We do have a high-level roadmap (internal) but it's mostly to align the different parts of our system integrations. We definitely won't be ready for March/April.

Our DAO is going to be powered by NXT. Originally we wanted to use NXT but the smart-contract features were pushed back - which is why we made the move to Ethereum. We've got no plans (afaik) to move the DAO

That's a very important distinction. When I said "based on tables" I meant to imply seats at those tables (obviously, full tables are immaterial to these stats). Sorry for being imprecise. Still, the rest of the point still stands: the more games are being played, the more table seats open up, ergo the more unlikely that two colluders will land at the same table.


Cash tables are on the roadmap, but because of the collusion aspect, we're going to be putting some very cool mechanics in place to rate-limit joins/quits by activity (i.e. the more you stick around in games, the more easier it will be to leave). So cheaters that keep table-hopping will quickly find themselves throttled in this activity.

A few points of clarification:

• You don't have to be part of the DOA to enjoy the game. It will be made available to everyone
• Collusion requires players being able to play at the same table. Pokereum removes the ability for people to pick and choose their tables (randomized assignment as per the white paper description), thereby making it a statistical improbability that two or more colluders will land at the same tables.

I certainly don't want to appear hostile or defensive, but I get the sense that the criticism about collusion are born out of an incomplete understanding of what we are talking about (for this aspect of security). I'll try to sum it up colloquially here:
To collude in traditional online poker systems, two or more people are typically in contact with each other outside the game system and share knowledge of their hands without others at the table knowing. This happens today when online poker games let people pick their tables, and they can direct their colluders to the same table. Pokereum does not let you pick a table - you are assigned (according to our matchmaking algorithms). So two people are randomly assigned to tables. There are stats and maths to discusss how likely/unlikely these two people land in the same game, but intuitively, we know that as the number of games increase, the chances of them getting in the same game drop (rapidly).

So, the cheaters face two options (once they've chosen to take their chances at collusion):

• play the table assigned, thereby be unable to cheat
• quit the table (and lose the buy-in) and try again

Any team looking to try option number two will quickly find that the costs of quitting tables will always be higher than whatever they can get IF they ever land at the same table (esp. since BOTH cheaters have to walk away from their buy-ins).

I thought this concept was pretty clearly explained in the paper - but maybe the confusion around the topic is a good indicator that we should take another stab at that section.

Hope this clarifies things for you!

EDIT
PS: There will be a "play with friends" feature, but it's not fully spec'd out yet, so I don't have a lot to share with you on that part just yet.

Hey guys, I'm part of the core dev team, and I'm lurking here on this thread. So if you have any questions about the project, I'd be happy to answer as best I can.