Hey all,
Btg has forked and so far it looks great also the Nvidia seems to like this new parameters many thanks to all the devs and contributors that helped,
but besides that one of our pools get quite a lot of hashrate . Please keep in mind the decentralization and spread the hashrate so no pool will have bigger half.
5 Likes
While i’m not thrilled about this, I am thankful for the dedicated mining support
I’m also convinced MiningPoolHub is not a bad actor.
Hope the hashrates get more evenly distributed in the future.
What could be some good ideas for pool ops to try as incentive for miners to use their pool?
My first is lower the pool fee, even if just for a period of time as a promotion.
4 Likes
i agree this is not against MPH in any way i also doesn’t think that they would pull something off its just about spreading the shares more equally /frequently among other pools as well
3 Likes
This is Korea’s largest mining community.
And here’s the story about a 100times reduction in difficulty a few days ago.
so In Korea, interest in btg grew, and a hash hit miningpoolhub.
This is because the operator of miningpoolhub resides in that community.
The miningpoolhub is a very fair place.
However, it is also undesirable to have more than 50% hashes.
If this situation persists
Fees fell in each pool. Or a need self-help effort like last year’s zec’s flypool.
4 Likes
This once happened in the past when BTG first launched. At that time Suprnova nearly dominated all the hashrate. We hope the hashrate will gradually become more and more decentralized in the future. We should also consider the promote other pools.
But overall, MHP and Suprnova are decent pools with good operators. We don’t need to be over worried.
6 Likes
Besides Josephs and H4’s comments, Also we have to keep in mind that this is a free open Market and miners can freely decide which pool is better.
I have noticed that miningpoolhub makes more effective promotions. Perhaps other mining pool have to make an extra effort as well.
4 Likes
nobody is forcing anyone to some pool all have the freedom of choice but with freedom comes responsibility as well.
we should be self aware as miners and spread the decentralization and not centralize in one pool because the pool has 0.1% lower fees than others
1 Like
checking the stats and a lot of fellas moved their miners
a big THANK YOU to all that moved and helped to maintain the decentralization
Btw this community is awesome we done this in 24 hours since the thread start
2 Likes
May be people simply find the miningpoolhub’s UI better than others?
like have to give them that their UI is nice and miners picking hashrate fast…was there before the fork when the poll had around 10-12Mhs
Does anyone else offer a stratum server in Asia? MPH has one in Tokyo, which may make it more attractive to the Asian miners than EU and US pool addresses - and with the surge in interest among Asian miners, it makes some sense.
Also, for now, BTG mining is dominated by NVIDIA miners, whereas it used to be more of a blend. The availability of good miner software for AMD miners will improve over the coming days and weeks, which should also serve to equalize.
3 Likes
Looking at it right now:
MiningPoolHub is .971 / 2.68 = 36.2% of the total hashrate, which is a healthier percentage.
Also notable is the rise in unclassified hashpower - the sum of all the observed hashrates is 1.82 MSol/s, while the total inferred hashrate of the network is 2.68 MSol/s - so we’re only seeing 67.5% of the hashpower in the pools on this list, and 32% is unlisted miners and pools.
It makes me wonder if we’re missing a major pool provider, or two.
4 Likes
https://zsolo.bid/bitcoin-gold-solo-mining.html zsolo bid has 37 ksols and should be added to the list
yeah we gained some adoption on the miner side 
but that fluctuates now it is under 2Msols
[accidental re-post of prior post deleted]
instead of reposting the same you should check the stats now doesent look like the MPH is under 50% now
That’s not a good sign. We should appeal miners to move around to balance the hashrate. MPH should also raise the fee to drive miners away.
1 Like
Easy there, koso - that was an accidental re-post out of my browser cache. I’m editing it.
They are on the miningpoolstats.stream list, but there’s an API problem so their stats are not getting reported. However, they are too small to account for the large difference we see between reported hashrate and network hashrate.
@koso16 - did you notice the discrepancy on miningpoolstream that you posted? not only was MPH > 50% of network hashrate, the reported hashrate was 132% of network hashrate!
We’re seeing variance in hashrates and reporting confounding our analysis. Remember, the Network Hashrate is not a reported number. It is an inference (one based on estimation and considerable variance) drawn based on the prior 200 blocks, and I’ve been wanting to propose improvements in the formula used for it.
I currently see MPH at 6568 miners - that’s the highest I’ve seen them (looking at all the prior screenshots in this thread), so it looks like they are still gaining.
1 Like
sorry if i sound offending …i didnt meant to offend anyone its just frustrating so see the network centralized like this if there is any idea what we could do i will be more than happy to hear it …