Bible Pay

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - 616westwarmoth

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 12
Production Proposals / Re: Proposal idea: airdrop
« on: April 13, 2018, 11:29:02 am »
Yeah, I was quite busy with airdrops for a while, haha! I participated in an airdrop a long time ago, and when I found it I basically earned 2000 euro's by retweeting something, I got FOMO ;D

Anyway, by having an exclusive airdrop with airdropalert, they do a lot of the work for you. They provide the form and the checks, and I think you get an excel with all data at the end of the airdrop.

You can take two approached: the 'limited applicants approach', whereby the airdrop closes after a certain number (for example 5000), or you have a 'limited time approach', where you close the airdrop after a certain time (for example two weeks).

By having users do a certain amount of actions, you can limit the number of fraudulent applications. Telegram is a good one for this I think, since you need a mobile number to create an account. But having users take a number of these actions, you can reduce the number of fraudulent applications to such a low figure that I don't think it's necessary to weed them out in the end.

I was thinking about a combination of Twitter (with a possible retweet) and Telegram, since that is the approach that most airdropping cryptos take. Also, almost all airdrops are Ethereum tokens, so an extra step that our applicants have to take, is to download one of our wallets.

Downloading the wallet consists of going to our website, which is a great way to get exposure.

Btw, good suggestion on the 'Bitcointalk Forum Signature' campaign thing. That could also be a nice way to get exposure (outside of airdrops). You give people a certain amount of BBP (depending on your status (newbie/member/hero etc)) when they have a Biblepay signature and make a minimum amount of posts per week.

I'm glad you're hear and have this experience.  Great to have a subject matter expert!

The only airdrop I'm reasonably familiar with is the DeepOnion one, and that's kind of atypical from the looks of it.  How would we verify that a person downloaded the wallet?  And I do like the signature requirement but am leery of any mandatory posting requirements as in my view that just encourages spam and ultimately diminishes the value of the signature in the first place.   

But the more I hear, the better I like the idea!

Production Proposals / Re: Proposal idea: airdrop
« on: April 11, 2018, 09:29:26 pm »
I've been talking to David from (who is also Dutch, I found out), if it's possible to have an exclusive airdrop with them.

I've have subscribed to airdrops with them in the past and they have always been transparant. That's why I chose them.

The idea is as follows: we give 5000 people an airdrop worth $1, so we're talking about something like 2M BBP. And we host this airdrop with The requirements to be able to participate in this airdrop would be:
1. Leave your email address
2. Join our twitter (not really sure if necessary)
3. Join our airdrop Telegram group (anti-fraud protection)
4. Download our wallet

Above should make sure that there are not much duplicate accounts participating in the airdrop.

I think this airdrop will do the following things:
-Create awareness
-Bring in new miners
-Bring in new people with a heart for the project

I like this idea, and follow me a bit on the value.  I'd rather do more people for less BBP.  Right now $1 BBP is roughly 400 BBP since we're at 1/4 cent as of late.  However, as this is not investment advice, I firmly believe we'll be above 1/2 cent in mid summer as long as the cryptocurrency market at large recovers a bit and if we can get more exposure then I see one cent as our intrinsic value we can achieve in the moderate term.  100 BBP for 20,000 people would be the same cost to us.

Or if there is a way to do it with a time limit and say max of 20,000 people but we'll divide the 2M evenly that would work too.

Granted not saying this as criticism just would rather see either a smaller budget for 5K people or more people for a 2M budget.

Yes I saw this explanation after asking here.  First, I've not seen this much variation in blocks in a long time, so it is a bit disconcerting.  My personal node has, in the last four-ish weeks (Mar 8 - Apr 6),  had a high of 5001.71, low of 3355.39.  But the only two below 4000 I've ever had both happened in the last four days.  Since it seemed like the overall block timing was pretty close to 205/day then I would suspect most of the blocks were close to their target times.  By my math by the stated formulas, (20K blocks, reducing by 1.5% compounding every 30 coin days, so at 39192 we are in the middle of the 5th coin month, and should therefore have a target (max) block reward of 18,826.73, of which according to, 38.5% should be given to Sanctuaries.  That would mean the target reward would be 7248.29.  These numbers certainly don't reflect that.  And so the question becomes, is the Economics page out of date and if so, what are the true percentages.  Digging through the code, it wasn't clear to me at first glance where the code thought we should be, but I will dig a little further.

Second, is there a way to reduce the block reward variability.    Measures of central tendency are Mean: 4736.79,  Median 4881.04.  So the 3355.39 block was only 70% of the Mean, and the 5001.71 block was only 105% of the Mean.  That is a pretty wide difference but to have that big of drop from average with only a slight bump from average, leads me to think we might gain some ground by stabilizing the low end.

Finally, I still see masternodes getting back to back rewards, which for the long haul, evens itself out, but could be frustrating for new users who don't get to benefit from the law of averages.  But this does not coincide with the statement that the "longest waiting Sanctuary" gets the reward.

If we are aiming at the investor market, having less variation in the rewards would, to me, be a very important thing.

Is there  a reason the MN payments have plummeted?  I understand there is a variation based on time to solve the block, but when PoDC came about, the payments and timing issues seemed solved for the most part.  Yet today, the MN payments seem more than 10% below what the average had been and are trending towards to an under 4000 / payment level when before they were trending to a just under 5000 / payment level.  There is not a lot of data to look at yet, so maybe I'm getting ahead of things, but the root question is has anything been changed in the last two or three days that would impact this or am I just hitting a run of poor luck?

This is pretty awesome!  Good luck!

Updated to, have removed the utxoamount line in my biblepay.conf file, so my understanding is my wallet should PoDC stake to 100%.  I've got two odd things happening, one I'm showing only 3.16 Magnitude which by my math should really be about 9 or so, and even as a weekly value that seems a bit off.

But more confusing is the PoDCUpdate is now for a much smaller amount that I would suspect it should be

Code: [Select]
Status: 30 confirmations
Date: 4/1/2018 13:39
Source: PODC-Update
Total debit: -10.99999998 Biblepay
Total credit: 10.99999998 Biblepay
Transaction fee: -0.00124480 Biblepay
Net amount: -0.00124480 Biblepay

Height: 38007
Difficulty: 823.947458
Time: 04-01-2018 18:42:42
Subsidy: 505.7907

Transaction ID: 7e8fee6b072e07fd7a6b9ce8bf6f008d3b105f493cd9024d01748a6f692b63b7-000

Debug information

Debit: -4336.80837858 Biblepay
Credit: 3.66666666 Biblepay
Credit: 3.66666666 Biblepay
Credit: 3.66666666 Biblepay
Credit: 4325.80713380 Biblepay

Yet when running exec totalrac
Code: [Select]


exec totalrac


  "Command": "totalrac",
  "Total RAC": 50266.24,
  "UTXO Target": 1105857.28

It shows the proper target.  I don't have quite that amount to stake but what it is staking is no where close to that.

Production Proposals / Re: Biblepay Charity Commission - Revised
« on: March 31, 2018, 10:10:06 am »
Again, I think the idea of a commission is good as it spreads out the work load while still maintaining integrity.  I would personally think an odd number commission would be idea so that there could be no tie votes in case of disagreements, but kept to 3 to 5 to avoid the inefficiencies of large groups.

I'll be honest, I like the Mag better but will try and be fair to both sides.  Under any circumstances, either system will be more equitable than the original one and should help reduce the impact of botnets and provide more balance between big and small users.  The downside of both is they are more complex than the original system and might confuse new users.

The original system by most standards is cheap for big users and costly for small users.  It's very unfair.

The RAC system will lock up more coins and grow as the coin supply grows (100M under the current leader and values).  We already lock up a lot with Masternodes, but that is suspected to become a smaller percentile over time so RAC Staking would help keep more coins locked and off the market.  That should add stability to the price.  The down side is it's not out of the question that we could be at 20M RAC next year.  The RAC system actually benefits current users more so than future users, because right now 10 Mag would be about 10K BBP/ Day and require roughly 1M BBP (at 20 BBP/RAC) to be staked.  In a year that same 50K would (in a 20M RAC team) only grant about 2.5 Mag, would be about a 2K/Day reward but still require 1M BBP to be staked.  So the ROI is far better today than it will ever be, unless we constantly change the staking requirement and gives, to me, an unfair early adopter advantage.  Constantly changing is to me a negative and any self-correcting system will add a lot of complexity.

The Mag system will keep a constant number of coins locked up (10M under the current leader).  This will be a smaller and smaller percentage of the supply as the coin supply increases.  It has the benefits that if we choose a good number, we won't have to tweak it down the road and, to me, is more fair as in the above example 10 Mag would require 100K (with the current leader of 10K/Mag) to stake to receive the 10K reward, and in the future it would require 25K Staked to receive the 2K/Day reward.  So the ROI remains constant.  The downside is even under the most ambitious selection of 50K/Mag, Mag Staking is going to require less and will do less to balance the playing field between larger users and new users.

I personally voted 50K / MAG which is the highest MAG choice and still likely a bit too low.  I do think for now, 20 / RAC is a good option but I think it will have to be revised downward every 3 to 6 months as our RAC increases.

Production Proposals / Re: Biblepay Charity Commission - Revised
« on: March 28, 2018, 10:11:17 am »
I'm not opposed to the idea long term.  There is already a donate checkbox on the Send tab, publicizing the Orphan Fund address for donations might be advantageous.  I think you should split the proposal into two components.

Component one: Charity Commission, a level of oversight and distribution of the work load is  good idea.

Component two: Charity Fund.  This is the part I don't think is strictly necessary given we already have the Orphan Fund and I'm not clear on why we need another wallet / address to have additional donations to.

Production Proposals / Re: Biblepay Charity Commission - Revised
« on: March 28, 2018, 12:21:36 am »
Until our current orphans are funded 6 months out, I'm pretty pessimistic on further commitments.  The well being of our currently sponsored children is too important to risk on trying to do a bit more good, when all it would take is a drop in price of BTC back to sub $3k levels to dramatically impact their lives.

Looks like Rosetta@Home got some jobs back up.  Hopefully they can adjust to our RAC, we've done approximately 25% of the work for the last several days, and that's probably quite the jump to their system.  They got distributed pretty quickly however.

I've read on bitcointalk that Rob has already payed ahead a lot of premiums for (I guess he used his own BBP to sell before the next superblock will hit, probably because the bill was due).

Are there more people that will vote vote 'yes' on a 1.5 million BBP proposal for an exchange fund?
I'll submit the proposal in the PR-budget. That budget will then be bigger than 5%, but I don't think it matters, as long as the total budget doesn't cross the 15.375.000 BBP, right?

The pay ahead was in part from the extra "leftover" budget stuff.  Basically we agreed that instead of expanding the number of orphans sponsored, we should instead expand the months sponsored until we hit a certain point (I've said at least a year, others have said six months) on the chance that we might nosedive in value at some point or have some other major issue that would not permit us to pay all the premiums.

Meanwhile, I'd love to see us on Bittrex or Poloniex and think any effort to get on Yobit is wasted (they have had many issues in the past and are in my mind are better to not be on).

Mining - General / Re: Rosetta Error
« on: March 18, 2018, 10:18:26 am »
You should be able to mine on any pool (PoBH a.k.a. heat mining) while you PoDC mine (Rosetta@Home).

Did you actually join Team Biblepay?  Go to, and search for Biblepay or just go directly to and click the "Join Team" link?

In 1111, we have the SPM or SPR (stake per mag or stake per rac) indicator Spork doubles (double is like a floating point number) compiled in. 

So when this poll outcome :

is known, then I sign a spork and induce it in the chain that night, and right away the sancs start honoring the new business logic rule for the next superblock.

So as an example if this poll ends of April Fools Day, and it dictates 20 bbp per rac, as of that evening, the sancs will start being influenced to create and vote on the contract using that new business logic.

Is there a reason this poll is running so long?  20 BBP/RAC has nearly 40% of the vote in a 19 selection race.  Could we reduce it to the top three options and run a shorter vote?  Or since 20 BBP/RAC has more than the 2nd and 3rd option combined, I would think it is the winner even though it's not my choice. 

Yes I agree, me too, but too bad we didn't catch it in TEST.

Hopefully this answers your question:

I guess my better question is when, if ever, is it going to change from 500BBP/Mag and what will be the final determining factor in deciding how much.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 12