Litecoin.watch original research, release 2026-09-30.1.
Publication date uses the site's normal clock. Experiments occurred 29 September
2026 after 22:30 UTC (30 September in Europe/Warsaw).
AI-assisted research, scripting and drafting; no independent human review claimed.
No real purchases, customer data, production wallet or payment was involved.
Contact /corrections/ at https://litecoin.watch for reproducible corrections.

Paying 50 people with Litecoin: one transaction or 50?
https://litecoin.watch/articles/paying-50-people-with-litecoin-one-transaction-or-50

164 signed-candidate policy checks, 12 summary comparisons; Core 0.21.5.8 regtest.
Python 3 standard library and verified Core binaries are required:
https://github.com/litecoin-project/litecoin/releases/tag/v0.21.5.8

  python batch-payments.py /path/to/litecoind /path/to/litecoin-cli new-results.json
Windows: use full quoted paths ending in .exe.
Tested litecoind.exe SHA256:
7430c6d0d4cb59d355361a0b90ffbfc4ac725609483e04c242bf95372cc9b8fe

The script creates a NEW temporary data directory. It disables peer connections,
listening and discovery, enables standardness (-acceptnonstdtxn=0), mines regtest
funding, creates 100 native SegWit UTXOs and checks signed candidates locally.
RPC uses its own temporary local port and cookie. The daemon is stopped in finally.
No existing data directory or wallet is accepted. The lab folder is left for inspection.
Candidates are not broadcast or mined; only the setup funding is mined.
The final mempool is asserted empty. No mainnet timing or propagation measurement.

All inputs and outputs are P2WPKH. Each recipient receives 0.001 LTC and each
transaction has one change output. Candidate fees stabilize at 10 litoshis per
actual decoded vbyte. This is an experimental rate, NOT a current fee recommendation.
Budgets vary only by transaction construction; the lab setup fee is excluded.

Separate-payment sets use disjoint funding outpoints. Different scenarios reuse
the lab pool as alternatives. The one-input batch assumes consolidated funds
already exist, and excludes any earlier consolidation cost.
Equal-input scenarios compare N-input batches with N one-input payments and
2N-input batches with N two-input payments. Random keys, signatures, transaction
IDs and some individual sizes can differ in a new run. Do not assert exact raw
hex or every vsize byte across fresh random wallets. Compare counts, script
types, fee/rate equality, acceptance and relative patterns.
164 counts repeated controls and alternative candidates, not unique mainnet payments.

CSV summarizes all 12 scenarios. JSON includes signed hex, input and output
counts, size, weight, vsize, fees and Core's testmempoolaccept verdicts.
