Question is simple.
Let’s get a quantifiable answer on how many people want the beeeeer.org payout level changed and in which direction.
Is it possible for you to explain to a noob like me any negative effects of lowering the payout barrier before I vote ?
Thanks !
I’m not a pro, I don’t know all the details.
The only answer that I do know is that more frequent payouts will mean it costs more in transaction fees over a longer period of time
Is the option to payout all balances periodically (once a week or once per day, for example) feasible? That way might minimize transaction fees even more since beeeeer doesn’t have to payout every time any individual miner reaches 3.01 XPM.
[quote=“proj3ct, post:3, topic:1195”]I’m not a pro, I don’t know all the details.
The only answer that I do know is that more frequent payouts will mean it costs more in transaction fees over a longer period of time[/quote]
you can always send many payouts to many adressess in one transaction.
i propose a paypout system from the bottom line voted in the pool (e.g. 1.01xpm) but in bulk - lets say each hour, a pyaout will be processed for each account with amount >1.01xpm in one transaction. thus, we will save on fees.
for example in bitcoin, the slush pool pays each 15minutes to aproximatelly 100 adresses in one transaction - https://blockchain.info/tx/cf8b070be97dc37a0337dc6919f00a62e2074393755642843b5a8ea55588690e
Hi all, new member here.
Didn’t we joined the pool to get predictable, regular payouts?
As the difficulty increases, however, a fixed threshold must reduce the number of payouts. Less payouts encourages the small players such as myself to go elsewhere. It may also encourage them to shout scam after they join the pool and realize how long they will be locked in.
I am currently looking at a payout in 60 days… So I want to reduce the payout threshold to something a little more ‘regular’ while I organize some new/better hardware.
I am sure others here (at least the one who wants to increase the threshold) have more resources than me and get payouts much more frequently. I guess for them lots of payouts is a pain as it makes it harder to see what is happening.
So I would vote for a regular payout, because, that’s why I joined the pool. Failing that a variable threshold so that we can make the payout suit our requirements.
Umm new members cant vote or am I just too stupid to find the button? 
No not stupid, just missing the details.
New members can vote after making 2 posts.
So I could not vote when I made the post, above yours.
I can vote now 8)
Sadly the option I prefer is not available. 
Ahh ok thanks.
What option do you prefer? If you want more frequent payouts, there’s the 1.01XPM threshold, or also the option for custom payouts.
Ok then. It’s my second post, so I can vote now 
To be honest i think 3XPM is OK. They could lower it i dont think the transaction fees is such a big issue considering the fees that the pool already charge us users.
You could change to ypool where they have 1XPM as lowest automatic payout.
Bigger issues are f:ex if Ypool/Beer will honor Bitshares, i mean users will have shitloads of Protoshares not paid out since its 1PTS minimum payout… The pools will get tens of thousands of protoshares they hold in unpaid shares upon Bitshares launch…
What option do you prefer? If you want more frequent payouts, there’s the 1.01XPM threshold, or also the option for custom payouts.[/quote]
I prefer to specify the frequency of payout.
All other methods hit the same problem that inspired this topic in the first place. That is the difficulty goes up and the payout frequency goes down. Eventually even the guy that wants 5 times will want more frequent payouts.
Specifying the frequency of payout is a one time change so from a development point of view it solves the problem once and for all. I am assuming the issues with small payouts are also resolved of course 
What option do you prefer? If you want more frequent payouts, there’s the 1.01XPM threshold, or also the option for custom payouts.[/quote]
I prefer to specify the frequency of payout.
All other methods hit the same problem that inspired this topic in the first place. That is the difficulty goes up and the payout frequency goes down. Eventually even the guy that wants 5 times will want more frequent payouts.
Specifying the frequency of payout is a one time change so from a development point of view it solves the problem once and for all. I am assuming the issues with small payouts are also resolved of course :)[/quote]
I’ve added 4 options and reset the counter.
Prior to reset, the scores were as follows:
1 XPM - 6
2 XPM - 6
3 XPM - 8
5 XPM - 2
Custom - 10
[size=18pt]TO EVERYONE. PLEASE RECAST YOUR VOTE. [/size]
2.01 XPM. I only have an i5-2300 mining XPM and only using 3 out of 4 cores. 1 core is for Litecoin.
I’d be nice to get my XPM a bit faster 
Could someone arguing for a variable threshold (or change in threshold) explain what they are trying to achieve by changing the threshold.
I know it may sound like a silly question, however, I come from the control the frequency of payments camp and want to know what I am missing
I think that it will be very comfortably to set the payout level in the miner launch parameters. With 3.01 by default and 1.01 as minimal level.
A good idea amartinz, as long as the functionality is already in the miner. Otherwise we would all need to compile a new miner to get it to work. I leave that requirement to the experts to comment on.
I think the upgrade should not interrupt mining significantly.
A similar approach would be to add a threshold at the end of the password with a distinct character at the start. e.g. password#1.0 No recompile just change in the scripts that handles login to look for the required character and act appropriately. This is an ugly fudge though.
To allow payments to be made automatically, the threshold has to be stored with the payment address in the database. As a result, it may be easier to allow the user to change the value stored in the database, as part of the new stats window for example. I like the new stats by the way Gives me hope that I will see a payout…
I would not rush to set a minimum payment. As difficulty increases the minimum will begin to look big and everyone will want to reduce it again. So by setting a minimum you are, unintentionally, creating more work in the future.
Better to get it right first time. Then we can talk about something more interesting, like how to make this currency more popular and so more valuable.
Get it right first time. Consider all the angles you can and plan for the future. Alternatively spend your time making the wrong changes and miss-out on the future.
That’s why I am posting here. That’s why I asked the question above, to get it right first time.
All this tallk abaout voting over pool payout is nice. But when is Xolo going to make a descision about this ? It would help people make up there mind wether to stay with this pool.
So Xolo please respond.
i would love to see some more opinions / votes / discussion
at the moment we have:
40% for decreasing the payout barrier
and
45% for not changing it / adding a manual payout or custom payout per user
and
<15% for the alternative method (payouts based on days/weeks)
i’ll try to gather some more stats regarding the payouts from my side to help this thread within the next days
- xolokram
ps. reminder to myself: NEVER give an ETA