|
All paid, sorry for delay.
|
|
|
|
...
One that is very evident is the bankrolls being of a significant size, without checking (so please correct me if I am wrong),
I think CG currently holds the biggest bankrolls among crowdfunded sites for BTC and ETH.
...
Crypto-Games indeed does have a big bankroll, but it definitely is not the biggest among crowdfunded sites anymore. 1. Bustabit - Total invested: 4536 BTC 2. Bustadice - Total invested: 4397 BTC 3. Crypto-Games - Total invested: 1469 BTC If we exclude offsite/leverage: 1. Bustabit - Total invested: 2315 BTC 2. Bustadice - Total invested: 1520 BTC 3. Crypto-Games - Total invested: 1469 BTC Crypto-Games therefore doesn´t have the biggest bankroll of all crowdfunded sites, but it occupies the top position if we ignore the two sites run by devans. You forgot to include altcoins  Total invested on CG: 2,700.36 BTC More than bustabit or bustadice. |
|
|
|
|
Payment processed, transaction ID: 77cd8c90db1a716182a188b0062a325901240d351e0a1de2d74d06b7f00a582d
|
|
|
|
I have around 1 Peercoin on my balance and seeing that there is a possibility to exchange I thought I'd exchange it for BTC and buy a ticket for Bitcoin Lotto. But it emerged that the minimum exchange amount is 5.90500000 PPC. I understand that the minimum exchange amount can't be too low because of the threat of abuse, but don't you think it's possible to make it 1 PPC? It would be still almost impossible to abuse considering that after 1 month of loyalty the faucet gives you 0.02 PPC, but it would be so much more convenient for players. Same goes for STRATIS and maybe for some other coins I haven't checked.
All coins have the same minimum exchange amount, that's 0.001 BTC or alt coin equivalent. Got it, thanks for the clarification! But, do you know why the minimum exchange amount is so high? Why can't it be 0.00025 BTC, for example? Or is it proven that abusers would take advantage of that in that case? Maybe yes, I don't know. But if there is a possibility of lowering the min exchange amount without putting the site in jeopardy, then maybe it's worth considering because on a site where you can play with a dozen of different coins, the lower that limit the better for players. I just hope I'm not the only one who feels this way.  $6 minimum is "so high"? As long as there's no cost per transaction I don't see why they couldn't lower it, though. correct, it's low enough. |
|
|
|
I have around 1 Peercoin on my balance and seeing that there is a possibility to exchange I thought I'd exchange it for BTC and buy a ticket for Bitcoin Lotto. But it emerged that the minimum exchange amount is 5.90500000 PPC. I understand that the minimum exchange amount can't be too low because of the threat of abuse, but don't you think it's possible to make it 1 PPC? It would be still almost impossible to abuse considering that after 1 month of loyalty the faucet gives you 0.02 PPC, but it would be so much more convenient for players. Same goes for STRATIS and maybe for some other coins I haven't checked.
All coins have the same minimum exchange amount, that's 0.001 BTC or alt coin equivalent. |
|
|
|
Our new hardware can better handle large amount of bets so we have decide to lower dice speed limit for 30%.
Change starts with 15.9.
That's great! Now I just have to figure out why the fuck Chrome keeps getting those "Snap!" messages every 5 hours or so on your website. That's strange. I have website opened for almost 24 hours per day without any issues. are you running autobet when you get a "snap" message? Yes, it's always on autobet. Once every a few hours I get that "Snap!" thing and have to refresh the page. Try to use other browser if it happens there also |
|
|
|
Our new hardware can better handle large amount of bets so we have decide to lower dice speed limit for 30%.
Change starts with 15.9.
That's great! Now I just have to figure out why the fuck Chrome keeps getting those "Snap!" messages every 5 hours or so on your website. That's strange. I have website opened for almost 24 hours per day without any issues. are you running autobet when you get a "snap" message? |
|
|
|
Fast bets!Catch the winning spirit! |
|
|
|
The thing with provably fair gambling is that you can easily prove that the website itself isn't cheating the player. Luckily these bad reviews are not really common and I doubt anyone actually reads them. For some reason they're always written in poor English as well  Since you mention it. Will there be considerations to make the lottery provably fair as well? No. Lottery draw is made by trusted third party provider. And total process is completely transparent and site could not manipulate result in any way. Is there a link to the public records for the drawings of RandomPicker? Yes. https://app.randompicker.com/Project/Public/ProjectsRecent.aspx?Key=550772x4478Awesome. I didn't know that. Why is this not linked in the 'How does it work?' tab of the lottery? Thanks for suggestion, it's added. |
|
|
|
|
Payment processed, transaction: 70cfd56d1f8699eacaae495fbd589ab93fe868c5803deb9c710df4ec5aad685c
|
|
|
|
|
On thursday, 6th of September, starting at 7:00AM UTC website won't be available for couple of hours because of maintenance.
|
|
|
|
Good luck!  |
|
|
|
Roulette giveaway!The winner has to report in chat within 5 minutes to claim their reward, or the prize goes to the next higher bet ID until a winner is found.
Catch the winning spirit! |
|
|
|
It's not provably fair if you pregenerate all the results You should read what provably fair means: https://dicesites.com/provably-fairClientseed - provided by your browser and adjusted by you |
|
|
|
Can you explain how can this be provably fair:  You pregenerate all the results and player pick one? |
|
|
|
Quick question here, are posts in the Serious Discussion & Ivory Tower boards counted and paid?
Signatures aren't displayed there, but it's not mentioned in the OP (yet?).
As these boards are (relatively) new, most campaigns are missing out about their stands. Here is another post similar to yours in another campaign. In my understanding, it is obvious that those boards where signatures are not visible, posts will NOT be counted for payments for a signature campaign. Given the nature of the boards, I'd think it should be no surprise that we don't count posts in areas where your signatures are not displayed. On top of that, paying for those posts would go directly against the intentions with which the boards were created. There's no explicit rule because I didn't think it would have to be directly stated, most users of this forum should understand why the Serious Discussion forum was created, and thus why posts there can never be rewarded. To avoid confusion however, I'll ask DogecoinMachine to add it into the rules for the campaign under the section of excluded boards. Since signature is not shown in "Serious Discussion & Ivory Tower", posts there does not count as valid posts for signature campaign payment. OP is updated. btw, payment processed: https://btc.com/49ec66612b344aaed9c4198ce49d865b0cba9f0874197dd5775a646d26f34a73 |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
