Bible Pay

Read 19363 times

  • MIP
  • Developer

    • 272


    • 33
    • February 13, 2018, 11:55:52 AM
    more
** UI LAG **

Also, after POOS was released you might have noticed a very slow Sanctuaries page in 1.5.2.2-1.5.2.3. 
I sent out a 1.5.2.4 version that fixes this (as a leisure).  Feel free to upgrade once this bothers you.

MacOSX is being compiled now.

(Btw, the lag does affect 'masternodelist' from the RPC also and is fixed in 1.5.2.4).

MacOS version and Linux 64 (Ubuntu 16.04 compatible) are ready now.


  • MIP
  • Developer

    • 272


    • 33
    • February 13, 2018, 11:55:52 AM
    more
** Welcome to POOS (Proof of Orphan Sponsorships by Sanctuaries) **
...
Taking a look at the gravity of the situation, I see that 44 sanctuaries have paid for Orphans!  This is a great start, but, we have some work to do.
Out of our total 125 sanctuaries that are ENABLED, we only have 44 that paid.

This means that 81 sanctuaries are starting to be POOS banned.

Please check your sanc and spend the collateral if you don't want an orphan -- or -- alternatively sponsor an orphan.  Starting in 20 blocks, you will no longer be PAID.

I see that POOS banned get a 1 BBP reward, but they still keep a slot in the block payments. Also valid sanc rewards are the same as before 217000 (were they not supposed to absorb the charity budget for themselves?).

So in the aftermath even if a sanc is sponsoring 1 child, it is getting exactly the same rewards as before, and all the emission of the POOS-banned sancs is becoming "lost".

Is this a correct assessment, or is it just a temporary situation until a whole reward cycle is finished?
Thanks for the great job!


  • MIP
  • Developer

    • 272


    • 33
    • February 13, 2018, 11:55:52 AM
    more
Official Block Explorer Upgrade

https://explorer.biblepay.org/ has been upgraded to HTTPS (will redirect if HTTP url is used)


  • earlzmoade
  • Jr. Member

    • 73


    • 20
    • August 02, 2018, 03:22:01 AM
    more
All,  please keep the momentum going by voting on BBP on Bololex:

https://bololex.com/voting?order=trending

We have 100+ votes now.

If we win a round we get a star and we get to keep it.  After 10 stars we get listed.



4200 BBP


Made an account on the exchange and voted, seems like i could vote several times.
Make your walls to doors


  • Rob Andrews
  • Administrator

    • 2795


    • 43
    • June 05, 2017, 08:09:04 PM
    • Patmos, Island Of
    more
I see that POOS banned get a 1 BBP reward, but they still keep a slot in the block payments. Also valid sanc rewards are the same as before 217000 (were they not supposed to absorb the charity budget for themselves?).

So in the aftermath even if a sanc is sponsoring 1 child, it is getting exactly the same rewards as before, and all the emission of the POOS-banned sancs is becoming "lost".

Is this a correct assessment, or is it just a temporary situation until a whole reward cycle is finished?
Thanks for the great job!

Its partially correct but there are many more variables to consider.

As far as the payment amount, that changes according to an ordinal in LLMQ - in order to keep the amount deterministic for the round.  So after 217K, it just had to run to the next ordinal.  Looking now, the sanctuary payment amount did jump from 3500 to 4679 with the same sanc count of 125.

As far as 1 bbp payments for POOS banned sancs, that only applies to  sancs who are in 700 but not in POSE banned state yet.

One issue we have between now and 220,000 is we are trying to restart our quorums again.  And this means LLMQ and hence POSE banning doesnt go into effect til after 220K and after quorums restart.

So we also have to wait for that to occur to actually see POSE banned sancs.  The code does attempt to vote bad sancs out of quorums that are not conforming to the rules this time (in contrast to the last time we had LLMQs).  So lets reassess the "slot" situation after LLMQs and POSE banning are on again.



4200 BBP


  • MIP
  • Developer

    • 272


    • 33
    • February 13, 2018, 11:55:52 AM
    more
Its partially correct but there are many more variables to consider.

As far as the payment amount, that changes according to an ordinal in LLMQ - in order to keep the amount deterministic for the round.  So after 217K, it just had to run to the next ordinal.  Looking now, the sanctuary payment amount did jump from 3500 to 4679 with the same sanc count of 125.

As far as 1 bbp payments for POOS banned sancs, that only applies to  sancs who are in 700 but not in POSE banned state yet.

One issue we have between now and 220,000 is we are trying to restart our quorums again.  And this means LLMQ and hence POSE banning doesnt go into effect til after 220K and after quorums restart.

So we also have to wait for that to occur to actually see POSE banned sancs.  The code does attempt to vote bad sancs out of quorums that are not conforming to the rules this time (in contrast to the last time we had LLMQs).  So lets reassess the "slot" situation after LLMQs and POSE banning are on again.



4200 BBP

Wow thanks for the detailed explanation, it’s hard to imagine the complexity and subtleties of LLMQ and masternode interaction.


  • sunk818
  • Sr. Member

    • 447


    • 27
    • April 24, 2018, 02:02:20 PM
    more
If we have a fractional sanc, when is a sponsorship due and when is payment taken out? If the funds are in the frac sanc, are the just the funds needed withdrawn or the entire frac sanc total is withdrawn?

2700 BBP
BH6oxjLkyz3z8FYpvU3ZR7PTZ31Xt9DkXZ


  • sunk818
  • Sr. Member

    • 447


    • 27
    • April 24, 2018, 02:02:20 PM
    more
If we have a fractional sanc, when is a sponsorship due and when is payment taken out? If the funds are in the frac sanc, are the just the funds needed withdrawn or the entire frac sanc total is withdrawn?


Also, if we want to continue sponsoring the same children but through a sanctuary... is there a migration process?

2700 BBP
BH6oxjLkyz3z8FYpvU3ZR7PTZ31Xt9DkXZ


  • alee67
  • Newbie

    • 6


    • 1
    • May 25, 2020, 05:29:56 AM
    more
Hi Dave,

The issue is that the supermajority of the sancs upgraded early and forced the protoversion up before the mandatory height started, and the GSC contents were being voted on by the wrong chain (because the sancs have communication no matter what chain they are on), then everything worked itself out yesterday now that we have 51% on the 1.5.2.2.  We'll have to consider that on our next mandatory to stop that behavior.   Anyway all the exchanges upgrade to 1.5.2.2 so we don't have fork risk so thats good.

I sent you an estimated payment from my account - please let me know if I didnt send you enough.

Have a good one!



4200 BBP

I updated to 1.5.22 on 8/22, and and was receiving PODC rewards through 8/25.  Then they stopped, along with the automatic GSC transmissions, though I sent them manually.  Yesterday, I started the wallet on a second computer, and discovered that the first had been on a fork since some time after the last PODC reward on 8/25, around the same time that davebbp said that he stopped receiving PODC rewards.  The second computer showed everything through the 8/25 PODC reward, but none of the later manual GSC transmissions.  One thing that seemed strange to me is that the first computer, the one on a fork, reported a larger number of sanctuaries, around 170, than the second computer, the one that isn't (I think) on a fork.  It also looked like blocks were regularly being generated on the fork, though the count was lower on the fork, which is how I finally concluded that the first computer was on a fork, and the second one wasn't on a (different) fork, by comparing the block counts with the block explorers.  In the end, I shut down both wallets, copied all the data from the second computer to the first and restarted the wallet on the first computer to fix things.

Why would an up-to-date wallet end up on a fork three days after updating?


  • Rob Andrews
  • Administrator

    • 2795


    • 43
    • June 05, 2017, 08:09:04 PM
    • Patmos, Island Of
    more
** Shalom **

We are now in the Jewish month of Elul, (the period of Teshuva), which precedes the fall feasts of the Bible. It is a time of reflection and repentance as we come closer to the Day of Atonement. The Hebrew for "repentance" is a phrase which means "returning to the answers." Repenting is returning, doing a 180 degree turn and heading home to the Father. But first, like the prodigal son, we need to become aware of our sin and confess it. It's a great opportunity to earnestly repent for the sin we see in our own lives, in our households, in our communities and in our nations.

-- Erez Soref

4200 BBP


  • Rob Andrews
  • Administrator

    • 2795


    • 43
    • June 05, 2017, 08:09:04 PM
    • Patmos, Island Of
    more
If we have a fractional sanc, when is a sponsorship due and when is payment taken out? If the funds are in the frac sanc, are the just the funds needed withdrawn or the entire frac sanc total is withdrawn?

2700 BBP
On the fractional sancs, we only pay a net reward, so the child dues is taken out at the same time of the reward.

Since ROI is negative right now, you should see your fractional sanc balance decrease daily (until we finally get these pesky 75 sancs who have not sponsored children POSE banned).

The (child deduction amount) is also shown on the "Fractional Sancs" overview page - please see Revenue and Expense there.  We also show the child deduction amount in brackets later in the details of the reward.



4200 BBP
« Last Edit: August 31, 2020, 12:31:31 PM by Rob Andrews »


  • Rob Andrews
  • Administrator

    • 2795


    • 43
    • June 05, 2017, 08:09:04 PM
    • Patmos, Island Of
    more

Also, if we want to continue sponsoring the same children but through a sanctuary... is there a migration process?

2700 BBP

Let me look into that.  There might be, as long as Todd hasnt given the child to another sanc already. 



4200 BBP



EDIT:    CHECKING


« Last Edit: August 31, 2020, 02:35:29 PM by Rob Andrews »


  • Rob Andrews
  • Administrator

    • 2795


    • 43
    • June 05, 2017, 08:09:04 PM
    • Patmos, Island Of
    more
I updated to 1.5.22 on 8/22, and and was receiving PODC rewards through 8/25.  Then they stopped, along with the automatic GSC transmissions, though I sent them manually.  Yesterday, I started the wallet on a second computer, and discovered that the first had been on a fork since some time after the last PODC reward on 8/25, around the same time that davebbp said that he stopped receiving PODC rewards.  The second computer showed everything through the 8/25 PODC reward, but none of the later manual GSC transmissions.  One thing that seemed strange to me is that the first computer, the one on a fork, reported a larger number of sanctuaries, around 170, than the second computer, the one that isn't (I think) on a fork.  It also looked like blocks were regularly being generated on the fork, though the count was lower on the fork, which is how I finally concluded that the first computer was on a fork, and the second one wasn't on a (different) fork, by comparing the block counts with the block explorers.  In the end, I shut down both wallets, copied all the data from the second computer to the first and restarted the wallet on the first computer to fix things.

Why would an up-to-date wallet end up on a fork three days after updating?

1) I agree first of all that a *non-updated wallet* on the old chain before the mandatory cutover height should not have forked til *after* 217K.  That is something we will definitely prevent in the future by enforcing the version of the sancs up to the cutover height.

2)  On your question, Why would an up-to-date wallet end up on a fork 3 days *after* the mandatory height (updating later):
This is defintely possible in the dash world.  Here is how that happens.  If you accept a block on the main chain after the mandatory height on a non-upgraded wallet, these wallets will never erase the dirty block index flags without an -erasechain=1 (or an exec reassesschains command).  So basically at that point, the other wallets will ddos you (because you are then sending them invalid block headers).  So thats why we always need to erasechain if we upgrade late.

On the missing funds feel free to paste your CPK and estimated amount lost and I will give you a tip.



4200 BBP


  • sunk818
  • Sr. Member

    • 447


    • 27
    • April 24, 2018, 02:02:20 PM
    more
** Shalom **

We are now in the Jewish month of Elul, (the period of Teshuva), which precedes the fall feasts of the Bible. It is a time of reflection and repentance as we come closer to the Day of Atonement. The Hebrew for "repentance" is a phrase which means "returning to the answers." Repenting is returning, doing a 180 degree turn and heading home to the Father. But first, like the prodigal son, we need to become aware of our sin and confess it. It's a great opportunity to earnestly repent for the sin we see in our own lives, in our households, in our communities and in our nations.

-- Erez Soref


Leviticus 16:29 29 “This shall be a statute forever for you: In the seventh month, on the tenth day of the month, you shall [g]afflict your souls, and do no work at all, whether a native of your own country or a stranger who [h]dwells among you.


We are like the lost tribe of Israel wandering in the wilderness being disobedient, trying to find out way to Him.





2700 BBP
BH6oxjLkyz3z8FYpvU3ZR7PTZ31Xt9DkXZ


  • Rob Andrews
  • Administrator

    • 2795


    • 43
    • June 05, 2017, 08:09:04 PM
    • Patmos, Island Of
    more
Let me look into that.  There might be, as long as Todd hasnt given the child to another sanc already. 



4200 BBP



EDIT:    CHECKING





So first of all your child was sponsored by someone, as it looks like all 44 are now sponsored by sancs.
So I did cancel your child sponsorship as of 8-30 and I refunded the 152,000 back to your balance.

To make this system simpler, I removed the Cameroon-One orphans from the sponsorchild page, and I will just leave the SAI children in there, so we can have a more straightforward system.  We will make Cameroon-one strictly for the sancs.

Sorry about that, I completely forgot we have one cameroon-one orphan sponsored by a real person.

Looking at everything now, it looks like between fractional sancs and regular sancs, everything is correct.

We do need to add the ability to cancel a child.  Ill add a todo list item to Cancel a sponsored monthly child (that is sponsored by the foundation).




4200 BBP