Bitcoin Randomizer, just a stupid pyramid scheme

[spetey]

I love this idea.  It's fun and well-meaning, and a great way to advertise bitcoin.

I confess I'm proud of my terse "ad copy" for my Facebook post (with a link to my promo URL, of course):

An unabashed, lighthearted Ponzi scheme. It'll cost you one "bitcoin" - the new hacktivist internet currency now worth about US$.82 - to bet, in effect, that you're an early adopter. Well, are you?

I think "unabashed" and "lighthearted" are important, and I especially like how much "hacktivist" conveys, and I like the dare to early-adopt.

You're welcome to use it - I hereby place it in public domain.  If you like it you can of course send me some bitcoins (1HxhNkrFWouXeboNhJVfTy4Vtr5SBAeCxz), or use my referral link!

[1713929151]

1713929151

[jimbob007]

Here's to hoping for a quick return 

[mintymark]

Ok here is a simple question, I joined and paid my 1 bitcoin. I think the randomizer is a great idea!

But I now cannot remember my username which I seem to need to recover my password, so I am locked out!!

Surely I should be able to recover my password if I supply either un or email, I should not need both!!

[deadlizard]

I'll be happy if I get my coin back, lol 

[BitLex]

Surely I should be able to recover my password if I supply either un or email, I should not need both!!

uhm..no,
thing is, you can create multiple accounts with different usernames, but only a single mail-address.

i guess you only have one account, so just let me know your email-address and i'll tell you the username. 

[Jered Kenna (TradeHill)]

Surely I should be able to recover my password if I supply either un or email, I should not need both!!

uhm..no,
thing is, you can create multiple accounts with different usernames, but only a single mail-address.

i guess you only have one account, so just let me know your email-address and i'll tell you the username. 

Maybe because it's simple and relatively small but the support is awesome 

[Fiyasko]

Arent Pyramid Schemes illegal?

[deadlizard]

Arent Pyramid Schemes illegal?

Not when you get in early

]join now!!!!!

j/k, you can get bitcoins essentially for free by mining
if you don't like this idea then don't particapate.
this is compleatly honest and upfront about what it is
I would assume the illegalities stem from people commiting fraud in order to recruit new people into their scheme
theres no fraud here, we all know exactly what we are doing with our bitcoins

and besides it's just monopoly money to the law anyway.

[Jered Kenna (TradeHill)]

Arent Pyramid Schemes illegal?

I suppose so, but with 1btc that's not officially recognized I'd say you're about as evil as the 8 year olds and their lemonade stand that doesn't pay taxes.

[Fiyasko]

Arent Pyramid Schemes illegal?

I suppose so, but with 1btc that's not officially recognized I'd say you're about as evil as the 8 year olds and their lemonade stand that doesn't pay taxes.

AHAHAHA SO FUCKING TRUE
TEN MOAR POINTS TO VICTORY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Jered Kenna (TradeHill)]

Arent Pyramid Schemes illegal?

I suppose so, but with 1btc that's not officially recognized I'd say you're about as evil as the 8 year olds and their lemonade stand that doesn't pay taxes.

AHAHAHA SO FUCKING TRUE
TEN MOAR POINTS TO VICTORY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

http://www.frugal-cafe.com/public_html/frugal-blog/frugal-cafe-blogzone/2010/08/05/bad-day-for-little-girl-with-lemonade-stand-in-oregon-bullied-by-big-bad-government-no-license-500-fine/ 

[nikonoel]

http://www.frugal-cafe.com/public_html/frugal-blog/frugal-cafe-blogzone/2010/08/05/bad-day-for-little-girl-with-lemonade-stand-in-oregon-bullied-by-big-bad-government-no-license-500-fine/ 

Pathetic :-s

[Jered Kenna (TradeHill)]

http://www.frugal-cafe.com/public_html/frugal-blog/frugal-cafe-blogzone/2010/08/05/bad-day-for-little-girl-with-lemonade-stand-in-oregon-bullied-by-big-bad-government-no-license-500-fine/ 

Pathetic :-s

Pathetic yes, surprising? Not really.

[phelix]

Shouldn't I always receive at least (# 1.lvl active) * 0.25BTC? Or is it 25% of 50%???

[BitLex]

yes, you should.
0.25BTC for active 1.lvls, 0.15BTC for active 2.lvls, 0.10BTC for active 3.lvls
and every once in a while random 0.50BTC.

you currently have 4 1.lvl-refs, of which 2 are active, so you have received 0.50BTC so far,
anything wrong on your side?

[Ian Maxwell]

My last special offer yielded an underwhelming response, so here's another.

Here is my referral link. If you join under me and send me a message with proof (username and password), I will

• send you a 15% rebate on your 1 BTC signup fee, and
• enter you in a drawing to win the jackpot!

("The jackpot" is 0.5*[number of responses to this offer].)

This offer is going fast! Ends April 30 at the latest!

[phelix]

I guess "active" means someone has paid the fee.

> 1.lvl:4 (1 pending)
I thought pending would mean "not active" and the other number would show the acitves. How would I know how many of these are active? Are there more than two states?

Boy, this pyramid scheme is hard work. =)

[BitLex]

I guess "active" means someone has paid the fee.

"active" means: paid the fee and logged in (or refreshed page) once after that (to trigger the sponsor-/random-payments),  that's correct.

> 1.lvl:4 (1 pending)
I thought pending would mean "not active" and the other number would show the acitves. How would I know how many of these are active?

means: you referred 4 people and 1 of those 4 is pending/not yet active/hasn't paid the fee yet,
obviously (or maybe not that obvious ), 3 of those 4 are active.

Are there more than two states?

no, there are just two states.

[phelix]

actually it is not obvious for me but rather ambiguous, so thanks for explaining.

>"active" means: paid the fee and logged in (or refreshed page) once after that (to trigger the >sponsor-/random-payments),  that's correct.
I guess the triggering is necessary because of the way your program works, fine with me.

I understood: 1.lvl:4 (1 pending) does not mean 4 active plus 1 pending but 3 active plus 1 pending or in other words 4 on 1.level, one of them pending. check.

How come then there are 0.5BTC received with 3 active?

I don't mean to drive you crazy, I am just wondering.

[BitLex]

seems like we got a little bug hiding somewhere.  

but, after checking the DB it also seems there's everything fine with your account,
it's just that you actually only have 3 refs (and 1 of those pending),
one of the actives registered twice, due to the bug i guess, which didn't create a new bcaIN on his first try.
that non-created bcaIN obviously didn't make it to the database and that again results in the wrong display of your stats.

sorry about that, have to hunt that down.

[update]:
this didn't happen for the first time, but it only effected few registrations (~1%) and corresponding ref-stats,
due to the fact, that no bcaIN was created, no coins were sent, received, or lost.

seems like there's a connection-problem from webserver to bitcoin-rpc (which runs on another machine, although in the same LAN) from time to time,
but i don't know why, or what causes it.
i'll see if i can work that out, by adding another checkpoint or something,
else i'll just fire up another webserver on the bitcoin-machine and move the website to it.

i'm sorry for any inconvenience.