Messages

421

TestNet Discussion Archive / Re: Testnet - Test Proof of Giving

« on: December 15, 2018, 05:25:01 PM »

So on the illegal tithe, I can say with relative certainty what I "think" is happening.  (Note that Illegal Tithe and POG Pool Recipients Invalid are mostly for logging, for us to ensure we have prevented those problems in test, and then they become very rare cases of things that arent supposed to happen in prod).

I believe due to people upgrading and being on forks, the difficulty level is not exactly the same on 3 forks.  Once we all agree on the block hash, we should re-tithe, and then watch the log for one day and see that the error has dissapeared.

To answer your question though the pool will not induct an illegal tithe.  But those will be forced on their own chain anyway, so this error should dissapear once we are synced together.

(The givers actual tithe was legal on his own chain) - just illegal on our chain.

Is there a frequency that is observed for "tithing"? TestNet seems to be about once an hour. If I were to tithe 30 minutes after an automated send, that is considered an illegal tithe?  If the transaction is not created, it wouldn't be in the "unconfirmed" stage. Unconfirmed seems like it would encourage more confusion to new users.

422

TestNet Discussion Archive / Re: Testnet - Test Proof of Giving

« on: December 15, 2018, 03:13:17 PM »

the above command isn't working for me in the debug console.

12:52:24 exec tithe
12:52:24 You must specify amount, min_coin_age (days), min_coin_amount.  IE: exec tithe 200 1 1000. (code -1)

12:52:27 exec tithe 250
12:52:27 JSON value is not a string as expected (code -1)

423

TestNet Discussion Archive / Re: Testnet - Test Proof of Giving

« on: December 15, 2018, 02:50:42 PM »

The POG reward is a coinbase, so it takes 120 confirms to become spendable (just like mining revenue).

On a side note, all the pool rewards for one block are contained in one transaction.

I'm seeing PoG reward available after 6 confirmations.

424

TestNet Discussion Archive / Re: Testnet - Test Proof of Giving

« on: December 15, 2018, 12:05:13 PM »

getblockhash is correct for me.

Keep getting this:

2018-12-15 18:03:55
 Illegal tithe @height 87725.000000, max amount 296.500000  amount 296.710000 vout 1
 Illegal tithe @height 87835.000000, max amount 296.490000  amount 296.710000 vout 2
 Illegal tithe @height 87883.000000, max amount 296.930000  amount 297.150000 vout 1 ProcessNewBlock : ACCEPTED

If a tithe is illegal, maybe one can be resent as a test and if it works send it along.

Or illegal tithe should be abandoned? It keeps showing up in the logs... is that right?  I assume it'll keep showing up because the transactions can't be abandoned currently or resent?

425

TestNet Discussion Archive / Re: Testnet - Test Proof of Giving

« on: December 12, 2018, 02:24:02 PM »

Also, is pog reward a block that can process other transactions like Joe sending bbp to an exchange?

426

TestNet Discussion Archive / Re: Testnet - Test Proof of Giving

« on: December 12, 2018, 02:21:50 PM »

Makes sense Rob. Fro. The consumer side I'd prefer to Max tithe with very little change left over.  With the exec bankroll feature and some small change amounts, it may be a moot point.

Also, I'm confused by pog reward amounts.

One new wallet never tithed (too new) but I've been receiving pog rewards.

And then other times pog reward goes to non-tithe address. Is pog reward actually mined reward?

427

Archived Proposals / Re: Use Discourse as Main Forum

« on: December 12, 2018, 09:53:23 AM »

Apache has mod_rewrite . If the former url scheme and new url scheme has a repeatable pattern it is easy to do. Worst case you'd have to manually wrote a big redirect list.

428

Archived Proposals / Re: Use Discourse as Main Forum

« on: December 11, 2018, 11:16:42 PM »

Another strong reason for Discourse is the ability to review changes in the post:
https://meta.discourse.org/t/everyone-can-view-post-change-history/7639

Production Proposals were/are being treated as Preproduction Proposals with changes to the proposal text diverging from the original intent of the proposal. I believe this practice is wrong and we should follow IT best practices such as having different environments dev/test -> QA -> production. Same with proposals. If the proposal is not well formed, it should be discussed in pre-production proposal. But if proposals in production must be edited, at least Discourse gives the feature where you can compare the original post with subsequent revisions. Its not perfect, but changes can be followed which I think is a more honest approach.

I don't see any downside to using Discourse and only upside.

my only concern is SEO, and there should be some plan to perform 301 redirects of old urls to equal URLs in Discourse:
https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Aforum.biblepay.org

429

TestNet Discussion Archive / Re: Testnet - Test Proof of Giving

« on: December 11, 2018, 01:47:03 PM »

in the gui, donate to foundation only allows me to select tithe amount.

in cli, exec tithe allows me to specify coin_age and coin_min_amount. I wonder if exec tithe should just allow me to specify a tithe amount only? so if I type exec tithe 300, i will either be told the tithe is legit and submit, or error out because tithe amount, coin age, or coin_min_amount is not met.

i also seem to be able to select a 300 input and tithe 290. when done automatically, qt wallet wants to select a bigger input amount. is an input of 300, a legal tithe when the automated way wants mincoinvalue of 500?

430

TestNet Discussion Archive / Re: Testnet - Test Proof of Giving

« on: December 11, 2018, 10:50:02 AM »

In exec pogpool I see BBP address twice. Is there a reason for this?

Is nickname required? Why is it there?

431

Archived Proposals / Re: Use Discourse as Main Forum

« on: December 10, 2018, 12:02:54 PM »

Discourse won't have the session handling issue. I think perhaps this implementation or this version seems to be a victim of session handling errors. I go to Post and says the session expired. It happens frequently enough that there's a configuration issue or something with the SMF version itself. Registration should be easier on discourse and I've never run into session handling errors on Discourse. Not sure how different the moderation tools are on SMF vs Discourse.

The logical intermediary may be to add social media login plug-ins for SMF to make registration easier (thus leading to greater participation).

432

TestNet Discussion Archive / Re: Testnet - Test Proof of Giving

« on: December 10, 2018, 11:39:13 AM »

min_coin_amount is the minimum coin value that can be used for a tithe out of your coins.  If you go to coin control and take a look at your coins, pick one of higher value than min_coin_amount.

For simplicity sake, if we don't use coin control, the wallet will choose a balance for us that is eligible? If so, which address does it pick from first? Is it random, oldest coin age first, etc ?

Also, in our File Receiving address, I see an address for TITHES. What is that for?

433

TestNet Discussion Archive / Re: Testnet - Test Proof of Giving

« on: December 07, 2018, 03:55:57 PM »

Can I change your validation rules and compile a new wallet to game pog? What counter measures exist to prevent this?

434

Archived Proposals / Re: Mass Adoption for BiblePay II

« on: December 07, 2018, 03:41:36 PM »

Also, what happens to the rest of the month, if someone donates the entire monthly ceiling on the first day via PoG? Or say they donate 90% in the first day, how does difficulty play out? Does this kick the coin_age requirement up so newcomers can not participate?

What happens if you donate to the foundation (using the wallet address not PoG) for the entire ceiling?

435

Archived Proposals / Re: Mass Adoption for BiblePay II

« on: December 07, 2018, 03:38:22 PM »

https://wiki.biblepay.org/Proof-of-Giving-II

What is min_coin_amount ? I understand max_tithe_amount but is min_coin_amount the change address needs to be in order to send the max_tithe_amount?

also, you mention default proclimit = 1 . Does this mean, this can be increased?

What happens if someone has a beefy computer with 128 threads. Can they use all 128 threads to mine? How does this affect the outcome? Won't they be the likely person to win the 20% and get a piece of the 80%?

Trying to understand how this is more green than PoDC?