Recent dadice.com development

[Pony789]

Seriously I can't think of a good reason (except the obvious one) why they chose not to show their cold wallet address. There is nearly nothing they would lose for publishing the address especially if they show it only to a few highly trusted people. On the other hand, many of their players and investors have lost confidence in them for not publishing it.

[dooglus]

Seriously I can't think of a good reason (except the obvious one) why they chose not to show their cold wallet address. There is nearly nothing they would lose for publishing the address especially if they show it only to a few highly trusted people. On the other hand, many of their players and investors have lost confidence in them for not publishing it.

I doubt there's much point in me offering to discretely verify a wallet address for them, but I'm willing to if it helps them out. I know Stunna already offered, and I'm just another dice site owner, but there's the offer for what it's worth.

[galbros]

From what I can tell, these complaints add up to this:

Someone wants proof about bankroll, dadice decides not to provide proof.

Is there really anything more to it than that?

Best I can tell, that's (still) it!  I agree that failure to prove the amount of coins you have does not constitute a scam.  However, at the same time, if you are going to claim to have X coins, you should expect people to ask you to prove it if you are operating a business.

Maybe they would be better off just doing what Stunna does and having a max bet that they can obviously pay and just stop talking about how many coins they have.

Dooglus and just-dice has set the bar really high here for integrity, but that does make his practices a requirement?  If dadice doesn't want to prove they have a lot of coins that is their call.  

Likewise it is the community's call if it wants to play/invest there.  And while I like the way this was laid out by the OP, I don't think it rises to level of scam or quasi scam or proto scam, it just suggests what we all know, player and especially investor beware - this organization is not acting as honestly as the best in the business currently do.

Good Luck!

[Twipple]

So did they also return the money all those who were invested ? Or did they only stop new investments for now ? From what they said before , they didn't show the address of the largest investor. Then why not just refund him, and continue and be transparent with the rest.

[dooglus]

this organization is not acting as honestly as the best in the business currently do.

It's not even about not acting honestly. It's more about transparency than honesty.

It is possible that they are being honest, really do have all the coins they claim to have, but for some reason don't want to prove it. There's nothing dishonest about such a stance.

It's also possible that they don't have all the coins they claim to have, and so can't show their cold wallet address without admitting to the problem.

As it stands we are left suspecting that they are insolvent, but we have no proof either way.

[shorena]

-snip-
@Sho, I hope my question doesn't get too buried in this thread: how long should the negative feedback stand in the case that all continues to go fine with dadice?

A simple signed message will do, I dont think time can restore the faith in them.

[iram91445]

-snip-
@Sho, I hope my question doesn't get too buried in this thread: how long should the negative feedback stand in the case that all continues to go fine with dadice?

A simple signed message will do, I dont think time can restore the faith in them.

people have played on dadice and will play on it as most of them dont care about cold storage and stuff they just want good design and thats it

[shorena]

-snip-
@Sho, I hope my question doesn't get too buried in this thread: how long should the negative feedback stand in the case that all continues to go fine with dadice?

A simple signed message will do, I dont think time can restore the faith in them.

people have played on dadice and will play on it as most of them dont care about cold storage and stuff they just want good design and thats it

Ok, I care and my warning is for those that do. You are free to ignore it.

Oooh, you are advertising a ponzi, I get it.

[DiamondCardz]

I am watching this thread rather heavily in anticipation of me updating the Overview of Popular Bitcoin Gambling Websites thread and bringing it back up to standard soon. So essentially, you think they're just going to make a runner? The images you have in the OP are rather telling and indicative of an issue.

[dooglus]

people have played on dadice and will play on it as most of them dont care about cold storage and stuff they just want good design and thats it

Wouldn't you think most players would care that the site is able to actually pay them out in the event that they won a lot?

[tspacepilot]

I am watching this thread rather heavily in anticipation of me updating the Overview of Popular Bitcoin Gambling Websites thread and bringing it back up to standard soon. So essentially, you think they're just going to make a runner? The images you have in the OP are rather telling and indicative of an issue.

In my opinion, it's hard to tell whether the behavior of dadice is actually shady (ie, indicative of someone about to do a runner) or merely reflective of someone who feels like they're being pushed around.  That is, out of nowhere, all sorts of folks started demanding all sorts of proof about their bankroll.  At first, several competitors of dadice were the ones offering to "privately" verify the bankroll.  It seems to me that a perfectly legitimate interpretation is that dadice felt pushed around, decided to stand up for their rights not to reveal their private information, and to stand on their budding reputation as a legit site.

The other situation has also been clearly expressed by the detractors in this thread, ie, they won't prove their bankroll because they can't.  I'm in the camp which believes that the best thing to do here now is to let everyone's head-of-steam cool down for a while and see what happens.

people have played on dadice and will play on it as most of them dont care about cold storage and stuff they just want good design and thats it

Wouldn't you think most players would care that the site is able to actually pay them out in the event that they won a lot?

Yes, of course they would.  But a lot of players will consider that withdrawing and deposting with success again and again is indicative of future success.  I'm not here to debate the logical flaws in that sort of reasoning, I just think it's worth bearing in mind that the point of view of the typical player isn't about whether some mysterious wallet backend banksafe exists (they don't expect to be able to see it if does), but whether the stuff they *do* see works well, ie, their own deposits and withdrawals.

[CryForMeSky]

In my opinion, it's hard to tell whether the behavior of dadice is actually shady (ie, indicative of someone about to do a runner) or merely reflective of someone who feels like they're being pushed around.  That is, out of nowhere, all sorts of folks started demanding all sorts of proof about their bankroll.  At first, several competitors of dadice were the ones offering to "privately" verify the bankroll.  It seems to me that a perfectly legitimate interpretation is that dadice felt pushed around, decided to stand up for their rights not to reveal their private information, and to stand on their budding reputation as a legit site.

The other situation has also been clearly expressed by the detractors in this thread, ie, they won't prove their bankroll because they can't.  I'm in the camp which believes that the best thing to do here now is to let everyone's head-of-steam cool down for a while and see what happens.

I agree, it is impossible to tell the motivation behind refusing to show proof of solvency.  But that action alone destroys the site's reputation.  "We don't want to prove out solvency because people are asking us to" isn't a valid reason.  Now, I agree, if I was in their shoes, I probably wouldn't show a competitor my addresses (although why that would matter I don't know) but there are hundreds of trustworthy people in the community they could show.  Why aren't they doing that?  Nobody knows.  But seeing as there is no good reason to not (especially since, you know, they claim on their site that they will) the only explanations left are shady ones.

We don't need to wait and see what happens.  That's how people lose money.  We already know what happened.  They were asked to prove their solvency and didn't.  Is it because they couldn't?  Is it because they didn't want to?  It doesn't matter.  All that matters now is that they have to be assumed as insolvent by any reasonable person. 

[PolarPoint]

I gamble a little here and there and do not have preference to any one dice site. I would avoid any dice site that cannot prove they have the bitcoin to pay us.

Which dice sites has shown their solvency by disclosing their cold wallet address? I might play their more often.

[RHavar]

Which dice sites has shown their solvency by disclosing their cold wallet address? I might play their more often.

NLNico compiled a good list (in reply to the claim from DaDice that competitors also don't show solvency):

- PRC: https://blockchain.info/address/1FhxjhFb1YudGC1vtV4FuLpQc2uHzq3XFd
- Just-Dice: http://clamsight.com/address/xJDCLAMZsZg1YqGytiP9CRzYYdsrJXX9Kh
- SatoshiDice: https://blockchain.info/address/18e5jpfn9zo9GQov1Ks9Pzh6Yam2SvFqqo & https://blockchain.info/address/1GBEAxb91tea1magDAQoKnjx18oH4ax2T3
- BitDice: https://blockchain.info/address/19yR1HxBNy5As4joecih4wgj8Cpe5SdmWk
- Diggit: https://blockchain.info/address/1AqGXXoFRRa27ThqVLfsiPykkp2NC4i7QU (not dice, but has investors)
- Dicenow: https://blockchain.info/address/1FY3J5Zuh7mp7q47brqr4wHUsUTeVLT8hb
- MoneyPot(DustDice/betterbets): https://blockchain.info/address/1QD1u16PFzsmsqdBWJjx2WjSpHstsDX9ST
- SafeDice: https://blockchain.info/address/1SD1ciWyeDNf26YoAUjSsifQZK1ShFJ2s

[dooglus]

Which dice sites has shown their solvency by disclosing their cold wallet address? I might play their more often.

NLNico compiled a good list (in reply to the claim from DaDice that competitors also don't show solvency):

- PRC: https://blockchain.info/address/1FhxjhFb1YudGC1vtV4FuLpQc2uHzq3XFd
- Just-Dice: http://clamsight.com/address/xJDCLAMZsZg1YqGytiP9CRzYYdsrJXX9Kh
- SatoshiDice: https://blockchain.info/address/18e5jpfn9zo9GQov1Ks9Pzh6Yam2SvFqqo & https://blockchain.info/address/1GBEAxb91tea1magDAQoKnjx18oH4ax2T3
- BitDice: https://blockchain.info/address/19yR1HxBNy5As4joecih4wgj8Cpe5SdmWk
- Diggit: https://blockchain.info/address/1AqGXXoFRRa27ThqVLfsiPykkp2NC4i7QU (not dice, but has investors)
- Dicenow: https://blockchain.info/address/1FY3J5Zuh7mp7q47brqr4wHUsUTeVLT8hb
- MoneyPot(DustDice/betterbets): https://blockchain.info/address/1QD1u16PFzsmsqdBWJjx2WjSpHstsDX9ST
- SafeDice: https://blockchain.info/address/1SD1ciWyeDNf26YoAUjSsifQZK1ShFJ2s

Unfortunately the Just-Dice link was broken when the CLAM developers switched from one block explorer to another again.

Addresses #1 and #3 on the CLAM rich list are the JD coins. They both begin "xJDCLAMZ" in case the order changes.

[PolarPoint]

NLNico compiled a good list (in reply to the claim from DaDice that competitors also don't show solvency):

- PRC: https://blockchain.info/address/1FhxjhFb1YudGC1vtV4FuLpQc2uHzq3XFd
- Just-Dice: http://clamsight.com/address/xJDCLAMZsZg1YqGytiP9CRzYYdsrJXX9Kh
- SatoshiDice: https://blockchain.info/address/18e5jpfn9zo9GQov1Ks9Pzh6Yam2SvFqqo & https://blockchain.info/address/1GBEAxb91tea1magDAQoKnjx18oH4ax2T3
- BitDice: https://blockchain.info/address/19yR1HxBNy5As4joecih4wgj8Cpe5SdmWk
- Diggit: https://blockchain.info/address/1AqGXXoFRRa27ThqVLfsiPykkp2NC4i7QU (not dice, but has investors)
- Dicenow: https://blockchain.info/address/1FY3J5Zuh7mp7q47brqr4wHUsUTeVLT8hb
- MoneyPot(DustDice/betterbets): https://blockchain.info/address/1QD1u16PFzsmsqdBWJjx2WjSpHstsDX9ST
- SafeDice: https://blockchain.info/address/1SD1ciWyeDNf26YoAUjSsifQZK1ShFJ2s

Thanks RHavar, I will play more on these sites.
I am surprised not seeing PrimeDice on the list

[RHavar]

Thanks RHavar, I will play more on these sites.
I am surprised not seeing PrimeDice on the list

No one really doubts the solvency of PrimeDice, and in general I don't think it's big deal if non-investing sites show solvency or not. Sites that make extraordinary claims and investment sites should be held to a higher standard, though. In fact, I'd say it's absolutely critical in investment sites as it's our only proof that profits are generated from a means other than it being a big ponzi.

[Stunna]

NLNico compiled a good list (in reply to the claim from DaDice that competitors also don't show solvency):

- PRC: https://blockchain.info/address/1FhxjhFb1YudGC1vtV4FuLpQc2uHzq3XFd
- Just-Dice: http://clamsight.com/address/xJDCLAMZsZg1YqGytiP9CRzYYdsrJXX9Kh
- SatoshiDice: https://blockchain.info/address/18e5jpfn9zo9GQov1Ks9Pzh6Yam2SvFqqo & https://blockchain.info/address/1GBEAxb91tea1magDAQoKnjx18oH4ax2T3
- BitDice: https://blockchain.info/address/19yR1HxBNy5As4joecih4wgj8Cpe5SdmWk
- Diggit: https://blockchain.info/address/1AqGXXoFRRa27ThqVLfsiPykkp2NC4i7QU (not dice, but has investors)
- Dicenow: https://blockchain.info/address/1FY3J5Zuh7mp7q47brqr4wHUsUTeVLT8hb
- MoneyPot(DustDice/betterbets): https://blockchain.info/address/1QD1u16PFzsmsqdBWJjx2WjSpHstsDX9ST
- SafeDice: https://blockchain.info/address/1SD1ciWyeDNf26YoAUjSsifQZK1ShFJ2s

Thanks RHavar, I will play more on these sites.
I am surprised not seeing PrimeDice on the list

All of those sites offer investments and need to post that information for the peace of mind of their investors. Primedice does not accept investments and our users rarely store massive balances. Users frequently cash out their winnings, often less than a weeks worth of expected profit is comprised by balances.

That being said PD probably has a larger bankroll than any bitcoin dice site currently, at least from what I've seen. We made a simple mistake which allowed ourselves to have 2400 coins stolen from us via exploit but even at that exact moment we definitely had at least 10-20x the total stored PD balances locked away in cold storage. We've since  quickly re-couped those losses and made improvements to prevent that from happening again.

If we were to ever accept investments which I think is very unlikely, we would absolutely have proof of reserves available for users.

[EternalWingsofGod]

Reading through the thread in my opinion the burden of proof is on the operator to prove they have reserves not on the users regardless of the percentage of funds held by users if the funds are all mainly held in a cold wallet the deposits would be in one address keeping the individual user balances relatively anonymous, and they can still prove their own reserves.
An absence of that does seem concerning and based on the timeline disabling investments was the logical choice next would be to prove they can cover large bets.

Hereby a list of the most popular dice sites that accepts investors:

- PRC: https://blockchain.info/address/1FhxjhFb1YudGC1vtV4FuLpQc2uHzq3XFd
- Just-Dice: http://blocktree.io/richlist/CLAM
- SatoshiDice: https://blockchain.info/address/18e5jpfn9zo9GQov1Ks9Pzh6Yam2SvFqqo & https://blockchain.info/address/1GBEAxb91tea1magDAQoKnjx18oH4ax2T3
- BitDice: https://blockchain.info/address/19yR1HxBNy5As4joecih4wgj8Cpe5SdmWk
- Diggit: https://blockchain.info/address/1AqGXXoFRRa27ThqVLfsiPykkp2NC4i7QU (not dice, but has investors)
- Dicenow: https://blockchain.info/address/1FY3J5Zuh7mp7q47brqr4wHUsUTeVLT8hb
- MoneyPot(DustDice/betterbets): https://blockchain.info/address/1QD1u16PFzsmsqdBWJjx2WjSpHstsDX9ST
- SafeDice: https://blockchain.info/address/1SD1ciWyeDNf26YoAUjSsifQZK1ShFJ2s

[michinzx]

All of those sites offer investments and need to post that information for the peace of mind of their investors. Primedice does not accept investments and our users rarely store massive balances. Users frequently cash out their winnings, often less than a weeks worth of expected profit is comprised by balances.

That being said PD probably has a larger bankroll than any bitcoin dice site currently, at least from what I've seen. We made a simple mistake which allowed ourselves to have 2400 coins stolen from us via exploit but even at that exact moment we definitely had at least 10-20x the total stored PD balances locked away in cold storage. We've since  quickly re-couped those losses and made improvements to prevent that from happening again.

If we were to ever accept investments which I think is very unlikely, we would absolutely have proof of reserves available for users.

hey Stunna, the guys over at saw-dice, the new one, claims to have a bankroll rivalling that of PD's, somewhere in the 5 digit range, and promise to show proof of storage after their 0% edge promotion is over. they also claim they wont have a limit to bet/win amounts. any thoughts on having a competitor like that with a bankroll that could, even currently, rival that of your site?