Recent dadice.com development

[Twipple]

But the main issue here is one of trust. These guys refuse to demonstrate that they still have the coins they are supposed to have, but have offered no good reason for their refusal. The most likely reason is that they no longer have all the coins they are supposed to have.

I would say most of it was probably given out paying for the campaign, and other advertising costs, which they wanted to probably use to become Big. But now that they are required to show the proof, its all backfiring. They also probably showed an increased investment amount which is another reason for them to not show any proof of funds.

[1714816368]

1714816368

[1714816368]

1714816368

[erikalui]

Shocking to read people accusing the dadice site which was said to be a trustworthy site before. Every gambling or dice site is definitely risky but to accuse some website without having any open scam accusation is weird. Hope this site never turns out to be a scam site and they keep paying their users as before and this speculation proves to be false. The campaign has really helped a lot of users  

Just because the campaign worked out, doesn't mean it is not a scam. At this stage it is a probable scam, so is the reason why there is no scam accusation against it . But all those related have already been negative repped.

That's the case with 99% of this sites which promise too much in return for the investment made and one should think 100 times before investing in such websites. That's what the issue here as well and that's why I said that I hope that they don't become insolvent and bankrupt which can lead to many investors losing their money. Here I would blame the people who invested as well as it wasn't a wise decision.

[jbrnt]

I think it is better for dadice if they show proof of funds even they don't need to. It is their reputation at stake here. Swallow the pride, provide a proof of solvency and silence the doubters once and for all is the best direction forward.

[srgkrgkj]

I think it is better for dadice if they show proof of funds even they don't need to. It is their reputation at stake here. Swallow the pride, provide a proof of solvency and silence the doubters once and for all is the best direction forward.

agreed as otherwise this thread is serving as FUD and dettering players away from the site :O you might be losing players due to this ongoing conflict :O but i believe that DaDice will come up with the proof of a signed message hopefully

[Twipple]

I think it is better for dadice if they show proof of funds even they don't need to. It is their reputation at stake here. Swallow the pride, provide a proof of solvency and silence the doubters once and for all is the best direction forward.

Let me guess what might happen next. Tomorrow they will come up , and say that all these discussions have affected their business, and some big investor divested from the site. So if their original amount was 500 BTC , then only 100 BTC is left. And they will just show the proof of that.

OR

Some player will get lucky and win big on the site tonight. And they will claim now only a small amount is left out of the investments.

[bitllionaire]

I don't see any reason why a reputedly site would not want to show a proof of funds.
Well,actually there may be many reasons,but all are bad

[iram91445]

I think it is better for dadice if they show proof of funds even they don't need to. It is their reputation at stake here. Swallow the pride, provide a proof of solvency and silence the doubters once and for all is the best direction forward.

if they will want to be a good website that everyone wants to play and if they want to attract new players they will have to show it

[jbrnt]

Let me guess what might happen next. Tomorrow they will come up , and say that all these discussions have affected their business, and some big investor divested from the site. So if their original amount was 500 BTC , then only 100 BTC is left. And they will just show the proof of that.

Some proof is better than no proof. Anything over 200 btc is good, if they are willing to share that.

[Twipple]

Let me guess what might happen next. Tomorrow they will come up , and say that all these discussions have affected their business, and some big investor divested from the site. So if their original amount was 500 BTC , then only 100 BTC is left. And they will just show the proof of that.

Some proof is better than no proof. Anything over 200 btc is good, if they are willing to share that.

Their bankroll currently shows around 756 BTC invested. 200 BTC is actually not good enough. If they used the investor funds for other things, or faked even half of the investment data, then they will be able to show that much proof.

[tspacepilot]

Let me guess what might happen next. Tomorrow they will come up , and say that all these discussions have affected their business, and some big investor divested from the site. So if their original amount was 500 BTC , then only 100 BTC is left. And they will just show the proof of that.

Some proof is better than no proof. Anything over 200 btc is good, if they are willing to share that.

Their bankroll currently shows around 756 BTC invested. 200 BTC is actually not good enough. If they used the investor funds for other things, or faked even half of the investment data, then they will be able to show that much proof.

Twipple, what's your interest in this?  Do you really think you're adding anything to the above discussion?  We can see you posting repeatedly here and in the dadice thread but to what end?

I'd think that everyone can agree that everyone has said their piece and that time will tell at this point who was right.  Certainly those calling for proof of bankroll have made their arguments known.  We've all seen the refusal to do so.  Lets just see what happens.  Flame wars aren't really going to add anything or make anything more clear than it already is.  The next step is for people to make their own decisions about where to play dice and what to do with their money.  What am I missing?

[tidus1097]

Here's my input on this from a gamblers point of view. If I'm gambling on a site, I do prefer to be able to see if they can cover the bet I am placing. There would be no need for opaqueness unless something is wrong with funds. I can say, "Hey I bet you a million dollars" but we both know I don't have it, but if I say, "Hey, I bet you $5 dollars" then people start thinking. Hmm. Maybe he's for real, lets see if you have the $5 bucks. Same with gaming sites. The purpose of the gaming license is to "supposedly" show that you have "x" amount of funds to cover the house. With BTC its a lot different because now you have to factor in lots of other variable such as price, supply, and the validity of the operator. If I trust the operator, fine I do not need to see the funds. If I do not trust him, I need to see the funds. So with BTC I feel that it is pretty much at the investor/gamers opinion if they want to see this. If DaDice does not reveal their investors funding/balance I would feel like something is being hid from me in my personal opinion and would have to make a decision on whether to trust them or not.

[Wendigo]

This Dadice drama is more interesting than the new season of game of thrones. Noone knows who is gonna die (scam) next  

[xetsr]

Here's my input on this from a gamblers point of view. If I'm gambling on a site, I do prefer to be able to see if they can cover the bet I am placing.

Good point.

One thing I've been wondering... now that this is out in the open, will they start losing members and get "hacked" sooner then expected?   I'm not talking about those "fan boy" or whatever you want to call them type of members either. They'll be there to the end no matter what.

[romano1]

Here's my input on this from a gamblers point of view. If I'm gambling on a site, I do prefer to be able to see if they can cover the bet I am placing.

Good point.

One thing I've been wondering... now that this is out in the open, will they start losing members and get "hacked" sooner then expected?   I'm not talking about those "fan boy" or whatever you want to call them type of members either. They'll be there to the end no matter what.

No doubt, they will have a reduced number of members as compared to earlier.

[Criterion]

Here's my input on this from a gamblers point of view. If I'm gambling on a site, I do prefer to be able to see if they can cover the bet I am placing.

Good point.

One thing I've been wondering... now that this is out in the open, will they start losing members and get "hacked" sooner then expected?   I'm not talking about those "fan boy" or whatever you want to call them type of members either. They'll be there to the end no matter what.

No doubt, they will have a reduced number of members as compared to earlier.

Judging from their actions they should have seen this coming. Running a business based on trust can only be done by playing with open cards.

[cryptworld]

Here's my input on this from a gamblers point of view. If I'm gambling on a site, I do prefer to be able to see if they can cover the bet I am placing.

Good point.

One thing I've been wondering... now that this is out in the open, will they start losing members and get "hacked" sooner then expected?   I'm not talking about those "fan boy" or whatever you want to call them type of members either. They'll be there to the end no matter what.

No doubt, they will have a reduced number of members as compared to earlier.

Judging from their actions they should have seen this coming. Running a business based on trust can only be done by playing with open cards.

That's right

Why am I going to trust you my money, If you are not showing users the transparency of your site?

[mfaspk]

AFAIK they have not forced their investors to divest and withdraw their investments so their current investors are still at risk.

Running an investment pool privately is not a bad thing, I bet dooglus will concur it May be Da Dice has shown its solvency to their private investors?

[FruitsBasket]

AFAIK they have not forced their investors to divest and withdraw their investments so their current investors are still at risk.

Running an investment pool privately is not a bad thing, I bet dooglus will concur it May be Da Dice has shown its solvency to their private investors?

private my arse.. no proof at all, just plain talk shit. go shill in the dadice thread if you can't show proof at all

[omahapoker]

so people here trust investing at dadice? if so any here invested more than 1 btc there? would ike to know. thanks

[dooglus]

so people here trust investing at dadice? if so any here invested more than 1 btc there? would ike to know. thanks

They say nobody is invested there any more.

When asked to chose between transparency and opacity they chose opacity. It's worrying, but there's nothing anyone can do to change it.

I guess we just have to wait and see what happens now.