Search results

camosoul Agree! Except last sentence.

camosoul That's a valid view. Both of our ways merge into the same result. In the theoretical possible case you judge wrong in the act of heat, you do something yourself, that you doom other people for. Giving the other party room to explain avoids these kind of problems and is no loss at all.

Let us be fair and give him some hours to respond and state his opinion. No condemnation without hearing his side of the story. In case he does not deliver a reasonable explanation, we should remind every miner of miningpoolhub of the possibility to give the user "miningpoolhub" on bitcointalk...

I "politely" asked miningpoolhub for futher explanation on this issue: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=472510.msg10446002#msg10446002

Enforcement is disabled: { "SPORK_1_MASTERNODE_PAYMENTS_ENFORCEMENT" : 1443754538, # Fri, 02 Oct 2015 02:55:38 "Unknown" : 1444217600, "SPORK_6_REPLAY_BLOCKS" : -1 } Masternodes are ready. 88% on version .23. Almost 50% of all MN payouts currently go to a) miners not paying out masternodes...

@evan Thank you for the fast fix. All updated!

Holy, this MN is nominated over and over and over. Address belongs to miningpoolhub. I suppose they manipulated their mining darkcoin instance to nominate their own masternode, whenever they find a block.

Great work. All MNs and other nodes updated! Two notes: 1. In Mac Os Wallet, InstantX ist not checked as default 2. InstantX transactions involve a fee of 0.01 DRK. Is this fee going to the miners or MN operators? Best, Rango

All masternodes and regular clients are fine again. No more "The network does not appear to fully agree!". Did not take any further action! Somebody did something good to the network without requiring annother update. :smile: Network managed to heal itself or some kind of spork was used (wild...

Resetting blocks/chainstate did not help either. Just saw there is some serious forking going on for everybody in the public announcement thread. So this one can be closed ...

I am running several Darkcoin nodes since almost 1 year. I am used to frequent updates and all the small issues coming with them. Since darkcoin 0.11.0.11 all daemons run into the "Warning: The network does not appear to fully agree! Some miners appear to be experiencing issues." issue...

crowning Thank you very much for your help.

Guys, what would be the formulae to calculate current block reward going to the miners? That's what i have currently got. Is this calculation correct? --- $masternode reward=0.75; $reward = 2222222/pow((($difficulty+2600)/9),2)*$masternode reward; if ($reward < 5) { $reward = 5*$masternode...

As flare said, 90% of the bad actors are unknown und unwilling to update. So you won't make anybody updating putting them on a blacklist etc. They simply don't care. Enforcing also includes the possibility to set a new checkpoint. So we should announce enforcement beeing enabled "within next...

Anybody of you guys managed to move masternode payments out of the masternode wallet without disabling the masternode/touching the 1k deposit? I like to do this using CLI on linux. Somebody already wrote it is possible using Qt wallet, but that's not really suitable for automatic handling. I...

If network is fine, it might be a good idea to enable "enforcing". All pools/miners who updated to masternode payment, suffer from a competetive disadvantage. 40% of the market players in DRK mining seem to refuse to update for their own profit (profit of 20% per block vs. pools who updated).

Thank you very much, elbereth & chaeplin. Interface settings work. More academic question: How does the thing running a masterserver in the coldwallet setting from technical perspective work? Is the masternodeprivkey a hash over masterserver IP, the address where the 1000 DRK are stored and the...

When running a masternode its listens on all network interfaces on port 9999. Is there a config command to make it listen only on one specific interface?