Talk:Pool vs. solo mining: Difference between revisions
Create a talk page to point out how an earlier topic was for the same subject. |
m Dree12 moved page Talk:Pool Mining vs Solo Mining to Talk:Pool vs. solo mining: Capitalization |
||
| (4 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
Should the original be merged into this one? - [[User:Sgornick|Sgornick]] 02:36, 24 May 2011 (GMT) | Should the original be merged into this one? - [[User:Sgornick|Sgornick]] 02:36, 24 May 2011 (GMT) | ||
This article seems biased toward a) pooled mining and b) eligius. This would be fine on a page like Why Pooled Mining. But since this page indicates it has pros/cons of both, there should be pros/cons of both. As is, it almost sounds like a commercial for eligius. --[[User:Hawks5999|Hawks5999]] 19:04, 14 June 2011 (GMT) | |||
Pooled mining is basically superior in every way nowadays, so there's not much one can do to avoid the "biased" feel. As for the Eligius bit, some other pool had a blatent advertisement in there, so I changed it to Eligius as a kind of "backfired!" expecting someone else to make it neutral fairly quick. --[[User:Luke-jr|Luke-jr]] 22:04, 14 June 2011 (GMT) | |||
"Pooled mining is basically superior in every way nowadays" is called an opinion. And when the opinion is given by someone who runs a pool, it is ''ipso facto'' biased toward pool mining. There's no problem with a biased opinion - every opinion is a bias by definition. However, for this content it seems it should be more fact and less commentary... and definitely not advertising. But, if I were in your position, I'd likely do the same thing ;) --[[User:Hawks5999|Hawks5999]] 23:20, 14 June 2011 (GMT) | |||
Not really an opinion when there's hard facts behind it. I can't think of any good reason someone would solo mine anymore. --[[User:Luke-jr|Luke-jr]] 20:58, 15 June 2011 (GMT) | |||
Latest revision as of 02:39, 10 December 2012
There already had been the Why_pooled_mining article though this article provides different information through a different presentation.
Should the original be merged into this one? - Sgornick 02:36, 24 May 2011 (GMT)
This article seems biased toward a) pooled mining and b) eligius. This would be fine on a page like Why Pooled Mining. But since this page indicates it has pros/cons of both, there should be pros/cons of both. As is, it almost sounds like a commercial for eligius. --Hawks5999 19:04, 14 June 2011 (GMT)
Pooled mining is basically superior in every way nowadays, so there's not much one can do to avoid the "biased" feel. As for the Eligius bit, some other pool had a blatent advertisement in there, so I changed it to Eligius as a kind of "backfired!" expecting someone else to make it neutral fairly quick. --Luke-jr 22:04, 14 June 2011 (GMT)
"Pooled mining is basically superior in every way nowadays" is called an opinion. And when the opinion is given by someone who runs a pool, it is ipso facto biased toward pool mining. There's no problem with a biased opinion - every opinion is a bias by definition. However, for this content it seems it should be more fact and less commentary... and definitely not advertising. But, if I were in your position, I'd likely do the same thing ;) --Hawks5999 23:20, 14 June 2011 (GMT)
Not really an opinion when there's hard facts behind it. I can't think of any good reason someone would solo mine anymore. --Luke-jr 20:58, 15 June 2011 (GMT)