Thanks for the laugh.
Hello @PTR,
Welcome to the forum!
We always calculate earnings in USD and convert them to STORJ when sends payout on date of payout. So, your accumulated earning will be in USD until get send.
We do not push you to market risks to accumulate earnings in STORJ. If you want to take market risks - you can opt-in for L2 payouts, then you will be able to withdraw your tokens when you want and pay fee yourself.
1 Like
? for those that that prefer to wait until i reached the minimum threshold would i still receive payouts as in the past or be force to use L2 method and the more fees due to an additional transaction.
For those looking to keep an eye on things, it looks like ethscan has added a bit about ERC20 cost too:
1 Like
Another month without pay, quite sad, but I understand…
High fees and the inability to scale ETH blockchain properly were exactly the main reasons why my company moved to Algorand blockchain, which they solved this a long time ago.
post deleted post deleted
Thant’s a shame, actually.
There could (should?) be an option for a SNO to chose whichever he/she prefers (the SNO reward waiting in the form of USD or Storj until the postponed payout is sent to the SNO). Personally I have no doubt that STORJ is more probable to gain value than lose it (that is part of the reason why it is worth it for me to run my nodes).
Buying extra STORJ to take the market exposure is not a solution, that requires extra financial resources people might not have lying around.
1 Like
The L2 is currently opt-in. So, you need to specify that your wallet supports the zksync:
The market risks are out of our control, please, do not mix them with payout. You can do on the market what you want.
I am not mixing anything. The situation is abnormal due to the fact that the payouts are delayed, which is the fault of the Storj network (it’s design failed to consider the possibility of high transaction pricing), not the fault of the SNO.
It makes perfect sense to convert the payout due to Storj at the moment the payout would normally happen (as is normally done), unless the SNO prefers something else.
I understand an argument can be made also to try to protect the SNO from volatility, but you are protecting even a SNO who explicitly does not wish to be protected from it, since such SNO is “protected” from the volatility in his favor. In the end, you are inflicting the volatility risk of USD upon the SNO in this way, which may or may not be greater in comparison to Storj volatility (e.g. my costs are in EUR, not in USD).
The point is, it should be the SNO’s choice, not the networks. (Though one could even argue that since the whole situation is the fault of the network’s design, the network should be covering all risk/loss/lost profit due to the delayed payments.)
I think this question should not be autocratically dismissed by the network.
Best,
Peter
6 Likes
bravo très bonne réponse
1 Like
I’m guessing you’re not going to argue that they should pay you less if the STORJ value goes down though, are you?
It is the SNOs choice already. You want to take on the market risks yourself, switch to zkSync or buy tokens yourself. Simple.
3 Likes
Then you free to opt-in for L2 and take the market risks. Or the other way:
You are guessing wrong. I am arguing it should be my choice which market risk I am taking due to Storj not being able to make the transfer without delay.
As I said, my costs are in EUR, so I am either taking the EUR/USD volatility risk, or the EUR/Storj volatility risk. Storj has made choice on my behalf without asking me which I prefer. That is what I am pointing out.
To buy tokens, I have to invest extra money - which I might not have, and even if I have them, such hedging is not without additional cost (missed return from that extra money, had I invested them elsewhere).
2 Likes
I will opt for the L2, but this will not help with Dec and Jan payouts.
I have 9 nodes all with it’s own payout address (since this was not a problem in the past and it is preferred due to accounting reasons).
Payout for none of those nodes was sent to me last month (most just below the threshold), and at least half of them in Dec., so we are talking about an extra ~ 500 - 1k EUR which I should, in your opinion, invest just to make hedging against the decision Storj took on my behalf without asking my preference.
All I am saying is that it would be nice if the Storj folks asked, and it would not have costed them anything (on average, assuming volatility is equal both ways for simplicity).
I am not making a huge problem out of this, it is just a comment / food for thought / SNO feedback. This kind of problem could repeat itself for various reasons, and it would be nice if on that occasion there would be a choice given to the SNOs.
Best,
Peter
2 Likes
You agreed with ToS when you started. There is no option to send payment in EUR. As soon as you accepted, you are paid in USD, converted to STORJ tokens on date of send.
It will help - you will receive exactly amount of USD for both periods in STORJ tokens on date of send.
As I said, we do not accumulate your payout in STORJ, it’s accumulated in USD. Thus you will receive the same amount which we owed.
Missed opportunity is not related to payout. You always can play on market if you want to take such risks, we do not force you to do so.
Thus you breaking ToS and shoot to your own foot because of threshold.
4 Likes
They are able to do that if you opt in to zkSync.
Clever, but this is clearly negligible and part of dealing with a foreign party.
Fair enough, so go for the zkSync option.
I give up, you are not trying to understand what I am saying 
I don’t want to be able to chose to be paid in EUR. I would like to chose between
a) the USD->Storj conversion is made when the payment is due even though the Storj is sent at whatever later date when transaction cost permits
b) the USD->Storj conversion is not made when the payment is due, the conversion is made at whatever later date when transaction cost permits.
Storj network has chosen b), I would have preferred a). Most importantly, I would have preferred if I was asked which option I prefer. That’s it.
2 Likes
I feel like it’s worth noting that using multiple payout addresses is also against the TOS. And it has created the problem that you are now having to deal with. If you had used one payout address, you would have easily made it past the threshold if most of your 9 nodes was just below the payout threshold as you stated.
2 Likes
The nodes are on different networks in different locations (even connected mostly by different providers). For all practical purposes the Storj network can view them as independent SNOs. As I said reasons for separate addresses were accounting and it was not a problem in the past.