Do you understand that there already is an ignore button? That's what jackg is referring to in his post... not the potential of an ignore button.

Here, it's interesting to note that in the past there were some problems with it:

Bump. Available on Telegram @actmyname

About a year ago, I was contemplating this very topic: it's so easy to craft a series of responses that align to the various spam megathread topics in the discussion boards. A lot of padding can also be used to fit into most posts: users generating some replies could add in a few fragments of sentences that go through a soft word spinner or something else, and then you will have a dynamic range of replies for most threads.

Of course, since you're only replying to those generic threads, you have the benefit of being vague or open-ended with your reply and barely saying anything of substance at all: this makes the whole plagiarism risk much less severe, and furthermore...

If you're talking users in Altcoin campaigns, then this can even be fully automated (more easily, anyway) because of how shitty the replies are in the Altcoin Discussion section. The thing is, unless someone actually starts purging posts or threads, it's unlikely that any one particular spammer (or account complex) will be impacted by the occasional reporter.

I do not recall the username, and it would be difficult to figure out who it was without directly asking theymos.

I'm certain that any rule-breaking feedback will be removed. For example, links to malware would definitely be something considered for removal.

---

All in all, I would just toss out the blanket statement, "if there's any doubt, it's not happening."

The previous day showed the participant pool dropping by a whopping SEVEN, from 86 to 79. Those that were dropped are the following:

---

Remaining participants just got their final prize increased by 8.86%, to 12.65 mBTC (the prize went up by 1+ mBTC due to the previous day).

Slowly, trickling down...

We haven't even passed 30 days yet and we're already down to nearly 1/5th of the original participant pool.

Despite his negative feedback spam spanning three pages, this is still less spam than what I remember theymos removing.

If we take that as a lower bound, then game-protect's negative feedback will never be removed. It takes quite a bit of push for theymos to actually perform some restitution: see flags, spam, investor-based games board for examples.

Well, that's untrue. Admins can remove negative trust. They just don't tend to do it unless it's egregious spam or something significantly malicious outside of words.

If it can happen, then there's nothing to say when it comes to luck.

If you can't find anything to demonstrate them faking provable fairness, then honestly the only thing left to do would be to apply Occam's Razor to the situation and accept that indeed, you were a victim of horrible luck.

Partisan politick please. Make it easier for Southern Canada to prepare for annexation.

It's important to note that the actual difference between going all-in and betting the equivalent amount in smaller denominations is zero from an expectation perspective, but will be massive from a risk of ruin and volatility perspective.

If you believe that you will beat the volatility in the medium-term, smaller bets are favored over larger bets. I would recommend that gamblers (that actually want to use bankroll management, even in a -ev luck-based game for entertainment) develop their acceptable wagering amounts by using the formula for risk of ruin. This will let gamblers gauge the expected result more accurately and also have a better depiction of how severely they will lose.

Questions like, "what should I bet so that I will have a 30% chance of not losing $50 after 100 rounds?"

Post bursting falls under the subset of spam. Given that the posts themselves were already worthy of being deemed that, it seems redundant to further sub-categorize.

We'll see if the posts are deleted or not. Preventing edge-posting from clogging up threads (that's how we got those spam megathreads) means that discussion will actually be streamlined, rather than circular and congested.

The previous day showed the participant pool dropping by just 1, from 87 to 86. Those that were dropped are the following:

---

Remaining participants just got their final prize increased by 1.16%, to 11.63 mBTC.

Since we're slowing down, I'm increasing the granularity of the delta changes. I wonder when we'll see the first no-drop day? Probably Hopefully in a week.

Please do not fall for this type of thinking.

Almost impossible is not impossible. It's like saying that the probability of you winning the lottery is almost impossible.

You can get a jackpot, and you can get a loss streak. These events can happen with any frequency, even if they are statistically unlikely. Mathematically, the odds of getting 13 losses in a row with a 1.25x payout with a 0.5% edge is (0.204)¹³, or 1 in 943,643,219.

Is this highly improbable? Certainly! But how can you say that it's impossible for this to happen twice? That would be arguing in bad faith.

---

All you need, by the way, is ONE example of when they fleeced you on the result to disprove their provable fairness - pick any bet from your loss streak and try to make sure that the server seed and client seed match the surrounding bets (i.e. they are the original pair you had) and the correct results.

Doesn't really matter whether it's burst posting or not. Either way, the content is absolute trash. What does it bring to the already-useless thread?

I recognized the name... looks like there are still some more posts to clean up as it stands.

---

As far as I'm concerned, if you as a user jumped an extra 51 deleted posts due to one person reporting consecutive replies on your post history, then you're a spammer.

---

The most shocking part to me, though, is the extent of how easy it is to just "float" the rules for substantial posts. The problem to me is never the shitposters - the problem is the edge-posters, the ones that barely toss in enough substance for the post to not be reported & deleted, but not enough substance for anything to be gleaned from the reply. When you see people pad out their posts with generic replies or use the same keyword five times in their post (e.g. bitcoin, DeFi) these are the people I'm talking about.

The distinction is important because of a causal relationship. It should be noted that the house edge is not derived from the zeroes themselves but from the structure of the game.

The game constructed with the rules in its current state is the source of the house edge. For someone that has a flawed understanding of this, they may incorrectly assume that they can somehow "beat the zeroes" if they bet in some particular pattern, if they had originally thought that the zero was some magical number that held the house edge. (Gamblers can get loony, it's definitely a possibility.)

The previous day showed the participant pool dropping by just 1, from 88 to 87. Those that were dropped are the following:

---

Remaining participants just got their final prize increased by 1.1%, to 11.49 mBTC.

---

Lucky you.

Not sure how you're accessing it, but Evolution should have a gear icon in the top-right of the UI: that lets you access the settings, which should have video quality options.

Like I said, though, you could alternatively run a third-party extension to directly remove the frame or canvas that's being used. Some HTML blockers might work.

Plagiarism?

It is the most common reason when you're not given one: is there any possibility at all that you could have copy-pasted text without having credited the source thereof?

It's a little inaccurate to say that the zeroes of the roulette wheel are the source of the house edge. You must dilute the responsibility across all avenues of the game: the payouts of each specific bet category are such that there is a -1/37 unit expectation (2.7% edge of roulette).

All things being equal, if you were to create an isomorphic transformation to translate roulette numbers into arbitrary symbols, any particular number can be the one that is excluded from the non-straight-up bets (e.g. even/odd, black/red, 1st dozen/column, etc).

If you were to remove those markets and you simply had the 36:1, 18:1, number-based markets rather than category-based markets, then apart from the variation in splitting chips between 0 and other numbers, all numbers are essentially equal. The house edge is thus derived from the payouts and the game itself.

I believe there are video streaming options. There is a "switch view" button that will reduce the size of the stream, and there is also a quality setting. Alternatively, if you use a plugin or some JS, you could completely eliminate the iframe/canvas that hosts the stream and just play the game exclusively.