Thanks for pointing that out deltavee, and if that is indeed the case, it would explain a lot. But the fact remains that we don't really know that for sure.

I have only recently begun to participate in the Ripple forums so if you have a link to the discussion you mentioned, I would very much like to review it.

edit: I don't know much about renting cloud machine, but it strikes me as odd that someone would go through the trouble of using a free offer that would only last for some short period of time knowing that they wouldn't be able to continue.

I have nearly a hundred threads running and only see 500-800 XRPs per day. I can't imagine that the people getting free offers are getting anywhere near that sort of access so the number of XRPs they would be getting would be nominal, wouldn't they?

Deltavee: Thanks very much for those references. I read the first thread all the way through but the others looked more like they were specifically related to finding and executing cloud computing services so I didn't really look much at those.

I could be wrong about the importance of cloud computing on the issue of losing volunteers, but almost everything I read in that thread seemed to be talking about the concerns of speculators and traders in XRPs. So I would consider that a very skewed sample of opinion. For example, look at this quote from near the end of the first thread - a quote which I found to be the rare exception, not the rule: Personally I think that these are the people we are probably losing, but until someone looks into it, we just don't know.

The payout rate here was upped last month to 1.25M/day over the previous 1M/day. IIRC, that was based on the increase in membership in the RL team. So I think these are the type of people RL is looking for.

They don't want people to just run and buy cloud computing power so it makes sense that they wouldn't want that to be profitable. Why? I feel pretty confident in saying the reason is that they want to have as wide a distribution as possible. Setting the payout to benefit cloud users seems counterproductive if that is the primary goal. If just dumping XRPs were the goal, there are plenty of other ways to accomplish that.

My point is that to lose 2000 users since Jan 1st, there had to be at least 2000 people (or cloud accts) that were using cloud services to crunch. Does that seem realistic? IDK, but again the point is that we need to find out for sure. I think it would be tragic to make that assumption and be wrong - because that would mean that the bulk of the people we are losing are not just speculators but real folks with real machines who want to participate but for whatever reason decide to leave instead.

Thanks again but I did get that from reading the thread I referenced. I don't doubt that there were people who joined just because they thought they could net a profit. My point was that it's hard for me to believe that there were 2000 of them.

Of course my disbelieve doesn't matter and maybe that is the explanation. But that IS a lot of people or at least a lot of cloud accounts. Plus we're talking about threads that are specifically geared to those people trying to make a profit. Do you really think that what we're reading there applies to ALL 2000 users that have been lost? Don't you think that this is something we should be looking into rather than making assumptions?

If it turns out that all of those 2000 people are just speculators trying to earn a buck, then I'll happily concede the point. But I don't see how that's likely or even possible. Plus, even it turns out that you can account for a majority of those folks as being speculators, it certainly can't apply to all of them, can it? So shouldn't we be trying to find out why the rest left?

twilyth you also keep saying 2000 users. However, it has been pointed out that it is 2000 accounts. Some of those accounts were suspicious because of the naming scheme used implied some people were creating multiple accounts. Like you also pointed out, without hard proof we wont know. I'm sorry but I don't want someone like WCG giving out my details even if it does quench your curiosity. You mentioned having the IP addresses and such used as a basis. Please don't give mine out. No I didn't do the Ripple giveaway. But, I'm sure there are many who agree.

You also keep waving away many valid explanations. Try merging all of those suggestions together like they would happen in the real world. 2000 Accounts (not users) really isn't all that many. In my teams forums, I see more chatter in the DC section about cryptocurrency than any other DC project. That includes lumping BOINC projects all into one category. I think you are missing how enticing profiting off of cryptocurrency is. So, yes people will use those free services to squeeze a few extra bucks out. Especially when it is a new offering. This is how people learn to maximize or exploit those services.

Also take into consideration if you were one of the people wanting to exploit it. Would you use your main account or tie your name to it? Probably not. You wouldn't want to risk getting banned or your legitimate work getting zeroed out. Create another account....tinker...then cash out and let the account die. Pretty simple really.

Since a previous thread was removed from general viewing, some of the comments can't be referred to. So please excuse me if some of the details get murky when you have rolled these concerns to multiple threads. My apologies if any of the statements weren't indeed actually stated exactly or implied. However, please stop the pointing and name calling bullying tactic. My level of caring about the matter was not expressed as you imply pretty heavy.

I could easily see many contributors that are active here making a second account. Not everyone wants fallout from jumping teams especially for monetary gain. That has been a very heated issue between some teams especially at other DC projects.

As far as my concern with giving my info out? That is a statement out of concern not an implication that you specifically asked for. Someone jumping around demanding answers typically follows with asking for proof. I know you didn't ask for these items yourself and I was just cutting to the chase before there was the suggestion by you or anyone else for it.

Did you not wave away the concern of the economy. Though probably not a big contributor to the issue, it may still play a part. I read your statement in regards to it.

I haven't done anything to the facts but point out the possibilities. You just need to come to terms that there are just some facts that you wont have access to. However, if you are worried about facts, then state the facts and not the assumptions. 2000 and rising users....nope. 2000 and rising accounts... yep. That paints a much different picture. Do you not agree?