month and just shut down the pool.

What is this 'bigger market'? I read your proposal and a lot of the thread, but I missed something.

I have asked this question before and I will ask it again... by not wanting to support all these delegates so we can get the dev done and create a sustainable pool that grows bitshares.. the alternative is just to stop it dead.. shut it down.. and kill all the delegates instantly. Ask yourselves.. will that be of more benefit to bitshares than what this is offering? I think the numbers shout a resounding no.

What numbers? And there is another side, and that is could the $ be spent better otherwise which requires a second set of numbers.

As the delegate dropping out.. that has been happening for days now. It happens everytime Chinese markets open.. what I think it says is that there are Chinese who are opening their wallets now that were not before and are not updating their vote. The trend has been pretty consistent like that.

I'll drop it after this post and hope to see some enlightening answers. I have nothing against you or the project. I just see all the delegates and have thought about this area a lot in the past. I am a bit skeptical. Since volume is definitely needed, it is easy to fall back as the main reason. Yet it also should be something easy to quantify.

You say you've considered everything I say then answer with a solution of innovation but where have you specified that innovation? If it is somewhere else, just post a link to it.

I have referenced the links several times in this thread. Here is the #s one specifically https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,18253.0.html

As for the rest.. this is a public forum.. I have pretty much told in regards to our market approach at later stages as much as is safe to say without totally pooching the opportunity for the pools mover advantage. Remember when cob jumped the gun and posted their plans on peertracks and how it would operate and quickly removed them because it could easily blow their opportunity? Similar situation.

I been up front on everything we are doing with development, features, benefits, and plans to grow in the early stages for the foreseeable future. Anything with plans further out are too far to reveal now, and have zero impact on any of the current delegate support being given at this stage. It's like asking Tesla to show you their 2025 model right after they showed you whats coming in their 2016.

Fact is our current support will either stop in a month, or take on a new form. So I can only speak to what we are doing right now. Which is to deliver on development to Phase 2 for the pool.. and grow it out so we get more liquidity to the markets, more volume, and more users/miners.

Regardless of this point, the present mining market makes up over 500 BTC a day (all algos). I have said before our plan is to capture just 10% of that. Reliability, consistent payouts, profitability, and innovation are key factors. I do not expect to accomplish this with Phase 2 alone. I think we will have done well if we achieve 2% at that stage actually. That's roughly 300 BTC a month being brought into the bitasset markets for the cost of roughly 18 BTC one time.

In-between Phase 2 & 3 we are implementing our own wallet and promoting the refer program. Other programs that were ponzis basically attempted to introduce refer by way of giving a % of what was mined by the refer to them. That doesn't work.

We are going to utilize the refer program as a means to create network effect for the pool. I will go on about that in another post in this thread so I am answering someone elses at the same time.

[BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode]

a user-friendly mobile bts wallet app  can Attract and retain more user  than mine BitUSD
a pc light wallet also needed

Awesome.. find me a dev team that will get that done for 16 BTC a month.

Moonstone took in $36k USD.

I am working with  less than 10% of that budget.

You are already on the hook to pay back everyone that contributed to that according to the terms of the crowdfund.

I don't think it's sensible to be directing funds to another such project at this time.

Also.. no liquidity created. It would be paid for double in refer bonuses paid out to the mobile app maker by bitshare holders regardless of what kind of volume is generated by users.

This is not as much about users but volume support for all bitasset markets to help make them more liquid in these early stages.

[BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode]

How much is the daily payout now, it used to be only 2,000 BTS per day back in January/February, and looking at the current stats http://pool.minebitshares.com/workers there just aren't that many actual workers mining.

what is the daily payout on this mining pool right now?

2000 BTS on average...

Last nights payout was roughly $139 bitUSD for the day.

Actually thats up from previous days. Shortly after the announcement about Oct 13.. we started getting mined more... by 50% over the typical performance in the past week. We have had some days where we paid out over $300 bitUSD.

This is no indication of what the actual volumes we can achieve after we complete our dev. Overall volume hovers around $4000 bitUSD per month in the pools present state. We want plan to ramp that up to per day once we have the new pool that will deliver the features needed.

[BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode]

I have said this several times over but I am guessing people are set in their own perceptions and opinions of what is actually happening in the market so I will say it again for clarify.

It took me quite a long time to come up with this plan, primarily because I identified all the same old things that have been mentioned by gamey regarding coins, miners etc.

This is why the only solution is innovation

I wish I could go into this in my details right now but I am piled on with work atm.

Bottom line.. initially our first phases does operate with the expectation to attract existing miners.

Following this though, we begin to reach beyond the mining community and then get into expanding into new markets.

The only way to do that is to make mining more accessible. Some operations in the past have done this successfully. They attracted miners far beyond the current scope, but operated on a faulty business model and bad management that resulted in their closure.

The launch of ethereum has gotten people pulling out their old GPUs again..

Also it was mentioned we don't support sha256.. that's right.. we don't at present.. part of the updates being done right now that these delegates are paying for will include supporting sha256 among other algos that are actually worth working with contrary to the believe. Not all profitably in mining takes place on coinmarketcap. Actually some of the best opportunities often are not there.

Anyways.. I could go on but the point is.. there is a much bigger market we are expanding into.. and with that I found the possibility to move forward.. otherwise.. I would have folded probably after the 1st month and just shut down the pool.

I have asked this question before and I will ask it again... by not wanting to support all these delegates so we can get the dev done and create a sustainable pool that grows bitshares.. the alternative is just to stop it dead.. shut it down.. and kill all the delegates instantly. Ask yourselves.. will that be of more benefit to bitshares than what this is offering? I think the numbers shout a resounding no.

As the delegate dropping out.. that has been happening for days now. It happens everytime Chinese markets open.. what I think it says is that there are Chinese who are opening their wallets now that were not before and are not updating their vote. The trend has been pretty consistent like that.

What are these markets you mentioned?

You may also be inspired by this:

I still think that it would be reasonable to point out whether profits (if any are made) will go to you or to BTS holders. I think that IN GENERAL delegate proposals are WAY TO VAUGUE. A delegate proposal imo should look like this:
-  I need x amount to deliver (of that x, y is paid to me, w is paid to server costs, z is paid to hired developers).
-  All of the profits made from the service I want to deliver is paid back to BTS holders OR r % is going to me and t % to BTS holders OR I see the delegate pay as a kickstarter for a net positive service for BTS holders and all profits will go to me.
-  In case I can not acquire the necessary x amount to deliver the service I propose I will give everything back to BTS holders (burn it) OR I will finance the rest out of my own pocket and therefore adjust the distribution of the profits.
Naturally these numbers can only be estimates.

I can't say whether you ignored the question about where profits go but you def. haven't answered it despite all the long answers you gave.

This is the 3rd time I am now referencing you to my answer here: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,18253.msg233626.html#msg233626

It's a paragraph.. wouldn't call that long.

[tonyk]

I have said this several times over but I am guessing people are set in their own perceptions and opinions of what is actually happening in the market so I will say it again for clarify.

Well you could use hard numbers and put them in one place and reference that. Thats what would shut-up guys like me.

It took me quite a long time to come up with this plan, primarily because I identified all the same old things that have been mentioned by gamey regarding coins, miners etc.

This is why the only solution is innovation

I wish I could go into this in my details right now but I am piled on with work atm.

Answering once in concise answers is all you need to do.

Most innovation is going to come from a client that switches GPUs to the most profitable coin. This requires a client-side aspect. Other innovation is that fact you pay out in bitassets?

Bottom line.. initially our first phases does operate with the expectation to attract existing miners.

It would be foolish to think that you'll have phases to bring in *new* miners. All the spergs have been spent. Maybe some kids running GPUs off their parents electrical bill will enter the market.

Following this though, we begin to reach beyond the mining community and then get into expanding into new markets.

What are these "new markets" ? I don't want to come across as a big asshole but your answers serve up more questions from me than they answer.

The only way to do that is to make mining more accessible. Some operations in the past have done this successfully. They attracted miners far beyond the current scope, but operated on a faulty business model and bad management that resulted in their closure.

Which pools? Mining more accessible? What do you mean accessible? It is all cli and tweaking out weird parameters few understand. You think you'll inspire people to enter the mining game in this day and age with your pool? The pool I worked on had a frontend client that polled an API for profitability and could switch between mining software. I'm sure even if it got working, it would have been a lot of work for the miners.

The launch of ethereum has gotten people pulling out their old GPUs again..

Also it was mentioned we don't support sha256.. that's right.. we don't at present.. part of the updates being done right now that these delegates are paying for will include supporting sha256 among other algos that are actually worth working with contrary to the believe. Not all profitably in mining takes place on coinmarketcap. Actually some of the best opportunities often are not there.

I know other algos are worth working on, but in terms of actual mining $$ volume, BTC clobbers them all. In terms of how to make your GPU profitable, all those other algos are needed.

Anyways.. I could go on but the point is.. there is a much bigger market we are expanding into.. and with that I found the possibility to move forward.. otherwise.. I would have folded probably after the 1st month and just shut down the pool.

What is this 'bigger market'? I read your proposal and a lot of the thread, but I missed something.

I have asked this question before and I will ask it again... by not wanting to support all these delegates so we can get the dev done and create a sustainable pool that grows bitshares.. the alternative is just to stop it dead.. shut it down.. and kill all the delegates instantly. Ask yourselves.. will that be of more benefit to bitshares than what this is offering? I think the numbers shout a resounding no.

What numbers? And there is another side, and that is could the $ be spent better otherwise which requires a second set of numbers.

As the delegate dropping out.. that has been happening for days now. It happens everytime Chinese markets open.. what I think it says is that there are Chinese who are opening their wallets now that were not before and are not updating their vote. The trend has been pretty consistent like that.

I'll drop it after this post and hope to see some enlightening answers. I have nothing against you or the project. I just see all the delegates and have thought about this area a lot in the past. I am a bit skeptical. Since volume is definitely needed, it is easy to fall back as the main reason. Yet it also should be something easy to quantify.

You say you've considered everything I say then answer with a solution of innovation but where have you specified that innovation? If it is somewhere else, just post a link to it.

I think you are over analyzing it ( and/or asking for too much... so much   he can say something he do not want to!)
The problem is  - he is building a private pool with BTS (read mine and yours money). All economic inefficiencies can be overcome (paid for) with other peoples money. All those are no biggies if you pay for the software development and subsidizing the miners profit with BTS funds ...and after 2.0 comes around he can pocket all referral fees(among other mays of monetizing the pool).

What I am saying is - later on he will let BTS benefit from the pool....well benefit 20% from it. Pocketing the 80% for himself and being paid upfront for the expenses by the 'main' (but actual 20%) beneficiaries.

PS
 Actually it is not a bad deal for 7-8 delegates. We could have selected 3-4 bit/road*scape pairs of delegates and could have gotten nothing! And I mean nothing! Not even an useless video. So, all is relative.

[gamey]

I have said this several times over but I am guessing people are set in their own perceptions and opinions of what is actually happening in the market so I will say it again for clarify.

Well you could use hard numbers and put them in one place and reference that. Thats what would shut-up guys like me.

It took me quite a long time to come up with this plan, primarily because I identified all the same old things that have been mentioned by gamey regarding coins, miners etc.

This is why the only solution is innovation

I wish I could go into this in my details right now but I am piled on with work atm.

Answering once in concise answers is all you need to do.

Most innovation is going to come from a client that switches GPUs to the most profitable coin. This requires a client-side aspect. Other innovation is that fact you pay out in bitassets?

Bottom line.. initially our first phases does operate with the expectation to attract existing miners.

It would be foolish to think that you'll have phases to bring in *new* miners. All the spergs have been spent. Maybe some kids running GPUs off their parents electrical bill will enter the market.

Following this though, we begin to reach beyond the mining community and then get into expanding into new markets.

What are these "new markets" ? I don't want to come across as a big asshole but your answers serve up more questions from me than they answer.

The only way to do that is to make mining more accessible. Some operations in the past have done this successfully. They attracted miners far beyond the current scope, but operated on a faulty business model and bad management that resulted in their closure.

Which pools? Mining more accessible? What do you mean accessible? It is all cli and tweaking out weird parameters few understand. You think you'll inspire people to enter the mining game in this day and age with your pool? The pool I worked on had a frontend client that polled an API for profitability and could switch between mining software. I'm sure even if it got working, it would have been a lot of work for the miners.

The launch of ethereum has gotten people pulling out their old GPUs again..

Also it was mentioned we don't support sha256.. that's right.. we don't at present.. part of the updates being done right now that these delegates are paying for will include supporting sha256 among other algos that are actually worth working with contrary to the believe. Not all profitably in mining takes place on coinmarketcap. Actually some of the best opportunities often are not there.

I know other algos are worth working on, but in terms of actual mining $$ volume, BTC clobbers them all. In terms of how to make your GPU profitable, all those other algos are needed.

Anyways.. I could go on but the point is.. there is a much bigger market we are expanding into.. and with that I found the possibility to move forward.. otherwise.. I would have folded probably after the 1st month and just shut down the pool.

What is this 'bigger market'? I read your proposal and a lot of the thread, but I missed something.

I have asked this question before and I will ask it again... by not wanting to support all these delegates so we can get the dev done and create a sustainable pool that grows bitshares.. the alternative is just to stop it dead.. shut it down.. and kill all the delegates instantly. Ask yourselves.. will that be of more benefit to bitshares than what this is offering? I think the numbers shout a resounding no.

What numbers? And there is another side, and that is could the $ be spent better otherwise which requires a second set of numbers.

As the delegate dropping out.. that has been happening for days now. It happens everytime Chinese markets open.. what I think it says is that there are Chinese who are opening their wallets now that were not before and are not updating their vote. The trend has been pretty consistent like that.

I'll drop it after this post and hope to see some enlightening answers. I have nothing against you or the project. I just see all the delegates and have thought about this area a lot in the past. I am a bit skeptical. Since volume is definitely needed, it is easy to fall back as the main reason. Yet it also should be something easy to quantify.

You say you've considered everything I say then answer with a solution of innovation but where have you specified that innovation? If it is somewhere else, just post a link to it.