You know it gonna happen the minute you go out the door, don't you? :smile:I'm glad to see that El's masternode page now has the version number. It's good to see who is playing and who isn't.
That said, are there any changes planned for this weekend? I'm going out of town, so... no surprises, please !
We need to get this to everyone worried about their Master Nodes. I have 2 because I got into DRK late and thats all I could afford. 1 has been online 6 days 7 hours with only 1 payment and the other 6 days 1 hour with 1 full payment and 2 half payments. I wasn't worried but it is encouraging to see that my 1st node had been voted 9 times in those 6 days but only one was paying and node 2 had been voted 7 times. Thats 16 votes for 2 master nodes in 6 days. Thats alot better than what I was seeing on the just payment end.
I'm seeing fewer and fewer ~0.5 DRK payouts. In fact, none since 07:38am EDT on June 3rd. So the "bad actor hunt" must be working.
Sure, I'll do what I can.
Zoom out and you will see a more even distribution, it's all matter of the scale.
Zoom out and you will see a more even distribution, it's all matter of the scale.
Random is the best even distribution you can get btw. Look at mining. Finding hashes is most random. Some days you find 2 blocks, after that you spend weeks without anything.
This!
The more I think about this, the more I believe the regularity of payments is not only a non-issue, but "fixing it" could actually be undesirable for a number of reasons. First, development of your proposed feature would take valuable time and effort away from the development team working on more constructive features or functionality aimed at consumers. Even if they did add it, it would not increase each masternode's expected payout, so it wouldn't even create value for MN operators, especially over the long-term over which payments should even out. Second, it would make the selection of the next MN less random and more predictable... which could have negative consequences (e.g., perhaps it could enable an attacker to predict high-probability MNs for DDoS attacks to disrupt the network). Random selection makes guessing the likelihood of the next MN as difficult as possible, thus providing greater security to the network. Third, the system is working fine now... it was designed to attract hundreds of well-managed masternode operators to provide a stable, always-on network infrastructure for coin mixing and anonymity services; and that it what it has done. We now have 600+ stable MN's up and operating as desired, and failing to fix a perceived "unfairness" of how frequently individual MNs are paid seems an unlikely threat to this network's size and stability at this stage... in short, there's nothing broken to fix.
I think there is no random payment after the enforcement. You may want to run the daemon with -rindex option and delete peers.dat to see if you will get something after roughly 1200 blocks. The MN payments are distributed in a round robin fashion now and you should get a payment after ~1200 blocks. At least, my MN's are getting payments every ~1200 blocks when there are roughly 1200 MN's on the network.