Messages

466

Archived Proposals / Re: Ads - Google, Twitter, Facebook

« on: September 13, 2018, 09:34:35 AM »

Personally, I think advertising is important, but content is more important. You write content once and it can give you traffic for many years. Advertising is temporary and you have to keep paying for it. If you don't have a big budget, then content writing is going to pay off long-term.

Thanks! Unfortunately, I don't have access to that part of the server (maybe Rob can post the log if he reads this). But I'll install an analytics plugin on the new website (probably Google Analytics, but if your friend has any suggestions I'm happy to hear them).

Thank you for your advice, you seem to be knowledgeable in this field  

I started out selling stuff on eBay, then ran my own ecomm shop for 10 years. I know a little about SEO, pay-per-click, analytics. There's a WordPress plugin called GA Google Analytics by Jeff Star -- this will put analytics on WordPress if you are not tracking visits already. Then in analytics.google.com (does Togo have access?) , you go to Acquisition > Overview and then click on Referral (see attachment). That tells you which web sites biblepay is receiving traffic from. This can help you see if your advertising is paying off or not.

This is my potential Google keyword research so far:

the NO list are keywords that when I tested adding them, werent approved right away like all the other keywords, so Id get scared and remove them

For the NO list on the keywords, we can write our own content on the web site with a BiblePay angle. Targeted keywords are best as they will lead to conversions (lower hanging fruit). Ideally, lower number of search results means we can place better organically.

9.6M cpu cryptocurrency,
3.9M cpu only cryptocurrency,
20M altcoin, 34M dash cryptocurrency,
76M cryptocurrency mining,
80M bitcoin mining,
108M crypto mining,

found some other keyword phrases that can traffic to biblepay.not sure if you want articles on a separate domain pointing back to biblepay.org or biblepay.org will host the written articles.
we can easily rank well for search results under 100k. you write a few good articles and you can rank easily for it.

42k android boinc mining
44k rosetta@home ryzen
56k android boinc projects
75k rosetta@home boinc
195k world community grid biblepay
287k does rosetta@home use gpu
634k world community grid cryptocurrency
911k rosetta@home system requirements
5M rosetta@home android
36M rosetta@home requirements
189M how does world community grid work

https://freetools.webmasterworld.com/tools/google-adwords-keywords/

467

Archived Proposals / Re: Ads - Google, Twitter, Facebook

« on: September 11, 2018, 05:54:16 PM »

You want your quality score to be higher otherwise you are getting poor leads. Looks like cpu mining and masternodes. Do you think there are any angles on the orphans or non-profit angle that may be less competitive?

In eCommerce, CPA can be a special landing page only that can be reached after you finish purchasing a product or service. For BiblePay, maybe joining the newsletter or participating in airdrop is a measurable action?  The other questions you have are good ones, but how to track/measure those questions is a big challenge.

468

Archived Proposals / Re: Ads - Google, Twitter, Facebook

« on: September 11, 2018, 11:43:51 AM »

Wow $1 a click. You should shoot for something closer to $0.03 a click. Work around the edges more. Focus on three or more keyword combos. Your one word and two word phrases is going to be more competitive and will burn through the budget really quickly. Try to pace it out so you can advertise for the full 30 days.

What are the keywords you are using?

469

Archived Proposals / Re: Aug 2018 BBP Telegram Airdrop Support

« on: September 10, 2018, 12:16:42 AM »

First proposal I sent for 2 500 BBP was successful, not never appeared in QT wallet under Proposals
http://explorer.biblepay.org/api/getrawtransaction?txid=073fa80dd665621656b1f178af09a19d7f2b200e24e40811e0df335e833d402c&decrypt=1

Gonna try again after 5 days of waiting:
http://explorer.biblepay.org/api/getrawtransaction?txid=09228b6bdfdc6cf64cb140fc408d1d51401bc2881ff54e5284c3ad994cbb83c2&decrypt=1

470

Archived Proposals / Re: explorer.biblepay.org Server September

« on: September 10, 2018, 12:03:53 AM »

My apologies for the armchair quarterbacking. I think there is some potential for monthly hosting cost... would need to consider the HDD vs SSD as I'm not familiar with how much disk is required to run an explorer. I imagine searching on one address is not cached, so the raw performance from SSD it way better than HDD. If I run across a host that offers similar specs, I'll pass it on to you Togo. We'll test and if it is on par or better, let's consider moving servers at a later point.

471

Archived Proposals / Aug 2018 BBP Telegram Airdrop Support

« on: September 05, 2018, 12:10:28 AM »

Hello, this is my first proposal write up so please be gentle! 

TL;DR: Requesting 69k BBP for Telegram Airdrop Support

I helped Jaap with Airdrop support. Our time zones are 9 hours apart. This allowed me to provide coverage while he got some restful sleep hopefully.

Questions were mainly about faucet, boinc setup (PoDC), cpid registration, and PoBH mining.

I broke down my time based on 0.1 hour increments or 6 minutes at a rate of $20 USD.


date   time (hour)   total
9/4   0.1   $2
9/3   0.1   $2
9/2   0.2   $4
8/31   0.3   $6
8/30   0.2   $4
8/29   0.2   $4
8/28   0.3   $6
8/27   0.4   $8
8/26   0.1   $2
8/25   0.2   $4
8/24   0.1   $2
8/23   0.4   $8


Total: $52



date   Open*   High   Low   Close**   Average
Sep 04, 2018   0.00059   0.000658   0.000528   0.000649   0.00060625
Sep 03, 2018   0.000729   0.000733   0.000583   0.00059   0.00065875
Sep 02, 2018   0.000648   0.000918   0.000645   0.000729   0.000735
Sep 01, 2018   0.000846   0.000947   0.000647   0.000647   0.00077175
Aug 31, 2018   0.000798   0.000849   0.000696   0.000847   0.0007975
Aug 30, 2018   0.000845   0.000968   0.000766   0.000797   0.000844
Aug 29, 2018   0.00081   0.000961   0.000804   0.000845   0.000855
               
Average of Average   0.0007526071429
               
BBP Requested   69,093.15

472

TestNet Discussion Archive / Re: TestNet Testing Thread - Test IPFS Integration (Decentralized IP File System)

« on: September 03, 2018, 06:08:11 PM »

Why even discuss it if we dont agree on "Im not concerned as a consumer how a file is distributed (centralized or not)".  Because in this case, if you aren't concerned that we are working on blockchain technology, then why discuss it.  As that is a night and day difference.

I feel we are making a mistake to not encrypt the files.  No, they will not be censored or deleted if they are encrypted.  If they are not encrypted, they could be censored, deleted, taken down by government request, etc.

The fee is currently set at .0002 bbp per K of filesize uploaded.  We can potentially lower it after we know the system works properly, but it would be doubtful that it should be lowered so low that it fills up 10 gigs of each of our sanc drives.  But I would lower it incrementally so that we receive some moderate usage by the network.

I feel the point of any feature is to help secure funding orphans long-term. This means daily usage by BBP users which leads to higher BBP prices. You don't get to increasing daily users without targeting more of the user segment. Some will care about the technology, but more will care about the UI and how usable the product is.

We've talked about this before, but if files are not public by default, it removes the usefulness of the feature. Can encryption be optinal?

Can "smart fee" (dynamic pricing) be applied to PoDS as well? If storage capacity is close to full, charge more... if not, charge less. It'd be like charging for parking in a small lot. Cheaper when there's fewer cars, but more expensive as there's limited space. I suppose we could extend it and have long-term parking vs short-term as well...

473

TestNet Discussion Archive / Re: TestNet Testing Thread - Test IPFS Integration (Decentralized IP File System)

« on: September 03, 2018, 05:15:31 PM »

Its not smart to compare apples to oranges; we're renting files on a blockchain, not space on a centralized server.  Not sure why you would consider a decentralized chain less valuable than a centralized company who can delete your account at any time, or decide what news is important for us.

I was speaking from an average consumer that'd not looking to host files that may be deleted or censored. That seems like an edge case unlikely to happen to 99% of common users. For all intents and purposes, I'm not concerned as consumer how a file is distributed (centralized or decentralized). I just care that the URL works when I need access to it.

Is the marketing plan to encourage uploads that is likely to be censored elsewhere? That seems very risky and controversial. If you're expecting $5/mo premium, then I suppose that has to be the group of people we target? If files are on the ipfs.biblepay.org:8080, does that make files censorship proof? Or biblepay would be ultimate authority on what lives and dies on IPFS?

474

TestNet Discussion Archive / Re: TestNet Testing Thread - Test IPFS Integration (Decentralized IP File System)

« on: September 03, 2018, 02:26:11 PM »

So today Im going to look into adding a fee to the attachment.  For now its just basically a fee per K being attached, and I think we should start by enforcing that it goes to the orphan foundation otherwise the transaction commit fails.  I will also add a process that pins docs that are legitimate and  have paid PODS fees. 

I hope you're not realistically thinking $5/mo is appropriate fee because Google Drive is $1.99/mo for 100GB of storage. It is a commodity service so realistically, you should expect pennies to store attachments or not even charge at all. $5/mo is a pipe dream is extremely unrealistic.

Whatever fee you collect and have it go to orphan fund is a good idea. Every little bit helps and hopefully the service will scale over time.

Still having some issues with bigger attachments. Tried a 45MB video but I don't see it in the transaction.

475

TestNet Discussion Archive / Re: TestNet Testing Thread - Test IPFS Integration (Decentralized IP File System)

« on: September 03, 2018, 02:00:40 AM »

Trying to figure out how to set up masternode for the first time. Getting close I hope.

Anyway, uploaded 21MB video. Plays right away on Chrome on ipfs.biblepay.org ... ipfs.io was initially spinning but retried after 4 min and the video played finally.

Is the default for Open Attachment ipfs.io or ipfs.biblepay.org ? I'm getting better results with ipfs.biblepay.org on the immediate request.

http://ipfs.biblepay.org:8080/ipfs/QmdMBtPQvuqPyCJgnczh5RcVeS5mi5UJydLzeVvcGcccd4

Status: 0/unconfirmed, broadcast through 3 nodes
Date: 9/2/2018 23:58
Source:IPFS-AttachmentTo: Donate to Orphans yadZnJ3hD3FRC8CiLZEVNqejvQFgNtu5ci
Debit: -10 000.00000000 tBiblepay
Transaction fee: -0.00100000 tBiblepay
Net amount: -10 000.00100000 tBiblepay

IPFS Document: https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmdMBtPQvuqPyCJgnczh5RcVeS5mi5UJydLzeVvcGcccd4 
IPFS Alternate Link: http://ipfs.biblepay.org:8080/ipfs/QmdMBtPQvuqPyCJgnczh5RcVeS5mi5UJydLzeVvcGcccd4 

Transaction ID: a9f2bbf8855aa9aa71e6de5cc7397311fc82f880900a2c49ec74bd1793d9366d-000

Debug information

Debit: -5316.68724846 tBiblepay
Debit: -5316.68700926 tBiblepay
Credit: 633.37325772 tBiblepay

Transaction:
CTransaction(hash=a9f2bbf885, ver=1, vin.size=2, vout.size=2, nLockTime=54656)
    CTxIn(COutPoint(aaa458f8c797caff2c1496523284a76a3b7221abbfdca63aa6359c699dd3b025, 0), scriptSig=47304402200da7c97435fa16, nSequence=4294967294)
    CTxIn(COutPoint(9e369d963e90c5391f85c57a36422b4e910a084e473f12d6d3722b41c99ee95a, 0), scriptSig=4730440220774651f9309807, nSequence=4294967294)
    CTxOut(nValue=633.37325772, scriptPubKey=76a914b578b1aceae2ee88995f786f)
    CTxOut(nValue=10000.00000000, scriptPubKey=76a9149cff090c148949e19f4ed915)

Inputs:
yYk8sAG6VrArnyuy5fi6rBjQfEaamd69kq Amount=5316.68724846 tBiblepay IsMine=true IsWatchOnly=false
testnet ycQa1b7LZUUbNunvgtWhvxPyT5YhEcJr5D Amount=5316.68700926 tBiblepay IsMine=true IsWatchOnly=false

XML:
{change}1{/change}{PACK}{MT}ATTACHMENT{/MT}{MK}OUT_TX{/MK}{MV}QmdMBtPQvuqPyCJgnczh5RcVeS5mi5UJydLzeVvcGcccd4{/MV}{ipfshash}QmdMBtPQvuqPyCJgnczh5RcVeS5mi5UJydLzeVvcGcccd4{/ipfshash}{/PACK}{PACK}{MT}MESSAGE{/MT}{MK}OUT_TX{/MK}{MV} {/MV}{/PACK}

476

Archived Proposals / Re: August 2018 Compassion Recurring Orphan Sponsorship Premiums Due

« on: September 02, 2018, 10:36:14 PM »

Do I see two proposals? One is for and one is against?

477

Archived Proposals / Re: BiblePay-Removing the BOINC Team Requirement for possible future Sustainability

« on: August 31, 2018, 01:26:58 AM »

This proposal feels a bit rushed and keeps changing based on discussion on BTC Talk. Its not clear what the proposal actually is for now and what changes will occur if the proposal changes. Should production proposals even be allowed to be revised? If so, revision history (like git commits) seem important so we know what changes are made and change yes/no votes accordingly.

478

TestNet Discussion Archive / Re: TestNet Testing Thread - Test IPFS Integration (Decentralized IP File System)

« on: August 30, 2018, 06:06:54 PM »

Do you know where the file spam is Rob?
My testnet machine is at 99% disk usage again haha, I closed biblepay for now until next update,

I appreciate all your hard work Rob! and thank you to everyone helping test

I think he means the debug.log file -- it gives me block rejected message... the block only mines every 15 minutes, so you end up with log spam.

shrinkdebuglog=1 in your biblepay.conf will trim the debug.log file upon restart of the QT wallet

2018-08-30 23:09:21
ProcessBlockFound::Generated 531.66870093
2018-08-30 23:09:21 ERROR: ProcessNewBlock: AcceptBlock FAILED
2018-08-30 23:09:21 ERROR: ProcessBlockFound -- ProcessNewBlock() failed, block not accepted
2018-08-30 23:09:21 CBlock(hash=0115fdd5b3d2a857c4ac2bbea3a11e77968d14028e126b4af8ec8cd94ef33eaf, ver=536870912, hashPrevBlock=63fc662f64b9e4568a2cb639d55c737bce9f0838e8acf8d7b0c658a33e446936, hashMerkleRoot=dec75898b0af80571ea24833187edfd4ecaf0920d2256a87e049f5e2d8f217c5, nTime=1535670561, nBits=1f0300d6, nNonce=26, vtx=1)
  CTransaction(hash=dec75898b0, ver=1, vin.size=1, vout.size=2, nLockTime=0)
    CTxIn(COutPoint(0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000, 4294967295), coinbase 037cd3000101)
    CTxOut(nValue=531.66870093, scriptPubKey=2103c55c0fc363e85b294f7c610314)
    CTxOut(nValue=4785.01830833, scriptPubKey=76a9149ee0a2740dbc649db0f13245)

blocks need to be mined right, so transactions go through in testnet? Or no?

479

Archived Proposals / Re: YouTube video review for BBP

« on: August 30, 2018, 05:10:42 PM »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0TjKcsTEkpI

Terrible ROI. 156 views. That's about $2 a view.

480

Enhancements in Development / Re: Twitter summary cards

« on: August 30, 2018, 12:05:08 AM »

Looks great!


Thanks so much for fixing this!