Just-Dice.com : Invest in 1% House Edge Dice Game

[radiumsoup]

slot machines tend to use the '97% payout' syntax, while table games e.g. craps/blackjack tend to use the '1% house edge' syntax.   I prefer the 1% house edge syntax, personally.

Will

I think when you're trying to disguise that your slot machine keeps 12% of wagered amount, saying "88% payout" does the trick.

If you're trying to advertise that the payout is good, "1% edge" looks better than "99% payout".

For example, comparing JD to SD:

* 99% vs. 98.1% makes them look similar - both close to 100%, but
* 1% vs. 1.9% makes it look like JD is about twice as good as SD

But maybe that's just me.

That's actually exactly why I suggested an A/B test - take out the "I think"s and the "maybe that's just me"s and go with what is demonstrably better for encouraging your customers to play (whichever that is.) I honestly don't know which is better. As for the wording for a potential test, maybe "99% player odds" or something. It doesn't have to be mathematically or semantically accurate, you're just doing marketing to get them in the door. You ever go ask for the house rules at a casino? They have them in these thick packets, and they've got all the legalese you'd ever want and more - but they don't give them to you unless you ask, because it's generally known among players what 99% means. You've got all the fine print laid out already - my suggestion is simply that you don't limit your marketing to the same legalese standard.

[1714127953]

1714127953

[1714127953]

1714127953

[1714127953]

1714127953

[1714127953]

1714127953

[ajolly]

Is there a way to withdraw directly to inputs.io?

[petrescuerz]

Is there a way to withdraw directly to inputs.io?

Not yet, but it is in the works!

[drawingthesun]

Are we blocking brand new users from chatting as a precaution from spamming?

If so perhaps give them a little warning that they need to wait for a set time or something.

Otherwise its seems like the site is broken.

Thanks.

[fuggedit]

radiumsoup


But maybe that's just me.
That's actually exactly why I suggested an A/B test - take out the "I think"s and the "maybe that's just me"s and go with what is demonstrably better for encouraging your customers to play (whichever that is.) I honestly don't know which is better. As for the wording for a potential test, maybe "99% player odds" or something. It doesn't have to be mathematically or semantically accurate, you're just doing marketing to get them in the door. You ever go ask for the house rules at a casino? They have them in these thick packets, and they've got all the legalese you'd ever want and more - but they don't give them to you unless you ask, because it's generally known among players what 99% means. You've got all the fine print laid out already - my suggestion is simply that you don't limit your marketing to the same legalese standard. Smiley

99% player odds doesn't sound good. Reduced House Edge 1%!! Does the trick magnificently from a consumer standpoint IMO... That was what drew me in initially from Satoshi Dice. I think the next milestone will be working with blockchain, or perhaps inputs.io to create a sleek intuitive interface such as SD did with Blockchain...That is a big draw at least to me

By the way, is there only that singular way to invest in this site?

[radiumsoup]

99% player odds doesn't sound good. Reduced House Edge 1%!! Does the trick magnificently from a consumer standpoint IMO... That was what drew me in initially from Satoshi Dice.

That's because SD had already framed the discussion in the "house edge" terms, and in your head, perhaps just subconsciously, you wanted to compare it with SD on their terms. For someone not already accustomed to SD's marketing, what version is demonstrably better at getting them to gamble more? Again, this is why I merely suggested an A/B test. Nothing sinister implied - I'm not identifying the 99% side as being better, I'm questioning the method used to come to the conclusion that 1% is better. The reason I brought it up is that since casinos generally put the larger number on their marketing materials, and they are in the business of convincing people that gambling is a good idea, they probably know what works to reel the largest number of people in. But I don't know how that translates into the world of bitcoinlandia, because the psychology of the players may be different. It may be true, it may not. I have no idea.

[MRKLYE]

As a player since day 3.. I think the site is fine.. What is 1% house edge? Not much tbh.

[mechs]

Nakowa reinvested 5k (a few more 100btc than he withdrew a few days ago). Hopefully he starts gambling again and gives us some excitement

[petrescuerz]

Just-Dice is experiencing a problem with deposits. Please be patient and your deposit will be credited once doog is up. Sorry for the inconvenience.

Deb

[thy]

hmm.. i made a deposit to the address i always use at just-dice, after 3 confirms the site transfered the funds away to other adresses so the site has clearly seen the transfer by now but it hasen't shown up in my account at just-dice yet, the deposit is up to 5 confirms now, this is starting to get silly...Isen't it 1 confirm until the funds should show up like the deposit message say and it has been before ?

Is the commision changed to 10% now by the way, i havent noticed that before, when did it change from 5% ?

Edit:  It just showed up, thanks dooglus/deb...

[Otoh]

from 2013 08 12 it's a 10% house fee, posted in both threads a week before

[fuggedit]

99% player odds doesn't sound good. Reduced House Edge 1%!! Does the trick magnificently from a consumer standpoint IMO... That was what drew me in initially from Satoshi Dice.

That's because SD had already framed the discussion in the "house edge" terms, and in your head, perhaps just subconsciously, you wanted to compare it with SD on their terms. For someone not already accustomed to SD's marketing, what version is demonstrably better at getting them to gamble more? Again, this is why I merely suggested an A/B test. Nothing sinister implied - I'm not identifying the 99% side as being better, I'm questioning the method used to come to the conclusion that 1% is better. The reason I brought it up is that since casinos generally put the larger number on their marketing materials, and they are in the business of convincing people that gambling is a good idea, they probably know what works to reel the largest number of people in. But I don't know how that translates into the world of bitcoinlandia, because the psychology of the players may be different. It may be true, it may not. I have no idea.

Self-reassured,Masculine, Cocksure,Sharp
Timid, Insecure, wispy, Round
These are the first three words I associated with the opposing statements proposed by you and I. I bet you can guess which ones are about which.... That's the power of connotation at work in its most potent. Slogan and marketing teams have an added history of crafted work resulting in thecreation of certain key buzz words that work like a charm in manipulating the  into desire centers of the brain & stoke the viewers impulsiveness to critical highs, keeping them amplified at high levels. The buzz words essentially work in tandem as a key to the pleasure center of the brain. They do this by providing the visualization of those desires when these words are mentioned. Words and their placements have been honed for decades & constantly tinkered with by marketing masters.
Honestly, It has nothing to do with "framing [any] discussion,"  House edge is a colloqiual term around wayyy before bitcoin or satishidice for that matter. You are getting bogged down in the minutae intellectual side, thinking too much. It is more of an animalistic marketing, i.e. to the reptilian brain which is why that line you proposed is not meshing as well as the line I said. I am marketing towards the base instinct, impulsiveness when I pit those two phrases against each other. It sets the consumers mind into gear and gets the neurons firing and releasing dopamine towards a visualized big. Ypu mau think this is silly and made up, but there is an absolute science to this that is very well documented. As we have been conditioned by other marketing campaigns for our entire lives to identify these "key terms and phrases", they indulge our fantasies the same way the media stream-of-conscious caters to the same basest segments of our psyche. Now when you say "99% player odds" it sounds limp, weak, round.

Moreover, in a more concrete criticism, I do not know what "player odds refers to. It is vague, and if it remains vague to us here on this discussion, it will undoubtedly be an issue which the layperson either forgets or thinks of as unsure in of itself, thereby associating the brand, aka the site, with that quality in tandem, pairing them hand in hand. A slogan is oft underlooked as a psychological draw, yet it is always the most powerful connection a consumer retains with the brand.  That is why the term" reduced player odds" is the sissy of the 2 it sounds feeble, uncertain, weak, round. " 1% Reduced House Edge" is strong and snappy, a sharp message which delivers the intended effect with no qualms, bravado. No worries that it has 1% contained. The attached numerical denotation is of no consequence, in fact the converse is true because the public sees that dreaded "99%" attached to a product, they immediately throw up their guard and see it as a shill-y advertising ploy because, well that's what it is...  In the end it's all a matter of psychology, linguistics, habituation. Especially with a service as potent to an impulsive consumer, like gambling, when imminent disaster can oft await controlling the fear and supplying the excitement/power through words is like warming up a muscle before a marathon. Keeping a hold on these two commodities is the supreme pole position to a marketer. Just like having 4 aces in every hand of poker you play. Believe me it may seem like overkill but this is how businesses and brands are forged man. Bait for the buyer. This is how the men seperate from the boys in the marketing game.

[fuggedit]

Numbers in slogans can really never  carry any context really, because a slogan by its nature isn't long enough to reveal any context. So this strange fear of incorporating numbers and any preconcieved notions or fears you have about them turning people away, you can assuage right now. What matters in the end is the wording, where the stresses are placed, and the force of that wording with which these elements cumulatively gather to impact the audience in a multitudinous fashion. Creating a dynamite wording for a brands slogan is a work of art I believe and should be respected.

[fuggedit]

As a player since day 3.. I think the site is fine.. What is 1% house edge? Not much tbh.

@ X 1,000,000 bets it certainly is my freind. But to an individual, you're right logically, however our minds can be manipulated, some moreso than others which is where a cleverly put together hook can contribute greatly

[radiumsoup]

[stuff]

So... you're against empirical A/B testing, you just wanna go with your gut? Cool, whatever. My suggestion was simple and motivated by a desire to help out. Your monologue was detractive and only tangentially related, although I'm sure your intent was not entirely self aggrandizing. But thanks for the insight, I'm sure it will be useful after empirical tests. Or, hell, come up with slogany things that take more than two seconds to come up with (like my off-the-cuff suggestion of "99% player odds", which you took the time to base an argument on, but I already suggested was only a shot in the dark), and test those, too - after all, it's evidence of success versus known alternatives that matters.

That is, if anyone wants to actually test results. Which is all I suggested in the first place.

[xchrisxsays]

[stuff]

So... you're against empirical A/B testing, you just wanna go with your gut? Cool, whatever. My suggestion was simple and motivated by a desire to help out. Your monologue was detractive and only tangentially related, although I'm sure your intent was not entirely self aggrandizing. But thanks for the insight, I'm sure it will be useful after empirical tests. Or, hell, come up with slogany things that take more than two seconds to come up with (like my off-the-cuff suggestion of "99% player odds", which you took the time to base an argument on, but I already suggested was only a shot in the dark), and test those, too - after all, it's evidence of success versus known alternatives that matters.

That is, if anyone wants to actually test results. Which is all I suggested in the first place.

As someone who works in the field of marketing and deals which market research frequently, what radiumsoup is suggesting is the logical option and will get the most accurate results. Depending on the sample size, of course. Fuggedit is basing his advice off of his personal opinions and feelings and applying a sample size of one to the entire population. We tend to find in market research that this generally is not an accurate way to find out a consumer/markets general preference. This is a subjective matter, people's opinion of what sounds better or what connotations each phrase has will vary widely. To get a good sense of what the true sentiment is overall, you do need empirical testing. 

[malevolent]

Has just-dice just got extorted for 11.0372 BTC?

1DDoSbbDBxhyNT55JK7FC8tMhgGaMZCe3Z is the address of someone asking for "DDoS protection services":

11.0372 BTC were sent to that address from:
1JzHCtJTG4LoPP2ks7mzPw5VwSmMpVvHpL

1JzHCtJTG4LoPP2ks7mzPw5VwSmMpVvHpL is from where BTC where sent to a just-dice "hot wallet" or "online storage":
https://blockchain.info/tx/4ee6e0d6156af476219f7241b0c5c04ac50486c756f17f9138298ff4f272fcd8
https://blockchain.info/tx/17ef1b38b872dba50f5f12bfe954ac5b09eb851611c454386494799d8325e121
https://blockchain.info/tx/6ca09bebd440edd6ffcfeceab7bf13db44d94634dd4026badf32ef1a26c0d75b
https://blockchain.info/tx/abb25885ad403627dc066b1c7d8b15001c03d7dd7e413b30deab79525700cf48
https://blockchain.info/tx/76a35133aa44f0eccd1b78831f2ba0735e8c14eeb7e32bf8957883c2c1ec28ba

and vice versa, from the hotwallet to the address from where the extorted BTC were later sent to 1DDoSbbDBxhyNT55JK7FC8tMhgGaMZCe3Z:
https://blockchain.info/tx/509552266131c528c42baa3db9699135a4efc58cf669d2617995254b81a4392d
https://blockchain.info/tx/c3d3da3e5a09339758974d41406e246acc4217bc7f9a80e44092e0426c823a9e
https://blockchain.info/tx/a3c0243cf4cd43a86aa03b2db8351d235621612a95f1792c8d9ffd6f7d69660a

[Mitchell]

Has just-dice just got extorted for 11.0372 BTC?

https://blockchain.info/address/1DDoSbbDBxhyNT55JK7FC8tMhgGaMZCe3Z is the address of someone asking for "DDoS protection services":
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=147952;sa=showPosts

11.0372 BTC were sent to that address from:
https://blockchain.info/address/1JzHCtJTG4LoPP2ks7mzPw5VwSmMpVvHpL

https://blockchain.info/address/1JzHCtJTG4LoPP2ks7mzPw5VwSmMpVvHpL is from where BTC where sent to a just-dice "hot wallet" or "online storage":
https://blockchain.info/tx/4ee6e0d6156af476219f7241b0c5c04ac50486c756f17f9138298ff4f272fcd8
https://blockchain.info/tx/17ef1b38b872dba50f5f12bfe954ac5b09eb851611c454386494799d8325e121
https://blockchain.info/tx/6ca09bebd440edd6ffcfeceab7bf13db44d94634dd4026badf32ef1a26c0d75b
https://blockchain.info/tx/abb25885ad403627dc066b1c7d8b15001c03d7dd7e413b30deab79525700cf48
https://blockchain.info/tx/76a35133aa44f0eccd1b78831f2ba0735e8c14eeb7e32bf8957883c2c1ec28ba

and vice versa, from the hotwallet to the address from where the extorted BTC were later sent to https://blockchain.info/address/1DDoSbbDBxhyNT55JK7FC8tMhgGaMZCe3Z:
https://blockchain.info/tx/509552266131c528c42baa3db9699135a4efc58cf669d2617995254b81a4392d
https://blockchain.info/tx/c3d3da3e5a09339758974d41406e246acc4217bc7f9a80e44092e0426c823a9e
https://blockchain.info/tx/a3c0243cf4cd43a86aa03b2db8351d235621612a95f1792c8d9ffd6f7d69660a

That was already there when I checked the address just after he posted.

[bitcoin44me]

Site profit decreased a little bit, is it the good time to invest now?

[eltopo]

It's a good time to invest if the overall investment decreased.