There might still be something else at play. I’m only seeing 6 connections. Yesterday I had 7, it should be 8.
Anyone else having a number lower than 8 connections during a sustained period?
Have no trouble with connections with other clients, like Nu or Peercoin
Try to delete you address.dat, and restart.
I have 8.
I have 8 now after deleting addr.dat. Problem solved for me.
Update from me.
Yes, it’s gone, thanks.
Before you posted this I deleted the B&C client completely from my computer including this file and let it resync. Before I was getting only 3 connections, but now I have 8. I also removed the new voting options in my data feed. I did all this before I went to bed.
When I woke up I checked it and I still hadn’t minted any blocks. I ended up completely removing my data feed and it still didn’t mint. After some further digging, I realized that even though I removed the new voting options from my feed, in the reputation and asset sections, voting was still configured from the feed I had previously removed. Removing the feed had not removed the votes for reputation and assets. Once I removed all the voting manually, I immediately minted a new block. So it seems to be minting normally now.
When I come back from work, is there anything else you guys want me to try? While removing the new voting options worked to get me minting again, I hear that @Cybnate and @Yurizhai are having no problem minting with the new options.
@Cybnate, I was reading your post in your data feed thread…
The thing that stuck out to me was that you were only voting for assets and not reputation related stuff. Have you ever tried minting with reputation voting options set?
We all had a problem minting with @cryptog’s feed. Nobody seemed to have a problem with your feed though. One difference I can see is that @cryptog had votes set for both assets and reputation while you only had votes set for assets. Maybe the reputation votes are preventing people from minting? Have you ever minted a block with reputation votes set?
When I get home I’d like to try voting for both assets and reputation at the same time and then only with assets and no reputation and see if either mints blocks on my client.
Quick update. I got home from work about an hour ago, and found my client continued to mint 21 times throughout the day with no problems. As an experiment, I setup asset voting using the same selections that Cybnate is using while leaving the reputation section blank. I was able to mint a block with asset info selected!
Now I’m going to remove the asset voting info, so it’s blank and instead fill out the reputation voting info that I previously had in there and see if I mint a block then. I’ll give it to tomorrow morning when I wake up.
Thanks for your tests.
They very much help narrowing down the reason for the problem!
I haven’t as I didn’t see the need for it yet and I still have to get my head around it. But it is good that it is being tested now. Hope it becomes clear what is going on soon.
Alright, last night I set the number of reputed signers eligible for reward to 4 and the reward amount per block to 0.01 BKS. Both settings are in the reputation voting section.
I didn’t mint a single block all night after doing this. I also tried removing one of the two settings and keeping the other and then switching later on to see if only one of these settings was causing the problem, but it didn’t make a difference. No blocks were minted.
As soon as I removed reputation votes I started minting again. So it seems that reputation votes are preventing people from minting any blocks. Can I have other people verify what I’ve found here?
@CoinGame, I just wanted to make sure you know about this. Please check my responses above when you get some time.
Hmmm that’s strange. I didn’t see that in testing. It just simply ignored all of my votes until the protocol upgraded. Will have to look into it some more.
It has happened to others also. In the discussion above you will see that people who couldn’t mint were subscribed to Cryptog’s feed when he started voting for reputation. Cybnate’s subscribers were unaffected though and continued to mint because she didn’t include reputation votes.
Current status:
"blocks" : 405075,
"block_percentage" : 47.7,Daily history:
"blocks" : 403889,
"block_percentage" : 45.7,
"blocks" : 403900,
"block_percentage" : 46.0,
"blocks" : 403913,
"block_percentage" : 46.05,
"blocks" : 403926,
"block_percentage" : 46.1,
"blocks" : 403941,
"block_percentage" : 46.0,
"blocks" : 403959,
"block_percentage" : 46.05,
"blocks" : 403973,
"block_percentage" : 46.0,
"blocks" : 403990,
"block_percentage" : 45.9,
"blocks" : 404003,
"block_percentage" : 46.0,
"blocks" : 404024,
"block_percentage" : 46.05,
"blocks" : 404043,
"block_percentage" : 46.25,
"blocks" : 404062,
"block_percentage" : 46.1,
"blocks" : 404077,
"block_percentage" : 46.0,
"blocks" : 404090,
"block_percentage" : 45.95,
"blocks" : 404105,
"block_percentage" : 46.15,
"blocks" : 404105,
"block_percentage" : 46.15,
"blocks" : 404105,
"block_percentage" : 46.15,
"blocks" : 404154,
"block_percentage" : 45.8,
"blocks" : 404168,
"block_percentage" : 45.55,
"blocks" : 404181,
"block_percentage" : 45.7,
"blocks" : 404196,
"block_percentage" : 45.9,
"blocks" : 404211,
"block_percentage" : 45.8,
"blocks" : 404225,
"block_percentage" : 45.85,
"blocks" : 404239,
"block_percentage" : 45.85,
"blocks" : 404249,
"block_percentage" : 45.9,
"blocks" : 404268,
"block_percentage" : 46.05,
"blocks" : 404277,
"block_percentage" : 46.1,
"blocks" : 404287,
"block_percentage" : 46.2,
"blocks" : 404296,
"block_percentage" : 46.25,
"blocks" : 404311,
"block_percentage" : 46.3,
"blocks" : 404323,
"block_percentage" : 46.25,
"blocks" : 404339,
"block_percentage" : 46.35,
"blocks" : 404357,
"block_percentage" : 46.45,
"blocks" : 404364,
"block_percentage" : 46.55,
"blocks" : 404378,
"block_percentage" : 46.55,
"blocks" : 404395,
"block_percentage" : 46.25,
"blocks" : 404412,
"block_percentage" : 46.25,
"blocks" : 404423,
"block_percentage" : 46.25,
"blocks" : 404434,
"block_percentage" : 46.1,
"blocks" : 404450,
"block_percentage" : 46.1,
"blocks" : 404461,
"block_percentage" : 46.15,
"blocks" : 404475,
"block_percentage" : 46.2,
"blocks" : 404488,
"block_percentage" : 46.35,
"blocks" : 404509,
"block_percentage" : 46.5,
"blocks" : 404523,
"block_percentage" : 46.6,
"blocks" : 404537,
"block_percentage" : 46.85,
"blocks" : 404548,
"block_percentage" : 46.55,
"blocks" : 404567,
"block_percentage" : 46.45,
"blocks" : 404584,
"block_percentage" : 46.45,
"blocks" : 404597,
"block_percentage" : 46.4,
"blocks" : 404611,
"block_percentage" : 46.5,
"blocks" : 404626,
"block_percentage" : 46.8,
"blocks" : 404641,
"block_percentage" : 46.85,
"blocks" : 404650,
"block_percentage" : 46.85,
"blocks" : 404665,
"block_percentage" : 47.0,
"blocks" : 404678,
"block_percentage" : 47.0,
"blocks" : 404694,
"block_percentage" : 47.0,
"blocks" : 404709,
"block_percentage" : 47.1,
"blocks" : 404726,
"block_percentage" : 47.25,
"blocks" : 404733,
"block_percentage" : 47.25,
"blocks" : 404747,
"block_percentage" : 47.2,
"blocks" : 404764,
"block_percentage" : 47.2,
"blocks" : 404777,
"block_percentage" : 47.3,
"blocks" : 404787,
"block_percentage" : 47.4,
"blocks" : 404795,
"block_percentage" : 47.3,
"blocks" : 404806,
"block_percentage" : 47.35,
"blocks" : 404818,
"block_percentage" : 47.45,
"blocks" : 404830,
"block_percentage" : 47.5,
"blocks" : 404845,
"block_percentage" : 47.55,
"blocks" : 404862,
"block_percentage" : 47.4,
"blocks" : 404874,
"block_percentage" : 47.25,
"blocks" : 404884,
"block_percentage" : 47.4,
"blocks" : 404898,
"block_percentage" : 47.55,
"blocks" : 404912,
"block_percentage" : 47.6,
"blocks" : 404920,
"block_percentage" : 47.6,
"blocks" : 404940,
"block_percentage" : 47.75,
"blocks" : 404948,
"block_percentage" : 47.8,
"blocks" : 404961,
"block_percentage" : 47.8,
"blocks" : 404977,
"block_percentage" : 48.05,
"blocks" : 404994,
"block_percentage" : 48.05,
"blocks" : 405011,
"block_percentage" : 48.0,
"blocks" : 405026,
"block_percentage" : 48.1,
"blocks" : 405036,
"block_percentage" : 48.0,
"blocks" : 405052,
"block_percentage" : 47.65,
"blocks" : 405065,
"block_percentage" : 47.75,
"blocks" : 405075,
"block_percentage" : 47.7,My question is, if we hit 90% and the protocol switches, will nobody be able to mint blocks if they vote for reputation, or will the problem go away? Would a v4.0.2 need to be released in order to fix the problem? That might look bad if we have to announce that shareholders need to upgrade yet again in such a short time span, so I hope that won’t be necessary.
Agree, if there is a bug in 4.0.1, just release 4.0.2 fixing it before reaching 90%.
Going down again. What now?
Wait until the 90% are reached 
But we shouldn’t sit idle and rather try to educate people on the need to update the client.
The bitcointalk already points out the need to updating the client to vote for the protocol switch when minting.
The Twitter account has only 174 followerrs, but some might be BKS holders unaware of it.
I haven’s seen a tweet with an update message.
I have lead lengthy discussions with the dev team about this over the course of the last few days.
I am preparing a proposal which I expect to present in the next day. For now I will just say there are plenty of options to successfully get the network upgraded and to prevent problems with apathetic shareholders in the future. I will present those options along with my recommendation soon.