Bitcoin Forum

I invested a certain amount of btc in DADICE at a kelly of 10, as far as I know this means I can only lose 10% of my profit in 1 bet.

Reading their website this was confirmed : https://www.dadice.com/print?investments
The maximum pay-out of the site is calculated by taking the sum of all the investments * risk * 0.01. So imagine we had user A with 10 Bitcoins invested at 1/2 Kelly, B with 10 at 5x and C with 10 at 10x. The maximum pay-out would be:

(10*0.5*0.01) + (10*5*0.01) + (10*10*0.01) = 1.55 Bitcoin




Then someone made 1 bet : #407989150
and my investment went immediately down by 29%
After talking to 1 staff member (M.F., full name and private info known) got the info that max bet is 20 btc and that it is independent of the amount invested. On the question why the above information was on their website and why they mention using the kelly criterion but are not doing that they couldn't give me an appropriate answer. If I ask what would happen if someone would win 100 x 20 btc (and investments would all be negative) he just said : "we will not pay him the won amount".

For this reason I would want to ask them to send me my losses  of ca. 2 BTC (only due to allowing a bet which shouldn't be allowed by the kelly criterion) to 1JnKcPAG8pieCdFA23X9yxvwMq5aeB9yqJ (+ 3 BTC for "trying" to expose my funds to more risk than I agreed"), and make their site implement the kelly criterion correctly (or remove every false/misleading information from their website and by doing that make the website completely untrustworthy)



*Investments are shown on the website as investment x kelly.

I DONT WANT TO SAY ANYTHING BAD ABOUT DADICE AND TILL NOW I DIDNT HAVE ANY PROBLEMS WITH DADICE; THIS SCAM ACCUSATION IS JUST TO PUSH THEM TO SOLVE THIS ISSUE ASAP.

I didn't know it was a secret that they are scamming. I am also not sure why you would invest in their site when they are refusing to disclose their cold storage addresses. Although in theory it should show up when they go to pay out this "player" who "won" on a single bet.

Disclosing cold storage doesn't assure they are trustworthy. Not having implemented the kelly criterion while spreading it out on their website (after discovering more problems like investing right after a big loss and starting with a large profit) is more a red flag for me and I hope they can sort this out soon.

Well not disclosing their cold storage is a pretty good indication that they are not trustworthy. If they are going to lie about how much money they are holding on their investor's behalf, then why do you think they would otherwise act honestly?

You are right that they messed up big time on that bet, assuming it was in fact a mistake (which I honestly doubt).

The 'effective bankroll' (ie. actual investments times Kelly multiplier) was over 1000 BTC at the time. That means the maximum profit per bet should have been over 10 BTC. So when someone wins 20 BTC because the site is risking too much, it's not more than double the correct amount to be risking.

The most you should have been able to lose is 10% of your investment per roll.

Even taking this fixed 20 BTC maximum profit into account, the most you should have been able to lose is ~20% of your investment per roll.

So how on earth did you end up losing 29%?

It seems there's more than one bug here.

It will be interesting to hear DaDice staff try to explain their way out of this major fuckup.

completely right,
I talk to them tomorrow on skype. I just got mutted in the chat because I announced this...

Why should they disclose this information? What about the investors who dont want to be identified? Should DaDice Just disregard them and make their information public?

So in the end they use the last thing they can do to silence this issue by muting you. Quite a honorable action from them to their investor. Censorship means people are hiding some stuff up on their sleeve

They should proof they own the bitcoin in cold storage, not who the investors are (which in fact they even don't know theirselves)

And I was not even accusing them, I was just explaining the kelly criterion  ::)

How is anyone going to be confident that they actually have the bankroll to cover the bets they are allowing players to make?

They can't exactly keep their cold storage private forever (assuming they actually have any cold storage) as players will eventually win (as in this case) and will need to pay out from their cold storage.

To take their argument that their investors want their addresses to be "private" seriously is just naive.

it's naive and there are enough option to mix bitcoins
People who want to be anonymous will also use anonymous bitcoin addresses so they will never be traced back. I fixed some earlier problems with them before and now I hope to keep working with them in making everything legit and open.

So question is why would you even want to put investment in there ?  ::) . This is a warning for the others because Kelly criterion is a standard thing in gambling industry, if they dont know how to do this properly then people should stay away from this

They just should implement it...

From all of that, I would really like to see the part where you say they said to you that..


That above is a game changer and no doubt if you have proof they said this then you are going to have a nice big offer to keep it to yourself,, but you should protect the community and not greed and release proof of this.

I am standing by waiting to see this proof.

If they don't implement the kelly criterion I'll post a proof of this. If they implement it soon this fact will be completely irrelevant.

Too bad you didn't read at least some pages of the previous scam accusation (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1066980). This has been known for a while and obviously DD didn't do much about it:

leen93, you don't talk good about them, but you take their signature …

I am not talking good or bad about them. I am just talking about the truth. About the non-implementation of the kelly criterion you just can't say anything good.
I didn't get paid for a long time for my sign campaign but don't mind too much about this, just want all problems at dadice solved. That's where I am caring the most about right now.

The fact more people knew this before doesn't make it less urgent to change it...

UPDATE : The investment option just got removed for me and a chat ban has been given to me. Getting any contact with the staff about the kelly criterion was not possible till now...

DaDice knew this for months and didn't change it. They also clearly lied about their bankroll, so 2 or 20 max profit is pretty much the same... if there is any big winner they will simply not pay (and higher max = more chance to scam more.) TBH I am not sure why people still take them serious after they have already shown to be untrustworthy (lying about bankroll.) They will only last as long as people deposit/lose on there. I hope, for your own sake, that you withdrew your leftover investments already.

Hello leen, how are you today?

Well to be honest this thread was no unexpected at all, for most us know how much of a manipulative and crooked fellow you are. I hope you will read my entire post and the ones followed by it patiently, as there are some big disappointments coming up for you.

First of all, you have once again proved your self as a liar as no staff ever said we will not pay them, what was said there, we will soon post screenshot of that right here in its original context. But let us all understand the history of leen93 and fuck ups it has caused us. For starters, when you came in site chat for very first time, we welcomed you there, a mod even added you to our customer relations group in Skype, but you spurned all our good efforts by making this (what you can only refer to as: stupid) post here in BCT:


And then anyhow after creating a class A whore-show there, you still decided to invest money with Da Dice. Right at those times, people also won 9 BTC and even more, as well as some lost their monies as well. Your investments did go down for a while and then later came back in profit too, which is the nature of gambling.

The point I am trying to make here is that you are one of our early players and you're aware of how system used to work because that is exactly the same way it still works today. Astonishingly, you didn't have this problem when your investments made some profit nor you had this problem when you won a 18 BTC in a single roll yourself.

https://stats.dadice.com/b/117880797 (https://stats.dadice.com/b/117880797)
https://i.imgur.com/DlsD39M.png

https://stats.dadice.com/b/117785803 (https://stats.dadice.com/b/117785803)
https://stats.dadice.com/b/110540608 (https://stats.dadice.com/b/110540608)

Of course you wanted to withdraw it all immediately after you had won, which you did and we honored your withdrawal request as always.

Later, when you decided to come back and when your investments reached a reasonable amount of 15 BTC. We even provided you a cold storage address of your own, which had a public note "for leen93". That is how we deal with all our private investors, so they know their funds are secure and all our private investors are happy with this. We do NOT require any suggestions any more in this area.

https://blockchain.info/address/1PmDaczwNg2QUyj5j8kFHNP53H44LR74nS (https://blockchain.info/address/1PmDaczwNg2QUyj5j8kFHNP53H44LR74nS)

So this is part of your working history with us, above. And given your rude, mean and offensive history, we always showed our patience and continued to do so. After all above events, investment program was finally made private. Everything was fine until 3 days ago, when you contacted us on support asking to open investment option for you, which we rejected 3 times!!

https://i.imgur.com/uul9LO7.png
https://i.imgur.com/YNH0Ms2.png

The reason why we didn't want you back as an investor is your given mean and offensive history, and also you are not consistent with your investments unlike our other private investors. Looks like you are one those who only like profit, and can't breath when they are in minor loss. Yes! I just called you a whining gambler :)

---

P.S. Every body please hold your horses very tightly, as this post is exclusively for leen. We will soon post our official response on the actual issue, we just wanted to start by introducing leen93.

looks like dadice is finally turning into the most dilettantish and unsuccessfull dice scam so far  ;D

Reserved.

Not at all, we are just demonstrating who is a liar and whiner here.

Another lie: You have never signed up to be in our campaign. Proof:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1078943.0

I really don't care who of you immature weirdos is whining/lying more. but please keep on entertaining me  8)

Dadice, I am trying to help you

Help you implement the kelly criterion.
I mentioned the investor bug, I could have just taken a lot of money out of it without anyone noticing it. But I didn't, I declared the problem immediately to you

why did i lose 29% of a 1000 btc bankroll after a 19 btc bet?
there is divested right before and invested right after, suspicious^2, would be nice if you could declare those details

I am trying to help the site to become trustworthy and get rid of all the bugs, but maybe a little bit respect for me should not be a bad idea ;)

In the chat the only thing I did was explaining the kelly criterion before getting the ban... Don't see any reason for the ban...
I advise you to reply me on skype asap to discuss everything

please keep the discussion on here so we can all have a laugh. thanks.

Ok, then please explain the OP.
How can you deny that that information on your website is misleading?
I am willing to help you improve your website but then you should show respect for people willing to help you.

Dadice has a lot of opportunities to become one of the largest dice sites but you just keep wasting them...

When I contacted you first on chat you said you would open the investment option immediately.

The fact I won before doesn't matter. I don't say you shouldn't pay out the guy who won the bitcoins (unless it is yourself) but this bet shouldnt have been made against investors funds since they didn't agree on a kelly higher than 10.

Yes, the official comment is you just got played by a greedy, whiny and manipulative fellow of yours. Because there is no reality to what she said above, here is the piece from actual converstaion:

https://i.imgur.com/P43NBjC.png

There is a big difference between actual conversation and how she clearly lied to mislead and create a FUD. And this is not the first time leen has shown us how shallow and digusting she can be.

----

Again P.S. everybody please hold your horses, we will explain the situation shortly.

if "as much as we can" is limited (which it is) it simply means you cannot pay him/her back completely (in the case i gave as an example) which means you will not pay him/her back completely.

Why don't you reply about the OP? We are talking about the non-implementation of the kelly criterion.

Is it ok that I point out a 9btc bet at 50% means a win of 9btc not 18.

yes, and a 9 btc win shouldn't be a problem with a 1000 btc adjusted bankroll, a 19 btc win is

Your name doesn't come up in either of their campaigns:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1M__XIQr2h-XlOt7N89BKw0qgr7nmoCxRS8R2aesqqZ0/edit#gid=1848405451
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1LruSSemYYQo-yYjRy0IJmV44O9-vJcZs7s9IEBG-hso/edit#gid=1870443202
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1tYtTqdk2fjl27Mm8cP--pYUqwskVAHReYxipxD_yuCA/edit#gid=0

Also you claimed they said: "we will not pay that user" where they said "we will pay as much as we can"

Nobody is saying you don't have the right to say what's on your heart, but you should'nt twist words or statements; that wont help your case.

Like they said, they will address the case more in detail soon enough:


cheers

They made the statement before and I'll post a printscreen soon.

Care to check 2 bet IDs already provided there.


9 BTC is your roll, payout is 18 BTC.


Every casino has a bankroll, we have shown ours, it was the very next message where I reminded you of our bankroll. We will pay as much as we can, that's the bankroll right there. If we are out, we will declare bankruptcy like every other casino works.

please get some information about the kelly criterion which will make it impossible to go bankrupt
and the max win should have been +- 10 at the time someone won 19 btc, that is the problem

As said before, please hold your horses, a justification is coming up shortly. And does that mean you admit manipulating and lying, and fooling dooglus into believing you?

Now since @dadice_dev has introduced working relations of leen93 with dadice, as well as exposed her lies she made number of times (no need to mention her constant rude attitude towards everyone).

First things first, we do not believe in censorship and that is why our thread is not self-moderated. We welcome criticism with open heart and justify the situations, where we are right and correct ourselves where we are wrong. If today we are not accepting public investments, is only because of this community and we consider ourselves as part of this community as well.

We did NOT mute leen93 in our chat, although it came to our attention this morning that after we have left, she created a scene in the chat (which is not new) and one of mods muted her for SPAM reasons. It is also to be noted that she created this thread right after the Skype conversation, and she had full knowledge that we are going offline for the night. She wanted to divest her investments and withdraw 6.19 BTC, those transactions require manual approval, so we also completed her transaction, told her that we are going to bed for the night and we can discuss anything with her in morning.

Since she had already created the thread here, and knew that staff will no longer be available in chat to answer her, she had no reason to make scene of any sort in chat, that is the reason she got muted.

In this justification, I want to put these facts in glance: (1) We never changed a single thing in our investments program and game play experience which could cause what people here referring to as "bug". (2) The maximum payout at dadice has always been 20 BTC from the very first day. Dooglus himself acknowledged this and even made his fair criticism on it:

Ref.: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=973765.msg11441671#msg11441671 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=973765.msg11441671#msg11441671)

We believe there is no bug in this system, instead the entire issue is combination of a bit peculiar and bit silly. Kelly criterion calculations are accurate and I welcome dooglus to invest in our private bankroll and make all the tests he might want to confirm this. But again, the max. payout is and was a well known fact. I would like to ask leen how she came by that link? We removed the link after rightful objection by dean that one of our freelance writers copied major part of it from dean's site. (Well, dooglus also claims dean copied stuff from his site) but since it was wrong, we had removed the link from our interface. And link was not visible to both public and private investors.

Ref.: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=973765.msg11364583#msg11364583 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=973765.msg11364583#msg11364583)

The purpose of the manual was to make people understand how Kelly system really works, in simpler terms, if you place 1 BTC investment on 10x Kelly, Your investments will increase site's bankroll by 10 BTC. Which means you are risking 10 times of what you could have been risking on Kelly 1 but you also gain profit accordingly.

So the manual's main purpose was to help people understand how Kelly system work. The effective max. payout at dadice is and has always been 20 BTC as mentioned in our FAQ (which is credible resource since its still linked in interface).

We have now removed the manual link for the time being, until we find another writer who can get this job done. Rest assured, leen knew everything about this system and was beneficiary of this as well. So we totally and utterly reject this accusation from her and deny any incentive. I would also like to request leen to make voluntary request to our support to have her account permanently closed down.

We have rewarded bug incentives to many users, we have had very severe issues (who hadn't?), but we feel its in our own interest to be part of this community and we respect every user on BitcoinTalk.  So I would like to welcome dooglus to check the investments system, give me his username on dadice and I will have this option enabled for him. The entire accusation is based on a misleading manual which is not even linked on our interface, I wonder how did leen came by of that link. Perhaps some user gave her the link, but we have now removed that document for time being.

If any of our investors want to leave dadice, they are welcome to post here and we will divest their investment to the value it was prior to mentioned particular roll. With exception of leen alone because of many reasons, one of which is, again, she is not acting in good faith and was aware of max. payouts since the start (she made her first investment on 26-Mar-2015) and knew how our investment program works, and was one of beneficiaries of it as well.

I believe we have answered all relevant questions in this and our previous posts. We will no longer discuss cold storage, max. payout and other issues which have been buried already.

Thank you for your interest in dadice!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelly_criterion
please inform yourself a little bit with the kelly criterion. Even wikipedia is fine

LOL. looks like you got BURNT ;D You should be proving they have bug in system but they proved you're a liar ;D well this was fun.

edit:
I saw post from PRC admin, why he deleted that?

About what did I lie?
There is still a bug in their system, they didnt implement the kelly criterion which exposed me and other investors to more risk than we agreed to regarding the inormation on their website

Do they not teach math in your country. If you use 1% of bankroll as max profit you get an exponential decay in bankroll that never reaches 0.
To teach you this it's easier in a chart form. The bankroll is on the Y-axis and the winning bets in a row is on the X-axis. You can see that it never reaches 0, although it does reach close enough to 0 at some point.
This means you can always payout the full winnings of the user regardless how lucky they are, the worst case scenario is that the user cashes out the entire bankroll and you have nothing left. You will always be able to pay what is owed if you use this method.
https://i.imgur.com/sB5yPfV.png

Well its clear now that page was taken from PRC ;D but you knew it about all already. You only cry because you lose, you didn't cry when you win. Hahahah not bad for a kid who just lost his pocket money.

This is true if they implement the kelly criterion, his post even shows they know about the fact they didn't implement it correctly.

The reason is "commercial" not "technical". We have started with 20 BTC max. payout for a "reason", and commercially we are doing good. This issue has been discussed before:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=973765.msg11441671#msg11441671 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=973765.msg11441671#msg11441671) so there is no need for us to answer it again and repeat same things over and over again.

as admitted, the manual was taken from dean's site but links were later link was removed from our interface.

I just got to know it: I lost 29% of my bankroll by someone placing 1 bet.
Then I started looking at the max win and realised they didn't implement the kelly criterion while they state they do it on their website.

I am talking about the lie on your page, I invested at kelly 10 and you placed it at kelly 29 according to the kelly criterion. THAT IS THE PROBLEM
Do you really think muting me in chat and screaming out you are doing well does make up for this bug?

Isn't 10 kelly actually 10 times of your investment? how much did you invest? If you invest 5, you were contributing and risking 50 BTC to bankroll. am I wrong?

Actually, as a player wins more, your Kelly goes up exponentially until there is no money left to pay out the player.

yes thats true
and the max bet should be 1% of that adjusted bankroll, that is what the kelly criterion means
max bet should depend on the bankroll

As I have explained earlier, it is not implemented at all - so there is no bug and your are personally aware of it since our last discussions in March!

That is the problem, kelly should be fixed liked on all other dice sites which don't have this problem.

I was not aware of this till yesterday.

Isn't what dadice said that kelly is fine, manual was wrong and accordance to PRC? where did you get link to it I also don't see it on site. And PRC admin made post here that it was word to word copy something but I dont know why he deleted that post.

I am discussing the problem with PRC
Yes, dadice copied the info for PRC word by word but didn't implement it. This means the information on their website was not according their system.

So you admit you can't pay out a big winner?

That is either a lie (once again) or you are stubborn...

I don't see how that is your problem, if a winner has won all of the sites bankroll, We will either arrange more or declare bankruptcy. The reason for max. payout being 20 BTC is solely a "commercial" reason not technical. This may be changed later when we believe we are commerically sound for that.

Well we have paid out a big winner yesterday 19 btc, a few weeks back the OP 18. So it seems we can :D

yes, because you expose investors to more risk than they agreed. You took more money from them than allowed by the kelly criterion

The OP won 9 not 18. Sort out your math before making a fool of yourself. 9btc deposit, bet 2x, cash out 18. Which is a win of 9. You really like over exaggerating stats, don't you?

Did you ever cash out that other 20btc win? Do you have the transaction ID?

Profit was not only 9 BTC, since 2 other bet IDs were provided and there are even more since it was result of consecutive wins. The fact about that bet is THE MAX. PAYOUT OF 20 BTC which let that bet happen (as it has always been 20 BTC max. payout on Da Dice), Anyway the point @dadice tried to make here is to the question you asked:


Its a simple answer he made to your question.
Don't try to reshape entire conversation, everybody is aware that this alt of yours is exclusively to slander Da Dice and you are not here for reasoning.

And don't repeat same things over and over again.

Come on, you know this is my only account. If you drank beer I'd ask you to join me for one.

Well after reading entire thread, its very clear to me that leen is only trying to recover her losses but this is gambling :) when you go as much as 10x kelly, that is a huge risk to take for some profit. You shouldn't have invested in first place if you cannot afford to lose.

And regarding QS, bodgy, etc... why these guys are everywhere where they get chance to abuse Da Dice. Especially this bodgy person seriously intrigues me.

No thanks! I will take a rain check.

this whole dadice thing is pretty weird, no matter from which perspective you're looking at it, it's a fail. but for some reason the operators refuse to let it die already.

they failed as a scam, since no real whale or big investor will choose their site.

and they also failed as a "legit" business, since their reputation is burned and they're not making any profit while wasting money on their marketing.

so, what is this thing?  ???

I'm always lurking.. jumping in when something justifies my scam allegations.

This could be your own personal opinion. I don't understand from which angle you're looking at it, I may recommend an eye sight checkup ;D OP clearly lied about being censored, lied about not knowing max. payouts, lied about their skype conversation, in fact manipulated it as said in post by dev.

I removed my post because I mentioned how you copied my page but it seems you removed that page anyway.

There certainly is no problem with the kelly system at PRC which has been in place since Jan 2015 and no one has found any issues. In fact investors have made a profit of around 1400 Bitcoin with that system.

But when things keep going wrong on your site you can feel free to keep taking shots at PRC if it makes you feel better.

Who knows. Maybe a hope if they keep going, people will believe they aren't a scam and start throwing money at it. Who really knows what these guys are up to. They are seriously incompetent at Math, writing websites and running a business. So maybe its a high school project? ???

well they could be many things but definitely nowhere even near to what you been trying to show them as ;D Name one site which didn't have bugs or other serious issues right from their start  ??? ???


better luck next time ;D

sounds plausible to me. :D

but seriously, they already spent over 60btc on their sig campaign alone (https://blockchain.info/de/address/13tcm29K3N39uSsiDRLN9aQwLdvA9zFWJv) while only making  43btc profit on site (stats.dadice.com). and that profit probably also includes a substantial amount of faucet btc they already owned before. there is no way this is turning into something profitable.

are they some kind of honeypot? like the us gov going after american gamblers?   ;D

ps: I sell tinfoil for xmr, pm me  ;)

will dooglus leave negative trust to leen93 for lying to him? ;D as he used false information fed by leen to ask if "we will not pay" statement is official policy of Da Dice.  ::)

 I don't see how that is your problem... if anything, you should appreciate our efforts to revive this dice industry  ;D

Thanks for reviving the bitcoin gambling industry. It was almost dried up.

That's certainly weird, if those stats are real and supposedly they are, i don't see why would they lie, means that they are indeed loosing money. They even started a new campaign not long ago, everything could be explained as a form of long time investment, when they don't need more advertisement they would stop their campaigns and start only profiting.

Now back to the topic, OP did in fact lie about somethings but he did not lie about the kelly investment option, seems..

That shows someone betting 9 BTC at 2x and profiting by 9 BTC. That is within 1% of the effective bankroll.

The bet that leen is complaining about is where someone profited by almost 20 BTC. That is not within 1% of the effective bankroll.

The way you publicly attacked one of your private investors in that post makes you look very unprofessional, and the fact that you don't even seem to understand the error that he is complaining about also doesn't help your image here.

Edit:


Well, leen asked you what would happen if someone won a lot, and you replied that "we will pay as much as we can". While that isn't exactly the same words as "we will not pay him the won amount", it does appear to have the same meaning. leen paraphrased you, without changing the meaning.

If you had said "we will pay them in full, of course, because we only offer bets we can afford to pay out as we are not scammers" and leen reported you as having said something different then I can see your point. But that isn't what happened.

The reason you have a crowd-sourced bankroll and investors choosing how much to risk per roll is so that you don't get into this kind of situation. You only allow bets that you are bankrolled to allow. This isn't rocket science. What you should do here is make things right. Fix your code. Repay the investors you have effectively stolen from. And fix your reputation.

Edit2:


But payout doesn't matter. When deciding on what max bets you're bankrolled to accept it's the player's profit that matters, not the total payout.


Jesus man, do your research. That isn't how most of them work. When you're dealing with investor funds and claiming to use the Kelly criterion, you should use the Kelly criterion and not just have a flat rate maximum payout of 20 BTC.

At Just-Dice, we guarantee that all winning bets will be paid out. There is no chance that any player can win more than the bankroll. That is because the maximum profit per bet is a fraction of the bankroll. How can you be operating in this space and yet fail to have even a basic understanding of how it works?

Edit3:


That post is me complaining that your maximum payout is too high. The fact that you still didn't fix that isn't a point in your favour.


If you would like me to take a look at your investment feature I would be willing to. But there is no way I am ever going to invest my own funds with you. You can make me an account and lock it from betting or withdrawing if you like so I can take a look but if you think I would send you coins after everything I've seen from you, you're mistaken.

We didn't attack leen in anyway, we just expose her lies and the fact that she was totally aware of effective MAX. PAYOUT on site for months. Decision to provide 20 BTC max. payout is totally a commercial one. There cannot be a better answer for such of a hypothetical question, "We will pay as much as we can!" ... "also thing to note is that we over 500+ btc of our own in bankroll". The phrase never means in any way that we will NOT pay people. We have paid leen, we will continue to pay everyone! If some one wins 100x 20 BTC, we will either have to arrange more or declare bankruptcy in given circumstances? Could there be a more reasonable answer to this?

Anyway, both of the issues were discussed in past, leen was totally aware of the MAX. PAYOUT on da dice so the entire accusation is null and void.


Personally I agree that it should be based on bank roll but as I have suggested before this is a commercial decision not technical. And we do not need advices when it comes to commercial decisions, including but not limited to how we pay for signature campaigns, other events and everything. We may change this in future, right now, how are we going to pay is none of your concerns.

With everytime you say investors, I take it as you meant to write "private investors" and I don't see any one else except leen complaining here because all of them are aware of 20 BTC max. payout and still have their investments with us. And as @dadice has perviously and very generously offered any of our private investor who wants to quit will be divested to the point prior to that particular roll except leen (for her not acting in good faith).

Thank you for your kind interest!

At least dadice now explained that in fact every investor knows where his investment lies on a cold wallet storage. At least investors have some safety then. But in investors shoes i think the investors made a stupid decision to prevent dadice from making the cold wallet public. The investors had to knew that this will hurt their investment, which it most probably did.

If an investor was stupid enough to leave behind traces about who he was then the simple solution would have been to tunnel the funds through a mixer or exchanges shared wallet and make a fresh cold wallet that can be shown. Problem solved, danger for dadice avoided. Didnt happen... investors fault... investors loss.

Im not sure about what to think about the kelly criterion. The page is easily found through google. And it seems the page was online since july 4th. And yes, it states a max 1 kelly: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:T7p9rI3jE1IJ:https://www.dadice.com/print%3Finvestments+&cd=1&hl=de&ct=clnk&gl=de

Its in fact insane to not use 1% kelly. The risk of the house being considerably damaged is very high. Recovering would be hard when the right person only has a good portion of luck. Even 1% proved to be risky like dooglus experienced with old bitcoin just-dice.

So leen, you suffered 2BTC loss and you demand a 3 btc punishment on top. Hm... dont know what to say about the last part. You say your investment went down 29%. Does this mean your investment was around 6BTC? The won amount was 19.8Bitcoin, which matches the 20Bitcoin max profit. But when your investment went down 29% when a player won 19.8Bitcoins, and you invested with a max kelly of 10 then the house must be relatively small, isnt it?

Funny thing is... the winner probably bet only faucet money. :)

@dadice_dev did leen sign something or check a checkbox that she know there is a 20btc max? When i would have read that and read the 1% kelly rule then i would assume that the 20btc only is in effect when 1% is more than 20btc, but not that it puts kelly out of effect. So was there some rules an investor had to say yes to?

Well that was all not an issue before, when she (he) invested under the same conditions but was in profit. Dooglus as said before, we haven't changed our conditions since the start. And leen was aware of those conditions. That is the point, so we don't have to write long stories here.

Secondly, she attacked us publicly in the first place, since this time it doesn't go her way. Can't you see that, what kind of liar this person is. Want more evidence that she is even lying about her sex. I can post it here! Wondering if you would call this "paraphrased" as well :D

Yes, she was fully aware of it, she invested since March with us, lost with some investments before (so she could have take notice) but never complained. At the end she made more money with her previous investments than she lost.

It seems the me that the "Kelly" option for private investors is not really based on Kelly Criterion, but is actually just leverage. If an investor has 10x Kelly, then it should not be possible to lose more than 10% of their investment in a single bet. If a 10x Kelly investor can lose 29% of their investment in a single bet, then the site is exposing the investor to more risk then they wanted.

The problem is that you appear to be offering investing based on the Kelly criterion, but aren't.

Nobody needs "the manual" to know about Kelly betting - it is a well known strategy.

It appears that what you are offering is nothing to do with the Kelly criterion. Rather, you're recklessly risking too much of your investors' funds per bet, while claiming to be using "Kelly".

If you were using "Kelly system", you wouldn't even have a "max. payout". You would have a "max. profit". And it would be way lower than 20 BTC.

You should stop this deceptive practice and repay the investors who lost out as a result of this deception and/or incompetence.

Here is more information from our removed investors manual:

Kelly 1 is like a straight investment. Let us assume that there is no bankroll and you invest 10 btc. This will make your investment 100% of the bankroll, and you will get 100% of the house edge, in case the player loses. If a player wins, the amount they win will be deducted in full.

Kelly 0.5 halves your risk thus you invest 10btc but the total bankroll (if there are no other investors) is now only 5 BTC. Accordingly you profits and losses are less.

Kelly 2 you would invest 10 BTC. Thus you would create a bankroll of 20 btc in total, but since you have invested only 10 BTC, your risk level has since doubled, but then again so have your profits, if players are losing.

Therefor the higher the Kelly level is, the more risk you are taking.

That wasn't a discussion. That was me telling you that your actions were irresponsible, and you ignoring me.

Does that count as a discussion where you're from?

On a risk profit base, yes, Read my post above.

You should call it leverage then since that what you are offering. What you are offering investors is not based on Kelly Criterion and it is misleading to call it "Kelly".

Well, you knew this all before. Why haven't you pointed it our before -- when you mentioned our 20 btc max payouts ???? Taking opportunities here?

Yes, you're clearly wrong. How can you risk 50 BTC when you only deposit 5 BTC? That would leave you owing the site 45 BTC if you lost the amount you were risking.

Here's how it works:

The house edge is 1%, and so the Kelly criterion tells you that it is optimal to risk 1% of your bankroll per bet.

When you opt to risk 10 times the amount that the Kelly criterion tells you to risk you are risking 10% of your bankroll per bet.

That's all. It's really simple.

So if leen invested 5 BTC at 1x Kelly, the risk is 0.05 BTC per bet (1% of 5 BTC).
And investing 5 BTC at 10x Kelly would mean a risk of 0.5 BTC per bet (10% of 5 BTC).

There is no way to risk 29% of your bankroll per bet when the maximum multiplier on offer is 10x.

This is all pretty basic stuff.

Well, then read our manual, that was accepted by leen. I repeat it again:

Here is more information from our removed investors manual:

Kelly 1 is like a straight investment. Let us assume that there is no bankroll and you invest 10 btc. This will make your investment 100% of the bankroll, and you will get 100% of the house edge, in case the player loses. If a player wins, the amount they win will be deducted in full.

Kelly 0.5 halves your risk thus you invest 10btc but the total bankroll (if there are no other investors) is now only 5 BTC. Accordingly you profits and losses are less.

Kelly 2 you would invest 10 BTC. Thus you would create a bankroll of 20 btc in total, but since you have invested only 10 BTC, your risk level has since doubled, but then again so have your profits, if players are losing.

Therefor the higher the Kelly level is, the more risk you are taking.

leen signed up for 10x Kelly but was unknowingly given 29x Kelly. That's unacceptable.


It looks to me like they are everywhere that scams are happening. I see QS tackling all kinds of scammers, not only DaDice. And if you read bodgy's words you will see that he makes a lot of sense.

Most recently he's pointing out that DaDice openly admitted that they are offering bets that they can't afford to pay out, and that if anyone is "lucky" enough to win a lot they will maybe have to declare bankruptcy. Why don't they mention that in the signature spam they pay people to display? "DaDice : we probably can't afford to pay you if you win!"

Nice you mention QS, he is a well known scammer, nice you associate yourself with such people.

We paid so far each and every request we have received, proof us otherwise.

I don't see where leen lied to me. Paraphrased maybe, but not lied. Is that the 'lie' you're referring to?

One said:
  "we will pay as much as we can"
The other claimed they said:
  "we will not pay him the won amount"

Do you not see they are the same? If "as much as you can" is less than you have available then that is the same as not paying the won amount. Declaring bankruptcy in the face of a win you can't pay out is the same as not paying the won amount.

So no, I don't think that in any way deserves negative feedback.


You don't see much, do you.

It is our concern when a dice site runs with a stated policy of "if a player wins too much we will probably just declare bankruptcy" that it won't end well. If your site is successful, eventually someone will win big. You're risking far too much of your bankroll per roll (as I have already tried to warn you several times now) and so will quite likely be hit by a player who wins more than you can afford to pay. Then you'll refuse to pay him, and you will be just another entry in the long series of Bitcoin scam sites.

It's in our interest, wanting Bitcoin to succeed, to do what we can to alert people to yet another "scam in the making" before they get too deep into it.

If you want to be a successful site, run it properly. Try to understand the issues that people are pointing out to you, and address them.

Are you suffering Alzheimer mate??? Read here entire posts and you will know what we are talking about. Seems you like to overread the important parts.
.

No?

What's this?

Dooglus, this is not what attack means, Leen is indeed and without any doubt manipulative and crooked, and created a whore show starring you right here in this very thread (yes welcome to the show!). And these are facts.

LOL what? Do you know how many times people have claimed I am a scammer? A lot. Do you know what all these accusations have in common? They were all made by scammers. Do you know the basis for all these claims were? None.

YES! The more reasonable answer would be "of course we can pay out winners, because we don't risk what we can't afford to lose. Anything else would be immoral".

Your answer appears to be, when paraphrased, "we will continue to risk 20 BTC per roll even when the bankroll has already been won, and if it goes negative we will try to find more coins or declare bankruptcy". When rewritten like that isn't it clear how wrong-headed your stance is?


leen isn't on trial here, and has merely pointed out that how your site works is wrong. That you haven't changed your conditions since the start despite us trying to help you fix them is precisely the problem. Your conditions are broken.


I don't care about her sex. Or whether she's manipulative. Or a "class A whore". Or any of the other ad hominem attacks you keep throwing out there. How is the gender she identifies as in any way relevant to the discussion in hand? She pointed out how your site took 29% of her investment from a single roll when her account was set to a 10x Kelly setting and so should only ever risk 10% of her investment per roll. And rather than apologising, refunding her, and fixing the problem you instead chose to attack her personally.

I would never do that, but that's because I don't smell like reindeer poop. Like you do.

I'm not very good at ad hominem attacks. How did I do? Did it work?


I didn't know all this before. This is the first I have heard about your fake "Kelly" system. You have hidden the investment feature on your site as a way of pretending that it doesn't matter that you are unable to prove solvency, and so there is no way I could have learned about your broken "Kelly" system.

If you had been transparent about how your investment system works, instead of hiding it away to avoid the pressure to show solvency, I would have been able to point this obvious flaw out sooner.


Where was I meant to find this manual? You were busy pretending that you no longer offered investments.

The part of the manual that you have quoted is badly written and makes no mention of there being a static maximum payout in operation. As far as it goes, what you have described makes perfect sense. What you miss out is something like "oh, by the way, we don't actually use the Kelly criterion to decide how much to risk per bet - we allow a payout of 20 BTC per bet no matter how much is in the bankroll".


You're attacking the people instead of the arguments again. If someone makes a well reasoned logical argument, does it matter whether they are a class A whore or not?


"so far" being the important part here.

Lots of obvious Ponzi scams have honoured every withdrawal request "so far" too. It proves nothing.

If you're going to keep allowing a maximum payout of 20 BTC no matter how much you lose, you risk being unable to pay winners.


"we"? I think you forgot to switch to the sockpuppet account here. Mate.

I asked which "lie" you were referring to. And instead of answering, you make an "Alzheimer" joke? You are bad at your job. Like really bad.

We know the implementation of our investment program and fact that Max. payout is 20 BTC on site, and it has always been like there. This is a not a bug, this is how we want it to work.

It is very clear that you don't read all of the posts and only jump to what you think are important parts. If you did read the entire thread, you would know that leens bet was indeed 9 BTC profit (but in fact profit was way more, due to consecutive wins, but that is NOT the point), the point with that specific roll is MAX. PAYOUT OF 20 BET, and leen being totally aware of it.

Let us not forget that this thread is a "SCAM Accusation" thread, and the fact that OP has no credebility in his/her claims. OP just like all other investors was very well aware of max. payout being 20 BTC.  Also: Given the hypothetical situation, that you are trying to make a big deal out of, Player only wins as far as the bankroll exists and is positive. This is a major fuck up in your calculations, if there is no bankroll, there will be nothing to reward player out of. And thus my answer comes back into scene: We will pay as much as we can.

You definitely have some personal interest with Da Dice but rest assured we don't need your advice when it comes to marketing and commercial policies. I will prefer if you stick to the topic. This entire accusation is based on lie from a whining gambler trying to recover losses. If you are blind enough to see it, let me make it clear for you, Da Dice is a long term investment, we are financing marketing, signature campaigns, and other events, we even hired 3rd party marketing team for this purpose. We want to offer 20 BTC max. payout to our players (note this!), and there are many other things that we do and want to do, none of them should of your concern!

...And we don't need public investments! after the criticism we made it private and we are doing just fine without your advices on how should we run Da Dice.

Well honestly asides from any proofs of them being scammers or not this behavior it's pretty fishy, calling everyone who called them scammers and generally pretty rude to everyone definitely does not make them look better in any way

Shall I feel pitty for you, silly muppet?

You didn't complain when you made 1 btc with our signature campaign, didn't you? One more BTCtalk hypocrites here...

Well scammer is a pretty big word, isn't it. Without any proof, with honoring each and every withdrawal request, with having build one of the most advanced dice sites yet, already number 3 after rolls or so within a bit over 4 months. But that might be their real problem.

EGO

So if somebody is calling us names - by all means, shouldn't we have the right to call them names back, don't you think so?

I was just pointing out that everyone who has claimed I am a scammer is a scammer themselves and that there is no basis for calling me a scammer. No one reputable has ever believed that I am a scammer. ::)

So what I advertised for you? I provided a service and received payment for that service. If I had known you were a scam site then I would not have advertised your site.

You will see in 6 or 12 month, when we have crashed the competition who is a scam site :D

I don't understand the reason why everybody is going off topic here. Leen93 made an accusation, an accusation! Since their investment program is private, and leen being one of those private investors, only question to ask is whether or not leen93 was aware of maximum payout being 20 BTC at dadice. And given evidence clearly suggests that he was not only aware of this but also had made a roll for himself with payout over 18 BTC. ??? And that was couple months old! No need to mention how leen associated a lie with Da Dice while making we will not pay statement in "double quote" to make it look geniune.  :-\

So in relevance to this thread, I think leen is clearly responsible for his own losses.

There must be some forums rule about throwing baseless scam accusations. Why do I find QS, bodgy, and couple other guys always going off topic in any Da Dice related thread? Please tell me more about this! why? ;D just don't go saying that you "think" this is a scam.

As i said their behavior it's pretty bad and it does not help them in any way, yes there might not be a definitive proof of them being scammers but i seriously don't see how acting like that makes your site look any better, you had the chance of clearing your name by showing proof of funds and you didnt want to although you said yourself that one of your priorities is to be trusted and honest.

The only bad behavior is from the OP. We just defended ourselves. On the other side, I have decided to halt any campaigns here until further notice, as from tomorrow, since we receive 80% of our business from sites other then btctalk. So we can nicely survive without this permanent bullshit here.

I did read all the posts. I didn't reply to them all, but I did reply to too many of them already.


I do know that. You can tell that I know it because I said it here:



This is true, but unimportant. When applying the Kelly criterion, it's the profit that matters, not the payout. That is how Just-Dice was able to offer payouts of 7000 BTC to "mechs" even though the site's bankroll was only 50k BTC. That's over 10% of the bankroll. The reason is that his profit was only around 250 BTC per bet - or 0.5% of the bankroll.


OP's credibility doesn't matter when what they say is undisputed. You and she both agree that you are allowing players to profit by more than they should according to the Kelly multipliers the investors have set. You just don't seem to understand why that is a problem yet.


It's hard to follow you sometimes, but I'm trying. The hypothetical situation is "a player wins a lot". Not just one max bet, but a lot of them. It can happen. What does "Player only wins as far as the bankroll exists and is positive" mean? Does the maximum payout depend on the bankroll somehow? I thought you said it doesn't. Do the rolls? I know some sites rig the rolls such that players can't win when the bankroll is too low, but I don't think that's what you're saying here. So what do you intend that bolded quote mean? Maybe that you will shut the site down when the bankroll is less than 20 BTC? But if that was the case why would you be including declaring bankruptcy in your plans? I've tried hard to understand what you're trying to say, but don't get it. And if you could point out my "major fuck up" that would be nice too. I am saying that your fixed maximum payout risks being unable to pay big winners. Am I wrong there?


I have no interest in DaDice. I react the same way to any dubious behaviour I see from any site. Don't take it personally. Check my post history and you'll see I'm always nagging at one scammy operation or another. Most recently some "crypto-games.net" site was accidentally offering +EV bets to their players and wouldn't believe it when told about it for example. And scrypt.cc continues to pretend to be mining with 850 GH/s of scrypt hashing power.


What's the lie? I've asked, you responded with an attack on me. Maybe you're the one who needs to focus here.


But you're not, are you. You are offering bets you aren't bankrolled to offer, with the plan of not paying out if anyone wins too many of them.

That isn't just fine. It isn't even acceptable.


Again with the ad hominem attacks?


Not true. You have behaved very rudely and unprofessionally. Most of the personal attacks made in this thread were by you or your 'supporters'. See "silly muppet" one quote up from here...


At least something good came out of this then. Thank you.

Well, we'll meet again mate -- and than you can decide again if that was good :D

That is the only meaningful and relevant part of your entire post. Since we are denying this scam accusation, we came with proofs of leen not acting in good faith and now you being accomplice for her lies. We have proved that leen was aware of max. payout for a long time and this entire SCAM accusation is based on her lying and not acting in good faith.

You have already given us negative trust, let it be, we do NOT need your or anyones advices on how much max. payout we should have nor how much we spending on marketing. Beat it!

Edit:

Only thing undisputed so far is our ability to pay. And this is again none of your concern and this is not relevant to SCAM accusation. Max. Payout is and has always been 20 BTC, it is the decision we understand and took for betterment of Da Dice. If we ever need commercial/marketing related advice, you are the last person I will consult with.

As said before we are not interested to discuss your "shoulds" and "coulds" and "woulds", They are totally irrelevant to this thread and totally irrelevant to us. (Just like it was expressed months ago)

Edit:

The case with crypto-games and Scrypt is totally different. There was a bug in their system, there is no bug with our investments but we do offer 20 BTC max. payout which our investors are aware of, Now you are only curious about our ability to pay big winner. Well we have NOT disappointed any big winner so far, and we will not disappoint them in future.

Well this thread is full of cunts  ;D OP being a total cunt lying about things just trying to recover losses, QuickSeller, bodgy and more of this "dirty dozen"  being total cunts and throwing scam accusations here and there and finally a legendary "cunt" who has no idea that he is talking in a scam accusation thread where defendants reserve right to defend their name.  ::)

I don't think you are qualified to judge that.


I will ask again. What lies are you referring to?


The forum allows you to quote other people's posts. Maybe use it to make it clear where she or I are lying. Thanks.


The purpose of a scam allegation thread isn't to give you advice, but to warn others of your deception. So accept my help or don't, it doesn't matter. All that matters is that people are allowed to speak the truth so that there is less chance of other people falling victim to your deception. You don't get to tell me to "beat it" out of someone else's thread.


No, that is also disputed. You are unable or unwilling to prove solvency, and have said that your maximum payout per bet is a flat 20 BTC regardless of the size of your bankroll. It's not clear that you even have enough funds to pay all your investors right now if they wanted to withdraw, let alone that you would be able to pay any big winners. So yeah - not at all undisputed.


Your operation concerns me. As in it is concerning. I worry that you are going to end up ripping off a whole bunch of people. You can argue that this isn't any of my business, but I would disagree. When I see a site acting irresponsibly and endangering the funds entrusted to them, I want to speak up. You aren't "consulting" with me. You're making very weak arguments and person attacks in a futile attempt to defend yourself against valid accusations.


It's a shame that you feel this way.  When you ignore what you should do, and are blind to what could go wrong you are taking unacceptable risks with other people's money.


No shit. You claimed "You definitely have some personal interest with Da Dice" because I was arguing with you. I posted examples of other dubious sites to show that it is nothing personal against you, but that I engage other misbehaving sites in the same way. Did you really not understand that?


There is nothing to be curious about. You yourself have admitted that you aren't able to pay anyone who wins too much. You even tried to claim that all sites are the same. So don't try now to pretend that you are able to pay someone who wins 20 BTC 100 times.


You think saying "cunt" makes you sound clever? Nobody is stopping DaDice from attempting to defend themselves. They just aren't very good at it, since they are guilty as charged and have no defence other than to attack people and say they aren't interested.


Is There Some Kind Of Competition Where The Dumbest Asshole To Post Wins A Prize?

I think you just won.

So when you play on DaDice, you just gotta hope they are not bankrupt? Maybe they only have like 10 coins left, no one knows... If there was only a way to prove you hold a certain amount of bitcoin?! :( so they could reassure us with the claimed 500+ BTC.

Yes but:

a) you're a class-A whore
b) we've already discussed this and are no longer interested
c) we paid out in the past and so that proves we will also pay out in the future even if we don't have the coins available

Any other "convincing" arguments?

d) NLNicoDicko. Geddit?

QED.

You'll find this is because there are cash flow problems, not because of this thread.

It's also funny that the PR agency you mentioned has only one client to tweet about?
https://twitter.com/mixedideaz (https://twitter.com/mixedideaz)

The tweets read the same as "Steve" from dadice. I think he was meant to tweet as dadice and retweet as the PR agency.
https://i.imgur.com/j6nESOo.jpg

And for some reason they stopped tweeting in April...

I am just saying that, although you and your site might be legit, your behavior it's making you look unprofessional and gives your site a bad image, i understand OP might have insulted you and your site but look at your replies to him and others, it's not the way to go.

exactly, even if you may feel insulted or whatever, its a fact that your posts on this forum represents your site; if this kind of behavior was demonstrated by a representative of any major international company they'd be fired immediately. pride and professionalism dont mix, especially in this kind of scenario.

Please keep it friendly...
I was never aware of this till yesterday. You exposed me to 29x kelly while i signed up for a 10x kelly. That is what's wrong with your website. Don't you see the problem?
Can you tell me when and what I lied? :p You are the one who has put misleading information (lies) on your website.

And to come back to the 3rd marketing team you hired. When will you pay them? According to 2 of them you didn't pay them for 2 weeks...

If you're talking about signature campaign, they are closing it because of this rage that seems to be against dadice. And all the current participants are getting paid. BTW I have heard that you did win 18BTC in one roll and got paid, stop this nonsense if you're just unhappy that you lost them later on(had a look on your stats) and you didn't know that the max profit there is 20BTC( I for one heard it a number of times on the chat).

I never won 18 BTC, I won +- 9 BTC, that's a big difference, totally ok according to the kelly criterion
and even if i would have won 18 BTC i should have been paid out (and that guy who won too)
but the kelly criterion should be implemented immedaitely to preven this from happening in the future

This site is always shady, perhaps they are stopping the camapign because they had no funds left lol

Sorry, bud. You are wrong there. To be honest, you* are speculating too much. :P

*not singular. ;)

Let's look at this overall thing from a different prespective for a moment? shall we?

I disagree and deny with what you said above  :) But is this me being unprofessional or rude? Neither! That is the whole point! I refered to leen as "manipulative" and "liar", and for both of these for which I have given undeniable evidences. I never called leen a "whore" (as suggested by dooglus) but instead if you read carefully I criticized him/her for creating a "whore show" as in slang-synonym for "fuck up" and "chaos" (TPB fans will understand). It is no different from dooglus stating "It will be interesting to hear DaDice staff try to explain their way out of this major fuckup." Just as usual dooglus's habit of not reading entire posts and jumping between lines took the best of him. To be honest, this entire thread is a fucking whore show indeed, for which I was compelled to write later: "starring dooglus".

Now lets have a look here:


This quote from dooglus and leen is enough to justify the entire situation. Now to deny this SCAM accusation, all we need to do is prove that the manual that leen is refering to was unlinked from the site long ago because it was not applicable, just like Dean has pointed out and reference links for previous conversations have been provided as well. And the second but most important aspect is to prove that leen was aware of 20 BTC maximum payout per roll. And that is exactly what we did!

This entire SCAM accusation was standing on 2 points as above, both crippled. We have had also explained this before and we did this again that we are offering MAX. PAYOUT as competitive figure and solely for commercial purpose and we will do this until it is commercially sound for us. Initially I did NOT mean to defy dooglus that is why I stated clearly:


However, I think dooglus didn't just read my post and jumped in between lines. All our investors are aware of the risks, least of all leen is especially aware of the rules and risks. Leen has been investing with us before the investment program was private and came back on repeated requests after investment program became private.

My sincere apologise to dooglus if he was offended by anything we said, but again, I am the one carrying "dev" in my username, any technical point he wanted to discuss should have discussed with me only, and I have had already agreed that "yes!" kelly citerciton is not imlemented in complete form and also tried to explain him that this is how we started by this may change in future when we are commercially sound for that. So the decision is commercial, investors are fully aware of this and especially leen was aware of it. I have said it number of times already that the roll from leen that we have shown here is not based about profit (consecutive wins) but in fact the roll is about max. payout being 20 BTC. Anyway also thing to note that leen made that roll after she was fully divested and the bank roll at that time was no more then ~550 BTC.

We also made it very clear, if any investor considers he is not aware of risks mentioned, we can divest him to the point before that specific roll. If this is not fair, then what is? And yes, with only exception of leen because of her not acting in good faith and associating lies with us.

Now when it comes to QuickSeller, BodgyBrothers and few other of their alts, there are never here for reasoing of any sort, they are here to abuse/slander and spread FUD, and only justification they have is they "think" this is a SCAM and its been going on for months.

What the hell is this supposed to mean? Leen made a valid point about her lost and about you are missleading information there. Leen supposed to be able to withdraw his btc , if you dont let him to withdraw it then you are a scammer. This will make your business goes down immediately

I think leen already withdrew 6 BTC and was paid even after this. And misleading information was removed from site long ago... wasn't this already made clear by dadice_dev. Why do you fail to read their end of story?

Oh right... yet another cunt!  ;D

If you have a problem you could always create a thread of your own  ;D I can smell some fun coming ahead  :-*

Really dadice?


 ''Are you suffering Alzheimer mate??? Read here entire posts and you will know what we are talking about. Seems you like to overread the important parts.''


''Shall I feel pitty for you, silly muppet?''

And honestly i dont want to quote anything else because pretty much everything you said here was disrespectful so please dont tell me you are not unprofessional because you are.

I think this explanation is very reasonable, and its very clear that leen already knew about high payouts. Everybody on dadice chat knows it already. I hope dooglus will accept apology. Its very clear that dooglus was correct in his observations and equations but also dadice staff confessed but want to offer 20 BTC payout for competition.

This site must be a damn joke.

Its clear they are about to run or close.

well they were serious in closing all of their campaigns in these forums at the moment that they posted it..

 here we go, popcorn time!  ;D

Muhammad Furqan can't stay awake forever.  ;D

No.  ???

The only unethical thing in your posts is you went behind there backs. By saying "then this week can be the last at current system" is you acknowledging the fact that you have been fired. Looks like you guys have been hired by other party that has also hired bodgy :D Its just my observation. No offense there!

You see! Seriously why is it this hard for them to understand their own words :D

Now angry ex-employee cunts ;D they should name this "cunt-thread"  :-*

What happened to this nice discussion about the Kelly criterion and how DaDice misleads their investors into thinking they apply some kind of bankroll management?

All infighting between various scam-cunts and spam-cunts is derailing the thread. Please move the PR dispute somewhere else and let us OC (http://imgur.com/1e8S8OM)s get back to the real topic at hand.

Why do you still have signature from them?

It doesn't matter so much, mainly because of this thread, dadice stopped their signature campaign for everybody on this board (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1078943.0), anyway, I don't see OP in official spreadsheet..

Indeed, let's bring back the discussion about the Kelly criterion.
Because Dadice didn't implement the kelly criterion well I lost more bitcoins than i was supposed to lose, which shouldn't happen. That's a fact.

Please tell me this other fact,, you have been invested in dadice for quite some time from what I read. March? In all this time has anything changed with the way dadice works meaning has it always not used kelly? If it has not and you have been a happy camper all this time when you have been making money why cry when you get a small loss? I don't really care either way but you lied/twisted saying they would not pay, they never said that did they. I also want to know why the fuss right now after all this time knowing exactly how dadice is run, sore loser?  ;D

Such hypocrisy.

The only time someone writes this shit is when someone means it. Don't try to make yourself feel better with your post script disclaimer. It's interesting that now Da Dice has left the forum completely...looks like you won't get your shit figured out, probably for the best. If you could have approached it like an adult you probably would have gotten the resolution you were seeking.

Am I reading this right? You're saying it's OK for DaDice to steal leen's coins because s/he didn't act like an adult?

I would disagree.

Again derailing from the real deal which is that dadice is misleading and potentially scamming people with bad information about their investment system, it doesnt matter if OP lied about anything else, dadice staff still failed to provide any evidence that their system was working correctly and instead tried to accuse OP of other things and insulting everyone.

I find it interesting that OP is having problem with DaDice and still wearing their sig campaign?

Is there a reason you have not changed sig's?   Are you on good terms with DaDice now? (did not read the 9 pages to see this)

Leen was previously in the campaign for 1 week and never posted anything back then. She was not very active on the forum either and therefore has kept the signature ever since she enrolled in the campaign. Some of her BTC is still kept by dadice and the fact that she is still wearing the signature does not mean she has solved this issue with them.

I approach things the way I want. If in your opinion I didn't approach it like an adult (I still believe warning other investors was the first thing to do while I gave a chance to dadice to fix everything was the right thing to do) it still doesn't give dadice the right to scam me.

Leen, no offense there but your approach to entire incident shows me the whole new level of douchebagness. You have literally created a SCAM accusation which puts DaDice in whole defensive position and then you put a seriously questionable disclaimer ??? As per there explanation you created thread even after they processed your withdrawal and assured you to talk about it next morning.

Anyway regarding your complain, me and few of my friends & associates also play at DD and just like them even I have a tiny little investment up there on 0.5 risk. And just like all other members we are aware of 20 BTC max. payout. Its not scamming investors if investors and members are aware of this fact. Its literally written in their FAQs. And the investment page you copied from, as explained it was removed from site long ago.  Why is that only you of all investors have problem all of sudden?

You have clearly lied about your conversation with staff, twisting the words will not change its meaning in anyway. You also lied about not knowing 20 BTC max. payout.

Read the OP
Your investment is not placed at 0.5 kelly or risk as you are thinking.

Taking no sides here.
But one point is leen93 would have kept quiet if she had made a profit. :P And, I am sure leen was aware that 20 BTC was the limit. He might have even invested at 30x kelly if it was available.
From my experience, if you really want an issue to be fixed however bad it is (since I don't think this issue can be fixed retrospectively), you should first talk properly with the admin and staff associated with it.

I can't see the invest option, so can someone say exactly how much risk is say 0.5x kelly subject to?

Of course I lost 0.5x of what leen lost at 10x but all of us being aware of 20 BTC max. payout on site. I don't know all these technical terms, but its proven that leen is an old investors and high roller player too, twisting words and lying about it will not help the OP in anyway.

If a site has a 1% house edge, then investing at "0.5x Kelly" should mean that you are risking 0.5% of your bankroll at the most on each roll.

As I understand it, at DaDice, investing at 0.5x Kelly doesn't limit your exposure at all. If you are the only person invested in the bankroll and you invest 1 BTC at 0.5% Kelly, you are risking over 100% of your 1 BTC, because the site offers a payout of 20 BTC no matter how much is in the bankroll. At DaDice your "Kelly" factor doesn't limit your maximum risk. All it does is change your proportion of the total risk relative to other investors.

In other words, if all the investors were at 0.5x Kelly, it would be exactly the same as if all the investors were at 10x Kelly. The maximum bet would be the same, and amounts risked would also be the same.

I'm not able to see the investment interface. It was hidden a while ago.

Could it be un-hidden on my account so I can see how it looks? My name at DaDice is "doog" (it seems someone already registered "dooglus").

Good evening all.

 As you may have noticed the posts between ourselves, DaDice and DaDice _Dev have all been deleted.

I am pleased to announce that Steve and myself have had a deep discussion over the last couple of days and have reached an amicable and professional agreement and have thus agreed to part ways as companies in a friendly and courteous manner.

Personally I would like to apologise for things getting out of hand here but as I say we have sorted everything out to our mutual satisfactions.

Many thanks to all for your understanding and patience in this regard as well

Jono

Not to forget all the investors are aware of 20 btc max. payout and they were also covered by 500+ BTC on kelly 1 of our own bankroll. So even in this case major part of discussed specific payout was paid from sites own bankroll.

EDIT:

Investments should be shown to you now on left menu.
btw. "dooglus" was registered on 2nd march (as the site launched), so might as well be you.

Can you enable the invest feature on my 'doog' account please?

Even if this is so, I don't see the reason to lose 29% at once! or could this be an inside job? Owner roll that bet and divested before it so the investor cover the most of that?

Leen was never in our campaign! She wouldn't have been accepted due to her post history, ie. selling Belgian chocolate.

I think that has already been explained by dooglus that it is due to 20 BTC max. payout. And from our view, yes the max. payout has been and is 20 BTC and leen being totally aware of it.

dadice_dev PM'ed me saying it was enabled.

I checked it out. The invest dialog looks like this:

https://i.imgur.com/SE3B6v9.png

I get to select my "risk" from a list of different "kelly" values.

That suggests to me that my risk is limited to the kelly amount I pick.

The FAQ mentions the maximum payout per bet:

https://i.imgur.com/DtkVtNZ.png

DaDice argue that that line in the FAQ should be enough to let investors know that the risk they select isn't implemented. I think a more reasonable interpretation is that investors get the risk they select and the house makes up the difference between the investors' risked amount and the 20 BTC they actually offer. Either way it should be made explicit.

I found dadice_dev in the on-site chat. He told me that people are warned of the risks when investment is enabled on their account. Maybe that's true, but I wasn't, so it apparently isn't automatic:

As informed you in chat, termonilogies have been updated.

In other words, the OP was correct all along. DADICE had misleading information and was, in fact, exposing investors to more risk than their Kelly. It's good to have that straightened out.

Thanks. I think that's a lot less confusing:

https://i.imgur.com/yASlDFO.png

Although I think it would be better to explicitly state how things work. A smart investor will want to risk something between 0.5 and 1 times the Kelly amount. First off, they are going to need to know what "bankroll: 621.7470" means. Is that the actual number of Bitcoins you have invested? Or is that the sum of each invested amount times the risk factor? I'm guessing its the latter, but am not sure. That should be cleared up somewhere.

Assuming that is the case, and that I want to risk a full Kelly, I need to set my risk to bank/maxprofit/100 = 621.747/20/100 = 0.31x - which isn't an option. The smallest you allow is 0.5x, which is almost twice a fully Kelly, which is too much.

I would have agreed to that if leen (i) wasn't one of the beneficaries of investment program,  (ii) didn't know about max. payout being 20 BTC, she could lie as usual but she cannot deny her own roll with payout over 18 BTC. (iii) hadn't lied about skype conversations and twisting words, (iv) after processing her withdrawal requests right on the moment, she was told the we will talk to her next morning, (v) went behind our back and contacted our ex-staff. (vi) leen has history of slandering dadice and associating lies with us, this happened in earlier months as well.

Yes dooglus, You are right and I didn't deny it earlier either. We will get the new manual in place until the max. payout remains at 20 BTC but as you explained in earlier posts, we will make the max. payout accordingly in near future (as soon as our commercial dept. is up for that). And all your other concerns regarding DA Dice will be addressed as well.

Well in that case it seems that leen knew about it so she can't really complain personally BUT the issue was there anyways. I see that you are changing it and i think that's the way to go if you and your team want to be trusted again.

Yes, thank you for your kind comments. Dooglus's reputation and knowledge is unrivaled therefore no one can deny that. As promised we will soon address all other concerns this community has with Da Dice.

When i would read that then i would read it as "maximum payout" but as a maximum that comes into play when the house is bigger than 2000 Bitcoins at 1 x kelly. So that even when 1 kelly would be more than 20 Bitcoins the max payout would be restricted to 20 Bitcoins. I would not get the idea that, lets say 100 Bitcoins total in the house could overwrite max kelly and 20 Bitcoins could be taken in one bet. That would simply be too dangerous and the wording would let me never get the idea that it overrides the max kelly in this direction and not in the other one.