Revive Bitcoinduit!

[ineededausername]

Hi everyone,
A month and a half ago we adopted a policy of one thread per site in the gambling forums (or, as the mods stated, started enforcing this policy).  Today, the pyramid game sites are all dead!  At the time, traffic was already heading down after the rule change, but it wasn't until it dropped to 0 that I started questioning why.  It appears to have been this forum policy.
However, we do know that these threads flooded the forum.  I propose that all major gambling site threads be stickied, but that this policy also be repealed because of its detrimental effect on our "industry."
--inau

[1715243055]

1715243055

[1715243055]

1715243055

[1715243055]

1715243055

[1715243055]

1715243055

[1715243055]

1715243055

[tysat]

I think they're all dead because people realized playing them wasn't all that smart.  I'd still like to be able to visit the gambling section and see what's happening.... if the policy was removed, it'd probably just be 90% spam again.

[ineededausername]

I think they're all dead because people realized playing them wasn't all that smart.  I'd still like to be able to visit the gambling section and see what's happening.... if the policy was removed, it'd probably just be 90% spam again.

Well, playing them is smart if and only if traffic goes up, because that's just the nature of it.  If you're going to call our game dumb, you're going to have to call all the gambling games dumb...  
The games had been around for quite a while before they suddenly died, which coincided with the new rules.  
I also mentioned stickying the major sites which would allow you to "see what's going on."
edit: Also note that there wouldn't be spam if the game is almost dead already.

[runlinux]

I support this

I put in many coins to make sure people get paid out as that is they only fun thing about this.

Don't like the risk? Create your own round and you loose nothing.

[Trevor]

Hmm... I think I would support this too. Obviously we don't want huge amounts of spam, but it seems a bit unfortunate that such a wide ranging topic that is the most popular on the gambling section, is confined to one thread. I've played bitcoinduit before and I would disagree that it's (completely) not smart. It is one of the few "gambling" games where there is no house advantage, and you can take as much or as little risk as you choose, including (literally) zero. Anyway, this isn't a discussion about it's relative merits, people can find those out for themselves, but it would seem fair to at the very least reduce the restrictions.

[ineededausername]

Hmm... I think I would support this too. Obviously we don't want huge amounts of spam, but it seems a bit unfortunate that such a wide ranging topic that is the most popular on the gambling section, is confined to one thread. I've played bitcoinduit before and I would disagree that it's (completely) not smart. It is one of the few "gambling" games where there is no house advantage, and you can take as much or as little risk as you choose, including (literally) zero. Anyway, this isn't a discussion about it's relative merits, people can find those out for themselves, but it would seem fair to at the very least reduce the restrictions.

This.  And my proposal is to reduce the restrictions for everything, so maybe bitlotto or any other site could also make multiple threads.  It wouldn't be spam, it would just be livening up the forum, sort of.

[Maged]

I honestly think you guys don't remember how bad things got. Almost every thread on the first page was Bitcoinduit, and most of them had only one or two posts.

[ineededausername]

I honestly think you guys don't remember how bad things got. Almost every thread on the first page was Bitcoinduit, and most of them had only one or two posts.

I don't think we'll be seeing that kind of spam these days.  Bitcoinduit is essentially dead and Bitponzi is not very well-maintained.  If it gets really bad (and I doubt it will) we could always change the policy back.

[Maged]

I honestly think you guys don't remember how bad things got. Almost every thread on the first page was Bitcoinduit, and most of them had only one or two posts.

I don't think we'll be seeing that kind of spam these days.  Bitcoinduit is essentially dead and Bitponzi is not very well-maintained.  If it gets really bad (and I doubt it will) we could always change the policy back.

You said it yourself that it was this forum policy that killed Bitcoinduit. It stands to reason that removing the policy will revive the site, bringing the spam back in full-force.

[ineededausername]

I honestly think you guys don't remember how bad things got. Almost every thread on the first page was Bitcoinduit, and most of them had only one or two posts.

I don't think we'll be seeing that kind of spam these days.  Bitcoinduit is essentially dead and Bitponzi is not very well-maintained.  If it gets really bad (and I doubt it will) we could always change the policy back.

You said it yourself that it was this forum policy that killed Bitcoinduit. It stands to reason that removing the policy will revive the site, bringing the spam back in full-force.

I believe that a lot of people have left the gambling community since then... so this measure would help liven up Bitcoinduit but would not bring it back to the level it was in August.

[Jonathan Ryan Owens]

Admins,

I've kept this to myself for awhile, but seeing this thread has brought up a well of emotion that I held back from when I was running what was arguably the most rapidly profitable and successful site that "Gambling" has ever seen.

You were 100% WRONG to restrict Bitcoinduit games to one thread. You PM'd me and seemingly missed the forest for the trees. Not only was I not running any of the rounds on Bitcoinduit, I was also not advertising any of the games. Every thread was by a different individual, newly empowered to run their own Game / Gambling 'site' using the Bitcoinduit platform.

Fact is, you got complaints from others who were upset that their silly ass little sites weren't getting the traffic that they felt they deserved. Instead of using logic and the principles of free markets, you quashed THE only successful Bitcoin game in its youth.

You were so completely and utterly wrong to do what you did, and look how well that's worked. Poker sites, Lotto sites, Bla bla bla. None of them have ever achieved the level of community involvement and play that Bitcoinduit had before you decided that it was time to stop a successful entry in its tracks.

Boo hoo, all of you silly wanna be Gambling site operators. Guess what? Your sites suck. You haven't invented anything new, and no amount of pressure on the Moderators of this or other forums will help you to achieve greatness. Instead, continue bashing each other (like you do at every turn) and alienating your players.

TL;DR

Bitcoinduit hosted games threads should never have been killed. It was a moronic decision based on trying to keep a few blowhard Gambling site owners happy. Most of them aren't even here anymore.

-Jonathan

p.s. Lift your restriction and watch what happens.

[ineededausername]

Admins,

I've kept this to myself for awhile, but seeing this thread has brought up a well of emotion that I held back from when I was running what was arguably the most rapidly profitable and successful site that "Gambling" has ever seen.

You were 100% WRONG to restrict Bitcoinduit games to one thread. You PM'd me and seemingly missed the forest for the trees. Not only was I not running any of the rounds on Bitcoinduit, I was also not advertising any of the games. Every thread was by a different individual, newly empowered to run their own Game / Gambling 'site' using the Bitcoinduit platform.

Fact is, you got complaints from others who were upset that their silly ass little sites weren't getting the traffic that they felt they deserved. Instead of using logic and the principles of free markets, you quashed THE only successful Bitcoin game in its youth.

You were so completely and utterly wrong to do what you did, and look how well that's worked. Poker sites, Lotto sites, Bla bla bla. None of them have ever achieved the level of community involvement and play that Bitcoinduit had before you decided that it was time to stop a successful entry in its tracks.

Boo hoo, all of you silly wanna be Gambling site operators. Guess what? Your sites suck. You haven't invented anything new, and no amount of pressure on the Moderators of this or other forums will help you to achieve greatness. Instead, continue bashing each other (like you do at every turn) and alienating your players.

TL;DR

Bitcoinduit hosted games threads should never have been killed. It was a moronic decision based on trying to keep a few blowhard Gambling site owners happy. Most of them aren't even here anymore.

-Jonathan

p.s. Lift your restriction and watch what happens.

This.  + 9001.
It's sort of ridiculous to say that the spreadsheet spam you used to see in the gambling forums was OK because it wasn't one site, but now that a ponzi site replaces that you say everything related to it is spam.

[Maged]

Admins,

I've kept this to myself for awhile, but seeing this thread has brought up a well of emotion that I held back from when I was running what was arguably the most rapidly profitable and successful site that "Gambling" has ever seen.

You were 100% WRONG to restrict Bitcoinduit games to one thread. You PM'd me and seemingly missed the forest for the trees. Not only was I not running any of the rounds on Bitcoinduit, I was also not advertising any of the games. Every thread was by a different individual, newly empowered to run their own Game / Gambling 'site' using the Bitcoinduit platform.

Fact is, you got complaints from others who were upset that their silly ass little sites weren't getting the traffic that they felt they deserved. Instead of using logic and the principles of free markets, you quashed THE only successful Bitcoin game in its youth.

You were so completely and utterly wrong to do what you did, and look how well that's worked. Poker sites, Lotto sites, Bla bla bla. None of them have ever achieved the level of community involvement and play that Bitcoinduit had before you decided that it was time to stop a successful entry in its tracks.

Boo hoo, all of you silly wanna be Gambling site operators. Guess what? Your sites suck. You haven't invented anything new, and no amount of pressure on the Moderators of this or other forums will help you to achieve greatness. Instead, continue bashing each other (like you do at every turn) and alienating your players.

TL;DR

Bitcoinduit hosted games threads should never have been killed. It was a moronic decision based on trying to keep a few blowhard Gambling site owners happy. Most of them aren't even here anymore.

-Jonathan

p.s. Lift your restriction and watch what happens.

This.  + 9001.
It's sort of ridiculous to say that the spreadsheet spam you used to see in the gambling forums was OK because it wasn't one site, but now that a ponzi site replaces that you say everything related to it is spam.

Barrier to entry is everything. With the spreadsheet games, you still at least needed the creator to be on top of things. You also needed to trust them individually. With Bitcoinduit, this is no longer the case. I could make a ponzi game right now and then fall asleep and ignore it. You also don't need to trust me, since Bitcoinduit automatically distributes the winnings.

Now, please tell me: how does your justification not also apply to referral spam? Everybody should be allowed to make a thread advertising their TradeHill referral link in Trading Discussion, right? Think about the slippery slope you're treading on.

Now, before you say that this policy prevents innovation by people using your platform, that is completely wrong. In fact, new and unique Bitcoinduit games are specifically excluded from this policy. Also, this policy does not prevent a bunch of Bitcoinduit clones from appearing using the Bitcoinduit source code, as long as they must use their own hosting and the trust is held solely in them (as in, no having the source use the Bitcoinduit site as an escrow).

Also, you seem to be confused about the purpose of this forum. This forum is designed to introduce people to new Bitcoin sites. Just because other Bitcoin exchanges suck, does that mean we should let them get buried by constant MtGox referral spam (pretend for a minute that MtGox has a referral program)?

Consider yourself lucky that we're even letting people post their games in the designated threads. It's bumping your thread when it otherwise wouldn't. The reality is, discussion of your games should really take place on your site, not here. Be thankful for what we are still allowing.

[ineededausername]

You draw a parallel to referral spam... this is different.  Referrals are all one and the same, they aren't games with different rules and they certainly don't need any discussion.  When someone posts a referral thread, they are saying, "Please sign up under me" and nothing else, and no one can really say much about a referral link, so referral threads would always end up with 0 replies, which is why they don't deserve separate threads.  For games, there really is a reason to allow separate threads because the game rules can be critiqued, the games are different in their rules unlike tradehill referrals and people can actually discuss the games... (f.e. "I'm in for 5," or "I'm botting this one," or "Why the hell do you have a 10% fee?" or "If you make this a daily series I'd contribute to it.")

If you care so much about spam and valueless posts, how come the BCX/CoinHunter spat was allowed to occupy 50% of the altcoin forums with stuff like "COINHUNTER DOXXED?"  I think my games provide more value than those posts, and just about anyone would agree with me.

You say that this forum is designed to introduce people to bitcoin sites but all I see is a forum that discusses bitcoin in general and everything related to it, even altcoins... If this forum were really for "introducing people to sites" we'd just have one big fat forum with site threads and no subforums.

[Maged]

I'd have to run it by theymos, but how would a "Games and Rounds" subforum of the Gambling board be as a compromise? I still don't like the idea of people spamming their games here, but I suppose that it would be better than the current situation of people posting in the main threads.

However, I highly suspect that this means that the Gambling forum will need a local moderator, because I, for one, am not going to be visiting that sub-forum. Any suggestions? (again, theymos would have to decide if a new moderator would really be necessary, but I'd still like to get the ball rolling)

Edit: Scratch that question of asking for moderator nominations. I nominate both of you, unless you wish to decline. This thread provides a great deal of evidence that you care about this forum and have a well-reasoned thought process, so it would make sense to choose you two.

[ineededausername]

I'd have to run it by theymos, but how would a "Games and Rounds" subforum of the Gambling board be as a compromise? I still don't like the idea of people spamming their games here, but I suppose that it would be better than the current situation of people posting in the main threads.

However, I highly suspect that this means that the Gambling forum will need a local moderator, because I, for one, am not going to be visiting that sub-forum. Any suggestions? (again, theymos would have to decide if a new moderator would really be necessary, but I'd still like to get the ball rolling)

Edit: Scratch that question of asking for moderator nominations. I nominate both of you, unless you wish to decline. This thread provides a great deal of evidence that you care about this forum and have a well-reasoned thought process, so it would make sense to choose you two.

The "Games and Rounds" subforum sounds like a good idea.  I'd be willing to be a local moderator for the Gambling forum if you need one, although right now it seems like it's largely self-regulating.
By the way, thanks for the compliments.

[Maged]

I'd have to run it by theymos, but how would a "Games and Rounds" subforum of the Gambling board be as a compromise? I still don't like the idea of people spamming their games here, but I suppose that it would be better than the current situation of people posting in the main threads.

However, I highly suspect that this means that the Gambling forum will need a local moderator, because I, for one, am not going to be visiting that sub-forum. Any suggestions? (again, theymos would have to decide if a new moderator would really be necessary, but I'd still like to get the ball rolling)

Edit: Scratch that question of asking for moderator nominations. I nominate both of you, unless you wish to decline. This thread provides a great deal of evidence that you care about this forum and have a well-reasoned thought process, so it would make sense to choose you two.

The "Games and Rounds" subforum sounds like a good idea.

Thanks, glad to hear that you agree. Now, we just need to convince theymos.

I'd be willing to be a local moderator for the Gambling forum if you need one, although right now it seems like it's largely self-regulating.

I agree with you here, too. I haven't needed to touch a single thread there ever since I started the policy. However, I was practically the only one moderating that board, and I can already tell you that the "Games and Rounds" subforum will be on my ignore list, so it'll need moderators.

By the way, thanks for the compliments.

No problem. This was a great debate!

[Jonathan Ryan Owens]

Now, please tell me: how does your justification not also apply to referral spam? Everybody should be allowed to make a thread advertising their TradeHill referral link in Trading Discussion, right? Think about the slippery slope you're treading on.

Tradehill doesn't let you set completely different rules for each referral link.

Also, you seem to be confused about the purpose of this forum. This forum is designed to introduce people to new Bitcoin sites. Just because other Bitcoin exchanges suck, does that mean we should let them get buried by constant MtGox referral spam (pretend for a minute that MtGox has a referral program)?

...

Consider yourself lucky that we're even letting people post their games in the designated threads. It's bumping your thread when it otherwise wouldn't. The reality is, discussion of your games should really take place on your site, not here. Be thankful for what we are still allowing.

Oh thank you masta! We is so lucky ta' have ya, shuck-a-muck!

How about this instead, Maged and other Global Admins: Be thankful that there are still a few people frequenting these boards even bothering to pay attention to you, and be thankful for the limited time left until your administrative status is simply a circle jerk among yourselves.

ATB,
Jonathan

p.s. You're wrong, and I suppose I'm just upset that its so obvious that most of the admins are on silly power trips. Still, thanks for doing the good things that you do, Mods. All the good things you do. Such a long list, these good deeds. Yup.

[error]

Oh thank you masta! We is so lucky ta' have ya, shuck-a-muck!

How about this instead, Maged and other Global Admins: Be thankful that there are still a few people frequenting these boards even bothering to pay attention to you, and be thankful for the limited time left until your administrative status is simply a circle jerk among yourselves.

I have no idea what Bitcoinduit even IS, but I do know one thing. Insulting us isn't going to help you. Nor is threatening to ragequit.

[theymos]

My concerns have not changed since the previous topic about this. In particular:

Automated games are maybe no better than simple spreadsheet games, but games with their own domain names are better, and they should stand out. If I create a Ponzi category, the high-quality sites will still be drowned out by low-quality games.

I could create a category just for simple, no-work games, but would anyone really read that section? Many of the Bitcoinduit topics have only 0-2 replies.

"One thread per site" is a guideline. Moderators will determine which topics are spam on a case-by-case basis.