ok, cool. I just restarted the server. I’m hoping to test out payment soon.
Right, I got submit errors…
Then I restart the client. Makes digging in the log files easier.
It seems the balance was reset when the server was restarted. Not that I would be interested in the dust balance that was acquired by the client.
I’m more interested in testing NuPond 
1 missing (91.67%) right after placing the bid and the next 3 log entries are at 100% efficiency!
I’ll check that again in some hours.
Great work so far!
1 Like
Yah, I noticed the balances reset. I still have the credits files and can pay out manually when I figure it all out. I don’t have any nbt on the server anyway, I think I’m going to make a new server this weekend sometime.
Working here with no issue now.
By the way, I found out the reason I was getting such a high rejection rate was because I chose the IPv6 option when creating the droplet.
Do you have a more in-depth explanation for that?
I created the server with backups, private networking, and IPv6. It had loads of rejects.
I created the server with none of these options, it had few rejects.
I created the server with backups and IPv6. It had loads of rejects.
I created the server with backups only. I had few rejects.
I cannot say for sure that the issue is not related to private networking without making a server with that checked and IPv6 unchecked, but I think this is sufficient. The server I am currently working on has backups only.
It probably has to do with using an IPv4 address to login even when I had the IPv6 option checked.
I assume you’re using Digital Ocean. I’ve used servers on DO with IPv6 and saw none of the problems you’re describing here.
None of those options should influence IPv4 connections…
It’s very odd.
1 Like
I am using DO, and I agree that it’s odd. I can’t really explain it other than that’s what I experienced. I supposed it’s possible that I made coincidental mistakes, but I made upwards of 6 servers (the 4 mentioned were all identical) and they all fit the description that the IPv6 option is to blame.
This one pays out now; %.25/day, payout every 5 minutes for 0.03 NBT (balance>0.04).
Funny enough, it’s the same IP as the original server, though it’s a completely different size and everything:
45.55.253.18
Please join me on this server and post here if you recieve a payout, thank you.
P.S. payments are out of pocket.
working nicely here.
1 Like
All my NBT got eaten up at Bter. If anyone is having trouble selling your NBT, try sending em over to Bter. I was expecting sell pressure, but it looks like we’re getting buy pressure.
indeed. all my fund is into bid mode.
who is selling 1355 nbt at 0.004700 btc per nbt?
That bid has been the for over a month. I wouldn’t pay it too much attention.
1 Like
Still some hard buy pressure here, most of that btc on the order book isn’t in the pool.
sent 10 nbts.
I will be restarting the server soonish (within 24 hours I hope) and doing manual distributions so that I can increase the payout minimum and the period between payouts. No one else has mentioned receiving a payout, but I personally have gotten quite a few of them so I believe it’s fully functional.
I intend on working on some possibilities for hedging mechanisms, such as separate buy and sell prices and allowing for users to choose whether they want to be mainly in btc or mainly in nbt. I noticed that the NuPond grant does not mention spreads, so it is up to the shareholders to decide after the 30 days if I have fulfilled the requirements of “providing liquidity”. I think this gives me ample room to modify the way both the bot and the server run and stay within good faith of liquidity providing.
The buy pressure on bter is no longer the case, by the way.
1 Like
Ok, I made a few client side adjustments to the pybot. I added a prefunit variable to the pool.config file which shortens the spread on the side you don’t prefer. I also increased the spread from .002 to .005. So far, I’ve been doing alright with that spread, not readjusting the orders too often.
I have not made any changes to the server so far. I was not able to figure out pay.py yet (though I’m close) so I haven’t restarted the server yet.
This branch is very experimental. Do not use unless you know what you’re doing or don’t mind losing money!
2 Likes
I’m currently testing your very experimental branch.
Nothing unexpected so far. Running smoothly at
rate: 0.25%
efficiency: 100.00%
Will keep you updated in case strange things happen.
I did get the payouts.
By the wat, should i git pull at this stage?