Yes with dooglus ide that people could invest for example 1 000 btc on JD and say they have 99% more 99 000 btc in there local wallet witch they dont have to have, then with that ide if they use it to maximize there exposure, then they can risk 100 % of there actual bankroll(the 1000 btc in this example that they have) that they then gamble with on the investors side and it can be lost on a single bet if some whale would come in and bet large.
Hopefulle Dooglus never introduces such things as it will put presure on investors to raise there risklevels(if others start rasing there's) for them to be able to achive an interest of any significanse.

Why would anyone want to have a risk level at 0,1%, that would probably mean they would have an expected monthly return of somewhere in the region of 0,2-0,5% when things stabalize if you allow people to have a risklevel from 0,1% to 1,0-2,0%


First if there is a single person sitting at 1 000 000+ BTC at the moment the chance that he/she want to invest that much in a single BTC business would be pretty small.

Second what good would a million BTC from a single investor be to JD, it will only reduce the profit for you and other big investors Dooglus, it's not very likely JD or any other BTC gambling site will be getting bets risking 10 000 BTC anytime soon, thats around a million USD bet at 50%

Third if you allow people to have risklevels of up to 100% with or without potentially "fake" coins that excists or do not excists in there local wallet then all people that don't risk the same high % will get a drastically decreased share of the expected profit(or losses) if one or several large investors risk extremely high levels, up to 100% per bet.

Lets for example then say 1 000 000 invested with or without fakecoins at 100% risk per bet and another 10 000 real coins at 1% risklevel per bet.
If someone in the future then wanting 0,1% risk exposure, they would then only be exposed to around just 1/1000 of what it is now at 1% and would probably be looking at 0,002-0,005% expected monthly interest on there investments

So for different levels of risked per bet it would probably look something like this then:

Risked   compared   expected
per bet  to how       monthly
             it's now      profit
0,1%     1/1000     0,002-0,005%
0,5%     1/200       0,01-0,025%
1%        1/100       0,02-0,05%     
2%        1/50         0,04-0,10%
5%        1/20         0,10-0,25%
10%      1/10         0,20-0,50%
20%      1/5           0,40-1,00%
50%      1/2           1,00-2,50%
100%    1/1           2,00-5,00%

Is this really how you like to have it, at the moment people are looking at an expected profit at around 15% a month on there investment in JD and they only risk 1% per bet.
Why would you possible want to force the investors to risk an extremely high part, maby even towards 100% of there investment in a single bet for them to have the same expected profit(if one or several large investors would risk extremely high percentages of there capital on a single bet) with hardly any possitive effect out of it ?

If then some gambler with a real bankroll of a few hundred thousend coins comes in, they could with very high likelyhood wipe out those that has risked 100% with there "fakecoins" and in reallity only have 10 000 BTC(that they invested) but is represented as 1 000 000 BTC for a 100% real risklevel.

Even if investors woun't go to such extreme levels, if just some big investors raise there risklevel significant, all other investors that want to keep there risklevel at 1% will suffer a lot from it unless those that risk to much will get busted.

Congratulations on passing 500 000 BTC in bets in almost exactly 1 months time

This thing you suggest is totally absurd, that you would let people take a gamble(with 100% of there investment on the site at risk on each bet) for it to go there way and if it does they will profit up to 100 times more then the a "real investor" that only gets 1% of the site's profit if it goes the right way.

It's more or less setup to screw people that want a resonable risk/reward as some will claim to have 100 times more than they have then and will take 100 times more of the profit, than the investors that dont lie will only get 1/100 of what they should have gotten, or they can expect a return in the region of 0,02%-0,05% interest if that thing you suggest will become popular.
Also you will get some very unhappy investors that will take the gamble and risk way to high amount of there bankroll and end up unlucky enouth to go broke on the investors side.

Also i trust that you run a legit business here dooglus but the fact that you even suggests such an alternative looks very suspicious as it could make manipulations 100 times more profitable for you, how easy woulden't it be for you to pick a nice entry and exit point for an investment and use some other account to make a huge fake swing in the site's profit, and take almost 100% of the profit when the site goes up and then divest and take 0% of the site's loss. No dooglus this ide is totally wrong way to go i would say.

I guess the x and y on that picture is 4000 BTC up then at around 27500 bets, witch would mean less than 1,6% up if nakowa/cici/celeste has made over 50% of the sites wagered btc like he said before.
But thats then missing the loss of 1300 btc, so in reallity he's up around 2700 btc, <1,08% then, still way better than epected(2 % better or so) after maby 30 000 bets in total.

There needs to be added an option to define what persons that you yourself find trustwhorty so you in the filter for loans that is offereed can have only loans from those people on your "green" list shown.

Also in the stat field there is really a lot more to ask from it, as of now it shown

"Stats
Active Loans
    836
Open Listings
    67
Loans Funded
    ฿ 15740.51
Repaid Loans
    1171 "

How about adding a couple of more things and make the one you have more informative, by adding loans that are late, and loans that has defalulted and for loans funded not just show BTC amount but for all stats show the number of them and the BTC amount, so something more in the line of:

"Stats
Open Listings
        67      2 587.50 ฿

Loans Funded
    3 419    15 740.51 ฿
================
Active Loans
       836     6 857.50 ฿

Repaid Loans
     1 171    5 236.13 ฿
Late loans
        499    1 145.37 ฿
Defaulted Loans
        913    2 501.51 ฿

To give Investors and borrowers a more whole and true picture of things.

Tulkas i would like a a little explanation of how loans tied to MtGoxUSD works, no information avaliable in the fact about them, the only thing one can find about it is by holding the mouse over MtGoxUSD and then this appeares:
"This listing has its amount linked to the bitcoin exchange rate for MtGoxUSD. The payment size in bitcoin will fluctuate over time following the exchange rate for MtGoxUSD."

Lets say someone loans out 0,1 btc with a interestrate of  1%, when he will be paid back will the interest amount be affected by changes in btc/usd price or the whole amount ?
If mtgox usd/btc is down by 10% for example when the loan is paid back what will people then get back 0,1+0,001*0,9= 0,10009 btc (0,9% interest) or will he loose on loaning the money out and only get back 0,101*0,9=0,0909 btc(-9,1% interest), hardly a great deal for the one loaning the money out then if that is the case, better to just trade themself on the market then.....

I think it's best for JD to concentrate on one thing to start with, a dice site with betting in BTC and do that good for a long period. it's way to early to increase risks by adding another currency(LTC for example) to bet in, you would need a large housecapital in litecoins to for that or the site's investors/dooglus would be in severe risk for what market fluctuations in the BTC/LTC price can cause.

If people want to bet with there litecoins, it's easy for them to change them to BTC at btc-e, vircurex, or some other exchange like that. Also the volume one can expect from gambling in litecoin is nowhere near the volumes/values for BTC so one would increase risks for very little benefit by adding other currencys like LTC i think.

High bets but not very shocking play i would say, +26/-18 times 111 btc in the sequence you show, 15 wins 10 losses.
A loosing sequence of 7 bets in a row followed by 10 wins in a row. Whats your point, at 50% 10 wins in a row should happen every 1024 bets you make, is it the fact that it happened just after a relatively long sequnce of losses this time that you think is special ?
7 losses in a row is 1 in 128 to happen, so 7 losses followed by 10 wins should happen once over a sequense of 132 072 bets on avg, but there is nothing that say you can't have such a event much earlier than that or much later...

Username (31791) <celeste> on JD witch is the real nakowa/cici/celeste mentioned in the chat at JD that he made posts under this towtoad name here.

The ide with variable size of the risked amount per bet woun't work very well unless the site will stabalize on a very high avg daily volume of bets compared to the invested amount and that is highly unlikely that that will be the case as invested amounts in the long run will adjust to the betvolumes and settle on a level where people feels the risk/revard is decent.

If you implement something like that where people will be able to choose a risklevel per bet in 0,1%-2,0% for example, then people will be forsed to accept a higher risk than there comfortable with to be able to expect a decent yearly return on there investments, if someone witch only want 0,1% risked per bet, then they would likely be looking at worse expected return compared to basically "risk free" investments that dont have a chance of beeing worth less than when they invested when they sometime in the future want to withdraw funds. It will likely end up that the invested amount in relation to the avg bet volume will force people to risk even more than 1,0% per bet to get a decent return if some large investors will go for max risk.

Before the nakowa/cici/celese entered the scene for example, even at 1% risked per bet like it's been sofar, the investors was "only" to expect something like 3,12% profit, witch one can compare to some basically "riskfree" investments out there that is at around 2,0% monthly return.
So it may be very likely that someone that wants to only risk 0,1% per bet may expect something like a profit in the 0,2-0,5% range when bet volumes and invested amount will settle in a couple of months time if you were to introduce varable risked per bet levels of 0,1-1,0% or even 0,1% to 2,0% or something like that.

There is a flaw in this reasoning, there is no way he can guarantee that he will ever be up in a single session or overall, no matter how big bankroll he has, the way he plays should rather make the chance that he ends up down way bigger than it have to be.
Given that there isn't any flaw in the randomness this whale should be a goldmine for JD. What is it 3 big loosing sessions he has had sofar, 400 BTC, 600 BTC and 1300 BTC(even thou the investors haven't got credit for that one yet), next time he looses it could very well be in the several thousend BTC region.

Given that there is now flaw in the randomness Celest/cici/nakowa's strategy is pretty bad i would say and he/she really should have lost way more than he/she has sofar and should be way down in the red by several thousand BTC instead of up 2700 BTC or so sofar...

Your OP here about cryptostocks you cliams there is
" - Low fees:
      0 fee on coin withdrawals"
for withdrawals on coins from cryptostocks, wich is simply not true.
I saw that you reduced the fee on vircurex for BTC withdrawals to 0,002 btc, but still you haven't lowered or removed the fee on Cryptostocks.
You charge 0.01 BTC/0.1LTC/25DVC at the moment. The withdrawal fee for BTC is 100 times the standard networks fee if there even is any fee on the transaction, usually you dont have to pay any fees on BTC+ sized transations at all....
Why do you still charge around 1 USD for each BTC withdrawal people make, 100 times or more than what it costs you to send them there coins ?

Negative balance in your account is because dooglus removed 1300 btc of losses celeste did from the database and you probably withdraw funds between the time celeste lost them and dooglus removed those bets. The 1300 btc celeste had already withdrawn, but by misstake dooglus left them in celestes accout and celeste then bet with those and lost those 1300, later on dooglus choose not to recover those 1300 from celeste the next couple of times he/she has been in so investors and dooglus himself is in total 1300 btc worse at the moment than if celeste did pay properly for his losses.

I was not invested at the time for this mess by the way, i removed my investment directly when i saw nakowa's increadibly luck early on at some high bets that he maby just out of the blue, it looked way to suspicious i think and i divested and withdraw the funds i had at JD from the site.

5% edge is only for level 0-2 players with no mentors in DT. DT effectively have less then 2,85%(in reallity even closer to 2% and going towards 1,5% or less in edge in the future...) as there is players up to 2,15% in rakeback already and the site gives back some of the houseedge in the form of EV+ games and tournaments and so.

OP and i guess it must be a typo or it's the invested amount at the time of investment and not what the investment is worth on the 7 july and 14 july.
The value 575.00000000 also exists both dates for example

Oh thats a step im the right direction at least then Kumala, can you now explain why your other project Cryptostocks still have 0,01 BTC in withdrawal fee and why that hasen't been lowed to, when will you lower that fee ?

Why do you chage around a USD in fee for BTCwithdrawals from cryptostocks when the networks cost for most withdrawals should be 0 or in worst case for the few people that sends really small amounts at max 0.0001 BTC(1 US cent) in fee, you charge people at least 100 times to much in fees at BTCwithdrawals at cryptisocks

Also in the OP of your announcement for cryptostocks there is a lie
" - Low fees:
      0 fee on coin withdrawals"
On withdrawals you charge a fee 0f 0.01 BTC/0.1 LTC/25.0 DVC at the moment at cryptostocks.

So are you going to credit those accounts at cryptostocks that you have charged a fee even thou you claim to not have any fees for withdrawing on cryptostocks ?
Are you going to fix the false statement in the OP for Cryptostocks ?

Sounds correct then, maby psy missunderstood what had happened in his account then.

Did he Roll back all bets, even those others have done back to the point celeste started betting with the 1300 BTC, not just removed celestes bets with the 1300 btc that wasen't his/hers to bet with ?
Well that is very wrong then in that case.

Well this part is a little strange thou, i can understand that the site wants a big player like this to come back and bet more(however heavy swings that will cause the site thou).
But as long as celeste/cici/nakowa can't prove that it wasen't he/she that made the bets that person still was the one that  betted the 1300 BTC that wasen't his/her's and owe the site and it's investors those 1300 BTC that he/she lost and of witch he/she sofar has paid off 120 of the dept of 1300. When/if celeste/cici/nakowa pays back the rest the bets or the site gets those 1180 BTC back the legal way, then the actions those bets caused should be put back in place again, basically around 190 btc in total to you dooglus and the other around 1110BTC in total back to those that had investments during that time of the betting.