Ofcourse. It depends on how well the bettor knows the site though. I assume that wise whales would bet huge amount on site they trust and are familiar with. The Trust minimizes the risk for them. If the site Op is accusing is trusted, then Op need to be really sure of what he is accusing it/them of

I think random-based betting games shouldn't be too exciting, so people don't getting addicted to them. Unless there are strategies (known by few people) for winning them consistently , they shouldn't be enjoyed too much else those who rely on luck to bet on them would be losing miserably to them if they become addicted.

One of my favorites(I haven't played it though) is "bets on crypto prices". They could be considered skill-based by some and could be fun

Interesting.
I wonder if speculation is the reason for this (the bolded part) or people moving their funds from centralized exchanges to hold (or both).
My problem with the whale alert is that it can potentially be used to manipulate prices

People should also remember not to invest what they can't afford to risk/lose. That should atleast help them not to panic sell or be too attached to the price of bitcoin.
They can sell some part of their bitcoins anytime they what to... No pressure. Just relax and see what you can do to help keep Bitcoin decentralized and safe.

I don't think it's even a good idea for Gold to increase in price like Bitcoin in this world population and its high usage/demand for gold for lots of purposes like manufacturing. That kind of extreme price increase is more suitable for things used just for money.

I think it's better to print coins out of thin air to pay people for actually solving important problems that involve hardwork, and the problems could be solved by either computers or humans or both. There are loads of important problems that will need to be solved on decentralized systems/networks by every network participant. The solvers could be rewarded with Coins printed out of thin air. And the amount of coins to be rewarded to the solvers should be based on the merit or quality of the solutions... Good quality works get good rewards,fair quality get fair reward etc. That's is one of the ways everyone in the network get paid accordingly, without compromising on quality.
There are numerous problems in diverse fields of endeavor that should be solved by all decentralized network participants and they could get paid in coins printed out of thin air for solving them.
People should be free to join/leave (and earn rewards for their hard work) without too much permission/trust.

Well, I believe one of the best way to manage public funds/assets is by managing them on system that is transparent, decentralized, immutable, safe, etc. Centralization only encourages lack of true transparency, lawlessness, secrecy, unauthorized changing/deletion/modification of public data, censorship, etc 
Most of us can't even see what is going on in our Central Banks which are supposed to be public (like Bitcoin network), nor do we have any say/power to affect them yet we are not that bothered?  I choose decentralization, transparency, immutablity and other good principles of Bitcoin over the closed/private Central Banks.

He/she is offering you "Fixed matches"  for commission? I guess fixed matches are illegal in most/all countries because they're not real/fair competitions and are they not based on established rules for such competitions/games.
 By the way, I believe it shouldn't be right/legal to bet on competitions we already know have been rigged. If their outcome have really been known or fixed illegally then it's not a good idea to bet on them.


I won't be surprised if they arranging fake (or fixed) competitions just to make money by getting people to bet on them and selling the outcome to others.

There has been strange appearances of people betting with or depositing huge amount of money on betting sites. It kind of surprising that people will risk that much on sites they probably don't know very well or trust. I wondered how people who earned that much money would take such hugh risk.
But we just answer their questions anyways. Hopefully they are genuine cases and not troll or tests

Tried checking out the site to know what it's about(I mean "skin rocket betting") , but go error message... The problem is probably from my own side alone or is it general? Using a lite phone browser.

I think Marijuana (which is actually green herb with seeds) should be legal. The abuse of the herb is what should be illegal. It doesn't make sense to ban people from using a plant which GOD permits humans to eat.

Eating the plant rather than smoking is what I can defend. I don't really know much about the smoking aspect though, whether it's healthy or not.
It should however be eaten in moderation but only by responsible adults. Understand what limit of the herb your body can tolerate without it harming you or causing you to harm others

Prices of goods and services will always increase in price due to demand and supply unless there is deliberate measure to keep them stable as long as possible. If you totally leave them to natural market forces/activities or without intervention, they will likely increase in price when supply is low, and decrease when supply is high.

Government printing alots of money for buying particular goods and services that can't be produced quickly enough to replace the sold ones will decrease the supply of the goods/services or make them scarce hence price inflation of the goods/services

Well, I never said profiting from safe/responsible/good bets is immoral. I am specifically referring to profiting from betting sites/centers that allow customers to take big risk (gamble) or those that allow customers to bet irresponsibly/unsafely. Please do you see anything irresponsible and unsafe about the company I promote?

I probably didn't see enough reason why you think they are lying. Is it because of this:

Doesn't that really verify the fairness of games played on the site, or is it not the proper way to verify the site's provable fairness.?

Did you check the site Terms and Conditions to know whether it's stated that the "free money" can be changed whenever they want (without warning/notification)? I think that will determine if what they did was legal, but I don't think it's moral, assuming their intention is to do that and justify it with their Terms of service when customers complain.

I think one of the best ways to prevent this from happening is to build a mechanism within the Bitcoin Network to control the supply/price.  This could mean increasing the total supply from current 21 million to may be 30million. The additional 9million could then be distributed and locked safely using multi-sig/smart-contract and governed by a decentralized community. The  community could help prevent the extreme price volatility by keeping the price fluctuate moderately while remaining deflationary long-term.


* You could alternatively (or in combination with the above) reward people to lock and hold/stake their Bitcoins for certain period of time(esp when Bitcoin is bearish) and the bitcoins maybe unlock when Bitcoin becomes bullish. Once their bitcoins are locked, they could be rewarded in tokens or something... Reward automatically increases when Bitcoin price is going down to encourage more people to hold and decreases when Bitcoin is going up to encourage some selling

10% is about 1.8million of the current supply lost forever. I wonder how they determine the 10%. Probably by considering coins that have remained unmoved for a long period of time?

I think this is simply determined by the number of bitcoins mined so far

Well, open source is recommended for true cryptocurrency... and i prefer fully Open Source. Open source means the codes are transparent and you know exactly what they can do, and whether they're really safe to use (especially long-term). How could we rely on closed source wallets if we don't really know what the codes/owners are capable of.. They may appear safe but doing really evil/illegal things in secret.

I think a well trained, good, very skilled, talented farmer would do a better job if given enough equipments.
I don't think fully autonomous machines/robot can be trusted to make new complex decisions without alot of errors.

I think the "too good to be true" maxim is for most cases, but it's possible to create "too good to be true" business reward system/model that is good, last long and is sustainable.  Most people likely don't know how to make that possible or they have been decieved into believing it's impossible.