I would also take into consideration the length of you being on this pool. We don't land blocks every few minutes, so given the variance, if you're judging your payout based on a short time, then variance is your answer.

Just a curiosity, does each share in your system have a timestamp that decides if the share is to be included in the PPLNS payout calculation?

I agree. I was thinking about suggesting this as well, glad I didn't have the same thoughts.

It's probably never going to be completely accurate. The hash rate in the pool stats is calculated based on the number of shares and their difficulty over a rolling 10 minute period if I understand it correctly. Over such a short timeframe, the hashrate can vary greatly. I am a small miner with 2 GPUs now, and the hash rate on the pool stats for each worker varies a lot, it swings +/- 30%.

Well we hit 2 blocks in a single day before after about 5-6 weeks of the pool being with a consistant ~1+- Ghz. The payout was sweet though. So the variance is very random and crazy for low hash rate as ours. I think if we would grow to at least 2Ghz we could get more regular blocks, as in in probably on average once every 2 weeks. :) On the good side, our hash rate has been growing and the Nicehash meltdown has helped...

You do realize it's possible that this pool hasn't mined more than a block of whatever coin you are mining? This is a small pool and it takes days or weeks to find a block in certain coins. Logically the rewards is far larger than for a block on a large pool - but it evens out in the long term.

So with the launch of Cryptokitties, there's lot of money in transaction fees. Comon guys, let's land another block! :)

PPLNS

To @Poolmining Support, I do understand your emotional outburst, you've had a lot of things to go through to get this pool to where it is right now, so I sympathize with you as a person. You've done tons of great work here already, but I have to side with Marius here, I don't think his intentions were wrong, there was a error in the communication process, hence his concern on trustworthiness, but it was not his fault, and he deserved less emotion and more rationality from you. Don't take it bad from me please, I'm honestly just giving you a suggestion as person to person.

Yeah latency is important. I think the pool operator was considering or working on supporting more GEOs, but not sure at what stage this is. Let's see what he tells you.