Like 4 hours to get the withdrawal approved and it's been so far stuck for 4 more hours as an unconfirmed transaction. Great...

I just close and open it again when it's been stuck too much time at the same "X weeks behind".

I'm having the same issue, it doesn't synchronize.

Whoever sold so many CLAMS had to be really desperate. Although my coins are cheaper now I'm happy of having been able to buy some more. I'm here long term.

No. I finally received an email and it has been approved.

Yes, there's nothing. A withdrawal request was cancelled a few minutes after opening it and now I'm not receiving any email for the a second request either.

I'm trying to withdraw BTC but I'm not receiving a confirmation email to do so. First time this happens to me.

Does your share of the staking profit depend on (your onsite investment)/(onsite total bankroll) or (your onsite+offsite investment)/(onsite+offsite total bankroll)?

70000 would.be losing just one bet. That's not a big deal. One bet of 7% of the bankroll, instead of 1% that it should be. But that player could keep betting and eating our bankroll at a rate of 7% per bet, instead of 1%. There simply aren't enough Clams in existence to keep buying them outside and depositing them on Just Dice. And that's assuming investors were online and had funds ready at the exchange to buy them, which isn't realistic at all.

Optimal leverage is something slightly higher than losing a maximum of 1% of your bankroll per bet (as 1% is our edge), because most bets target much smaller prizes. But 7% is just reckless. Or 12.5% if you are using 25x multiplier.

It simply makes no sense to allow that degree of leverage. Investors would get the same kind of returns as now if everyone was capped as about 3x, but we wouldn't risk being destroyed the day someone bets against max profit.

If someone comes and starts betting for max profit and winning it, investors wouldn't be able to buy the needed CLAMS to deposit them, even if they are online and ready to buy them in an exchange (totally unrealistic). Actually, there aren't even enough CLAMS being offered in exchanges to buy them in that scenario (357703 are available on Poloniex now, that's only about 40% of the insite bankroll, and that obviously includes those listed for way more than the current price, like a 190345 clams sell order for BTC0.008 each, about 4 times the current price). An scenario like a short squeeze would occur in that case. It's just not possible to buy back hundreds of thousands of CLAMS.

What you are allowing, which is basically leverage, wouldn't be that problematic if it wasn't because Just-Dice bankroll is about 1/3 of the total supply of this coin, and average leverage is 1:15. The scenario of someone betting for the max profit may be unlikely, but it just makes no sense to risk getting in that situation. In that scenario, only those that aren't lying with their insite+offsite bankroll (which is probably just a minority of people as you are forced to be at 1:25 not to be deluted) would be able to bear the downswing. Meanwhile the rest of investors would be losing about 7% of their CLAMS in each max profit lost bet, instead of the optimal 1% or a conservative 0.5%.

Maximum allowed leverage on CLAMS should be money supply/insite bankroll (and that's already risky as the rest of existing coins aren't ready to be bought on exchanges). Actually I'd just get rid of the offsite function and just make max profit 1% of the (real) bankroll, equal to our edge.

Is there any way to set autorenew to FRR minus a specific amount, like you can when opening a position manually?

I understand that the purpose of the offsite balance was not accumulating too many CLAMS insite. However, seeing that there's a circulating supply of 2 631 279 clams (https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/clams/), and a theoretical bankroll of 13 852 378 (200 times the current max profit), 5.64 times bigger, it's evident the offsite function isn't being employed as intended. Investors are forced to use a multiplier as big as the rest of investors, so their position isn't deluted. But by doing that, she's lying, like the majority of other investors.

In practice, if someone comes and starts betting for the max profit, instead of just 0.5% of the bankroll being risked, it's something between 69261/889254 (7.79%, assuming nobody has CLAMS outside) and 69261/2631279 (2.63%, assuming all the supply is held by CLAM investors, and all the rest of CLAMS were really hold outside and ready to be invested if needed), way more than it should be. It's working well so far because very rarely people bet to get the max profit, but the risk is still considerable and it could be fixed by simply limiting the offsite bankroll to be set at a maximum of circulating supply/current bankroll (2.96 right now). If an investor wanted to be protected against that scenario, she would be forced to just use a 2x multiplier (the optimal with a 1% edge and 0.5% max profit), but by doing that she's getting lower returns than she should, as part of them are being obtained by investors using much bigger multiplier (average is 15.58 right now).

Say I have 1000 CLAM on Just-Dice. I deposit 1000 more. I set it to "/offsite 25x", so now I have 2000 onsite and 48000 offsite. What would happen if after that I withdraw 1000 CLAM? Would the invested amount remain at 1000 onsite plus 48000 offsite?

Thanks in advance.

In any of those 3 cases, he could just sell the casino to someone else. It's a quite profitable website right now (as he probably doesn't have to spend much to run it).

About the last scenario, he could also ban new investments being made or force investors to withdraw a percentage of their investment (both options would be quite bad for the coin value, something he doesn't want to happen as he probably has many of them). In case he did that, maybe another second (or nth) similar dice site with the same structure would be created.

Yeah, but why would he do that? He's making money already this way, without having to worry about any government (he stopped accepting BTC for that reason), and he probably also has many CLAM. So what would be the point of closing or doing anything else that would plummet CLAM price and make other investors angry (and therefore not likely to invest in an hypothetical new casino dice)? I would also prefer that he still accepted BTC, so we wouldn't have to worry about this, but I understand why he stopped accepting them.

How CLAM were distributed is an entirely different topic. What I mean is that they aren't being used for anything else than betting/investing in Just Dice, so they are like casino coins/shares.

CLAMS are basically Just Dice casino chips, but they let you invest instead of just play. He wants and will try to make CLAM valuable for two reasons: the comission is in that currency and he probably owns a lot of CLAM (at least I would if I was him).

Even if you don't know the exact amount, more or less how much do you think is realistic per year using 30 days FRR? 15%? 20%?

It's possible, that's what I plan to do.

Which client are you using? I'm using 1.4.17.