Question: why are this post in any way interesting, since they contain random numbers pulled out of user's asses?
What's the point of giving random predictions, if you don't explain the exact reasoning why you predict one specific number?
Is anyone actually reading this shit, or is everyone just in write-only mode?

Is there a working website about it now? (IIRC the other one broke months ago)

?

How in hell having a 0.50BTC fee would "prohibit Scammers"?

Ahahahaha so obvious, blaming AM!
If it was a collateral, it should obviously have been sold when its value was approaching the loan value.
If he hasn't, it means he's utterly inept, but obviously nothing like that happened anyway, since he scammed you.

Uh? I reported this ages ago, I'm surprised it's still here.

That being said, if you really want to bet (and you'd better don't), use just-dice, it's much better than SD.

So, let's recap, stealing your coins wasn't enough, now he's also going to steal your identities and sell them?
This debacle is making me laugh more and more.

Well, you could start selling PURCHASE in blocks of 1000 and, as @eltopo suggested, you could give a time limit to round the amount of owned shares.
After that you don't even need to cut them, just to prevent selling amounts of shares <1000 if you already have >= 1000: doing so will ensure there won't be new people owning <1000 shares, just old ones.

But... yes, it's getting a bit complicated, and maybe it's not worth the effort.

Since you'll be listing at a new exchange, while you're at it, will you change the denomination of MINING to bigger units, or you will keep with these tiny dividends?
Currently the "rounding error" is 1/100, but once it will be 1/10 it won't be negligible anymore...

If scammers like him actually went to jail, it would be a strong disincentive to future scammers.

Let's say you "owe" him something: would you give it back, now that you know he's a scammer? I wouldn't.
Not that it matters, since he's a scammer, and you won't get nothing back anyway.

Suppongo abbia senso per chi contava di mantenercisi, dunque per pagare bollette, affitto, spese, etc.

(senza entrare nel merito del giusto/sbagliato/evasione/caccapupù etc.)

At first I thought that posting this story here was a nice thing to do, such as "hey yes we take money away from gamblers, but when they go broke maybe we are kind", but thinking about it a bit more... it doesn't add up.

1. if he won instead, he likely would be very wealthy now: risk vs. reward, why did he get the possibility of having the reward, if we back up his risk now that he knows he has lost? If he won, do you think he would similarly donate all his money to charity? Doubt it.

2. if you feel sorry for him, well, divest. Your being invested means you are being fine with screwing people, it's not this occasional charity that would make you feel better.

3. if you really feel like doing charity, then give it to a gamblers supporting/awareness group instead: I guess there must be somewhere some group trying to educate people in not doing stupid bets like this. Donating to such a group could be beneficial (at least in theory) to all potential gambler-losers, instead to just one who managed to arise your pity.

Sorry if I'm being harsh, but a few days ago I was just considering divesting because I hate gambling, as I'm torn between the "it's their own choice to give me free money" vs. "this should never happen, and I'm part of the problem instead of part of the solution".

Sorry for this post, I really appreciate the work doog is doing, he has managed to create the fairest gambling site so far, still... being the fairest is not enough, apparently.
I still have to decide if I want to still be part of it or not.

You are comparing apple to oranges.

So if I create a shitcoin with a coin cap of "1" it is automatically better? Or automatically worse?

Makes exactly ZERO sense.
As usual, with litecoin fans.

Grazie mille, fa sempre piacere sapere che in mezzo ai troll e agli stolti, rimane comunque qualche persona sensata... : )

How can you blame them?
After all, it's not like you're getting anything should the company close.
So the dividends are the only reason to buy the shares.

You might argue that people are too much focused on current dividend, ignoring future ones, however with the great amount of scams and failures in the bitcoin world, again, how can you blame them? After all, if you're in for the long run, just buy real-world stocks.

Ok, me ne sto, grazie della spiegazione : )

Cioè ero finito nella DefaultTrust?
Non ne ero a conoscenza, il che è assurdo.
Ragione in più per cui la DefaultTrust non dovrebbe esistere, come sostengo già da tempo.

Ora almeno comprendo come mai un tot di utenti fossero andati in paranoia a riguardo, mi spiace per il fraintendimento (non che avrei agito in modo diverso, ma mi sarei espresso in modo diverso).

Puoi darmi più dettagli su cos'era accaduto, per piacere?
(in privato se non ti va di parlarne in pubblico)

Non ho capito, cos'è accaduto?

Falso.
Tu non capisci come questo strumento funzioni, dunque fraintendi.

Funziona così: se non mi fido di te, ti lascio un feedback negativo. Se **IO** non mi fido di te, **TI** lascio un feedback negativo. Punto, fine. Non mi fido, te lo lascio. Semplice, no?

Gli utenti possono inserire a piacimento utenti nella propria Trust list, e dunque solo quei feedback di default saranno considerati "trusted", ignorando gli altri.

Per cui se io non sono nella tua trust list, per te il peso dei miei feedback dovrebbe essere nullo.

Ora cortesemente smetti di parlare di cose che non capisci e muovere sciocche accuse di conseguenza.

+1 please stop polluting this thread (I'd split it if I could)

This topic is about DefaultTrust, so any issues with a DefaultTrust member leaving feedback, is of course in-topic. No idea why someone said it's offtopic.

With that being said, "pointing out" such an issue is in-topic, but going on for 10 posts reiterating the same thing that has been said in the first one, is not exactly ideal. Every new post should add something new, otherwise we'll be buried by noise.