Nobody bans or kick off you. Only suggestd use of english, to be understanded by all of us. I´m not a english speaker, but , in fact I write here in english. Imagine how mess could be if I post in spanish, others in french, german, etc

Well as dishwara already pointed out, Slush's forum account is showing that he (or someone) is logging in to it.  But I agree with Lucko in that I have seen way too many anomalous payouts and missing shares in the past week or more to just think all is normal.  I already moved more than 20 of my miners elsewhere and only have one miner left on Slush.  Organofcorti posted a link a few pages back to a post about spreading your hashing power over several pools so I went that route.  I get less per found block on each pool but I get some kind of payout for a lot more blocks each day.  Plus since I put miners on both bitparking and bitminter I am also getting some alt coins.  I've got a pile of devcoins already whatever those are, woot!

Fantastic! Thanks!

Will tip when I get more BTC. Only been mining a couple weeks.

Man, all the Fear/Uncertainty/Doubt you can dish up.

All the blocks I've seen with incorrect payouts were eventually corrected.  I see some people freak out just after "Processing..." is completed.  It's clear there are multiple calculations on different boxes to get the final number.  I suspect on some of the blocks with "short" payouts, one of the boxes is missing from that calc.  You can refresh and watch it grow in 3rds...

I think the pool is better than ever.  He moved to a more stable host (and faster IMHO)....  I think he's tired of having 5000 employees and having a handful of those who work the least complain the most.

He's recalculating "short" blocks... it seems correct...   but I tell you what.  Log your next block session, don't lose the logs, and come back and complain with some REAL evidence you're being shorted.  Coming on here and bitching about what you suspect doesn't do anyone any favors.'

There are logging options in cgminer.  Use them, do the math, and then come back with real evidence and make some real accusations.  The pool has never been stronger....  He reacted to a theft, and a DDoS attack, and it's still going strong.  All the while, maintaining a good attitude and helping people.  Give the guy a break...  and we'll see you back next block with some real evidence, right?

I'm curious as to your reasoning to why you think you deserved 54% payout in the 2nd round when you submitted 82% as many shares/minute as the round before... aka... did 82% as much work per X time.

Or if we look at total contribution per pool shares...
You got .00016% total pool shares for the lesser paid round, and .00014% total shares for the better paid round. You actually contributed 14% more of the total shares on the round where you received 46% less reward.

The reason is - this is not a PPS (pay-per-share) pool, but more like a PPLNS (pay-per-last-N-shares). In Slush's case "last" is about an hour, but when you add exponentially lower score to the older shares - it's really about the last 15-20min.

Many people get confused in this exact way - the number of shares DOES NOT mean a proportional payout. It would be proportional in a PPS pool, which this one IS NOT.

It is the TIME of those shares that matters (and by time I'm referring to how old the shares are, or in other words - how closely before the end of the round did you submit them).

So, back to your question - I learned (although too late) that one of my miners stopped submitting shares, and unfortunately it stopped closer to the beginning than to the end of that round. Hence the payout. I know how Slush's scoring works and that's why I'm not surprised by the result.

I see... I'll have to look more into this, I thought the N in PPLNS was in relation to the round as a whole... In that N being a variable was fixed to the duration of the round.

If you miner stopped near the beginning of the round, how can you be expected to have pulled a higher total pool percentage?

I have more than one miner. The rest worked fine - the final payout reflects the amount that the rest did.

The newer the shares - the higher the score (and also the older the share - the lower the score which eventually becomes zero). The miner that died had some shares towards the beginning of the round, but by the round end they were already too old and as a result their score was almost zero.

One "feature" that I'd like to have (even if it is a paid one) would be a database dump with the timing of each of my shares and their score. Slush already has that and that's what he uses to calculate the final score. That way everyone can crosscheck and match each share against what his/her logs say. And this can also help with troubleshooting and isolating misbehaving miners (because if you have several miners you can never be sure which was the bad one).

I don't have time to explain anything right now, or even look at your problem. But I just wanted to point out that you were looking at the wrong payout method before you spent more time on it.

There's a post in this thread somewhere that out lines the payout method, or you could try these: