Reward does not seem correct on last Dash block

Reward was in line with previous blocks. The 1.8039736 DASH you might be referring to, went to the DASH master nodes. If you inspect the previous blocks you will notice a similar pattern. Roughly 50% always goes to the master nodes.

I received .4 and .3 before with far less shares.

The only explanation for this would be the miner directing a massive amount of hashpower on the pool roughly a day ago.

WTF! I mined for 4 days over 30,000shares and my payout is 0.04Dash?! what kind of scam pool is this?? It should be WAY more than that!  I thought this was a PPLNS pool not a one-guy-gets-the-entire-block-payment pool.  "The only explanation for this would be the miner directing a massive amount of hashpower on the pool roughly a day ago.".... I dont give a shit. Pay me out the work I put in. this is ridiculous and unprofessional.

mine was also much lower this time

You told me to message back if I thought I was seeing a discrepancy again. You sure seem like nice enough and engaging people but I dont see how this can be right. I like to help out new ventures like yours and really gave it a go this time but over 100,000 shares and the equivalent payout of $10 a day against $6 a day electricity isnt for me. I did not get the answer or resolution I wanted so I will be moving on again. I wish you all the best in your endeavour.

@Ted: As I've already wrote in response to your private ticket: Total recorded difficulty for the block was 14600000 for 232210 shares contributed by all miners. Of which you contributed 11024 shares with a combined difficulty of 484175 which equals 3.31% of the work for the block. What kind of payout do you expect for that?

I think it would be very healthy for all of us to see a contribution of shares per round in the reports if we want to continue working on the pool. Cheers,

Well, you either trust the pool or you don't. Even if that information would be included in the reports, people could still accuse the pool of faking these metrics as well. I can tell you that we are working our asses of providing a good mining experience to everyone and we don't have the slightest interest in angering and ultimately losing loyal miners by doing shady stuff with the payouts to cash in on a couple dollars. I'm currently in contact with a fellow pool operator and we will go over the logs tomorrow. If there are any irregularities caused by a software bug, people will get compensated.  

@crypto Journey, How many D3 did you use to generate your 100,000 shares? @Ted can you share your statistics too plz?

Please everyone keep in mind last week the Difficulty spiked from 14M to 24M in some days... very crazy things happening. Very sadly we have tons of miners using multipools which increase OUR difficulty and dump all for "shit coins" or BTC which drives our price down as DASH keeps being offloaded....   I understand that we are under financial stress to recoup our investment so we need the best information always.

@Pool. My question is I find it very interesting that even at 6THs (all the time)  this pool takes 7 days in average to find a block. There are pools with 6THs such as Zpool that find them within hours... that's where I see a huge disconnect. This capacity is equivalent to at least 300 D3 with only 40 miners connected?

I am like others looking to support this pool too - information on mining and understanding statistics, rounds is very limited and no one takes the time to elaborate.

This is a joint partnership and as people doing business we are also requesting clarity on topics.

@Marco: There was indeed a bug with the displayed amount of miners and hashrate for the pool on the web frontend (the values incorrectly included information from other pools) which has been corrected now. 

Here's the complete payment processing log for Block 761230:

[2017-10-28 16:30:01.5036] [I] [PayPerLastNShares] Balance-calculation completed with accumulated score 1 (100%)
[2017-10-28 16:30:01.5293] [I] [PayPerLastNShares] Adding 0.19411 DASH to balance of Xh5oWnZgzgRtC6qSSQVQfZL5CHgctaTTgE for 28900 shares
[2017-10-28 16:30:01.5408] [I] [PayPerLastNShares] Adding 0.3938 DASH to balance of XbirKVQ8iVs9iGv8tN3ZTPLPaiHreTVYqE for 59446 shares
[2017-10-28 16:30:01.5911] [I] [PayPerLastNShares] Adding 0.07555 DASH to balance of Xy7BgJD6UCyTUwTYqQzr2vMyL6B4V4DPvi for 10746 shares
[2017-10-28 16:30:01.6056] [I] [PayPerLastNShares] Adding 0.2532 DASH to balance of XeE863rqgVLTBrE2eDWkpq3m7KzbdcYU1f for 38810 shares
[2017-10-28 16:30:01.6203] [I] [PayPerLastNShares] Adding 0.00179 DASH to balance of XkkA4JqYmekdBoEjBhAnuFxWqsmUk1uWwd for 194 shares
[2017-10-28 16:30:01.6758] [I] [PayPerLastNShares] Adding 0.00108 DASH to balance of XfftbJdExNvfjLV6S7wgQJsB9BrKv6vstk for 78 shares
[2017-10-28 16:30:01.6943] [I] [PayPerLastNShares] Adding 0.00042 DASH to balance of XhnJDaruB1zAMFwjXmZRVTKLQfHxiPRR27 for 42 shares
[2017-10-28 16:30:01.7194] [I] [PayPerLastNShares] Adding 0.22057 DASH to balance of XyTaexB4LnndFF9wQEVuVWC7qacnT6b1uL for 30862 shares
[2017-10-28 16:30:01.7475] [I] [PayPerLastNShares] Adding 0.04209 DASH to balance of Xp6bK4UKh7zwXks1TBgt9HGLgnz5vMdgKB for 7876 shares
[2017-10-28 16:30:01.7834] [I] [PayPerLastNShares] Adding 0.32892 DASH to balance of XomXz9aQgBvJkY8WWvvfGsNmefwhiaeUHc for 10529 shares
[2017-10-28 16:30:01.7928] [I] [PayPerLastNShares] Adding 0.00111 DASH to balance of XvzhNipVHAPF8rfP4jeQA459fgWvDe5Aud for 126 shares
[2017-10-28 16:30:01.8377] [I] [PayPerLastNShares] Adding 0.00017 DASH to balance of XgwYSnC7wkuj2oeKKVMCB7YJtmeGq7rvo4 for 25 shares
[2017-10-28 16:30:01.8823] [I] [PayPerLastNShares] Adding 0.00042 DASH to balance of XiAgyvR9b78gAYhSmNNfhnP8C1fiV3piH5 for 47 shares
[2017-10-28 16:30:01.8869] [I] [PayPerLastNShares] Adding 0.00014 DASH to balance of XfCNMA8ydvudG1XyF18yAxvEfVmaPNtRy3 for 13 shares
[2017-10-28 16:30:01.9149] [I] [PayPerLastNShares] Adding 0.00001 DASH to balance of Xo8iWDxQm57wFgAt7aFfxoVhdrTgnCUW4Q for 1 shares
[2017-10-28 16:30:01.9149] [I] [PayPerLastNShares] Adding 0.00081 DASH to balance of XwArE5219EFEibU9XxwQwbgh8oBrWZU7Qv for 104 shares
[2017-10-28 16:30:01.9149] [I] [PayPerLastNShares] Adding 0.00038 DASH to balance of Xo4VNqHiTXJH9wzTxqxEdy9obiHpK1EHzR for 12 shares
[2017-10-28 16:30:01.9149] [I] [PayPerLastNShares] Adding 0.19415 DASH to balance of Xv262qxWYasMwaLtFQEWsns7eS61m26Qoq for 1540 shares
[2017-10-28 16:30:01.9149] [I] [PayPerLastNShares] Adding 0.05929 DASH to balance of XshF4uevDpJ2P2ta4RtR845V3GUZvqHunq for 530 shares
[2017-10-28 16:30:08.0820] [I] [PayPerLastNShares] 189881 shares contributed to a total payout of 1.76803 DASH (100.00% of block reward)
[2017-10-28 16:30:08.5314] [I] [dash1] [Bitcoin Payout Handler] Paying out 1.73786 DASH to 7 addresses
[2017-10-28 16:30:08.6576] [I] [dash1] [Bitcoin Payout Handler] Payout transaction id: cd2b5a1c212a7f80521aa86054c448518f111b9f33a5e33156731ae10ce6c18d

I will continue the investigation tomorrow morning. I'm simply too tired right now.

At the moment the only plausible explanation for the variance in payouts appears to be the extreme volatility of the dash network difficulty over the past eight days. I queried the share database for the minimum and maximum network difficulty for submitted shares:

miningcore=# select min(networkdifficulty) from shares where poolid = 'dash1';
     min
-------------
 5.35662e+06
(1 row)

miningcore=# select max(networkdifficulty) from shares where poolid = 'dash1';
     max
-------------
 3.06027e+07
(1 row)

This appears to be in line with the graph at: https://www.coinwarz.com/difficulty-charts/dash-difficulty-chart

Notice the extreme drop on 26th of October. We are talking about a 570% spread spectrum in network difficulty over 10 days here. Anyone with basic math skills will realize that such an extreme volatility will have a severe impact on share valuation: https://github.com/coinfoundry/miningcore/blob/master/src/MiningCore/Payments/PayoutSchemes/PayPerLastNShares.cs#L152. Notice how share difficulty is divided by network difficulty.

I can clearly see here

[2017-10-28 16:30:01.6056] [I] [PayPerLastNShares] Adding 0.2532 DASH to balance of XeE863rqgVLTBrE2eDWkpq3m7KzbdcYU1f for 38810

That I was credited for 38.8K shares instead of 100K plus. You further check this as when I pulled my miners from the pool, I still had 40K shares remaining and received a payment of more or less the same for the very next block.

There is something clearly wrong.

@Crypto Journey

That I was credited for 38.8K shares instead of 100K plus. You further check this as when I pulled my miners from the pool, I still had 40K shares remaining and received a payment of more or less the same for the very next block.

Actually that's exactly what supposed to happen when the PPLNS window boundary is reached. Your shares will be silently dropped from the calculation, but are eligible for inclusion in the next block which is exactly what happened with your 38k shares. Please take a look at Round 2 of the illustration in the FAQ.

Going forward maybe. Are you telling me its correct that I lost 70K shares? 

Going forward maybe. Are you telling me its correct that I lost 70K shares? 

You did not lose them rather somebody else moved so much ahead of you that the algorithm wouldn't consider them anymore. That's just how PPLNS works.

My understanding of PPLNS is obviously not as great as yours. However in 'laymans' terms I always thought that it is meant to reward miner loyalty by 'weighting' more towards those who stuck with the pool. I think I ran on your pool for 10 days or so this time with a 7 day no block found period but I stuck with it because I understood I would receive a greater share than previous blocks as I had over 100k shares as opposed to 40-50k. Instead somehow only 38K were counted, you tell me this is normal etc. Fine I dont have a beef with you guys, For me its not normal that for 7 days you get rewarded the same as a pool hopper. I left the pool and got the same payment!!

The DASH difficulty roller coaster appears to continue: https://www.coinwarz.com/difficulty-charts/dash-difficulty-chart. Just yesterday we had a difficulty spectrum between 13.1 and 24.6 Million. That's a whopping 87%. Going forward there's needs to be a way to cope with that. One approach would be to use the network difficulty average of all shares contributing to a block.