Jump to content

Ghostnipple

Member
  • Content Count

    120
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation Activity

  1. Thanks
    Ghostnipple got a reaction from maxsio5 in Devaluing of Alt-accounts   
    There are many valid reasons a reasonable person would create an alt account, but this post is not about that. Stake through their activities, policies and procedures and implied terms of service, actively encouraged the creation of alt-accounts. Alt-accounts pay their way, they have the same house edge imposed and therefore suffer the same losses over time. They make the same contribution to stake's profit balance as any other player account.
    In the last 2 months there has been a move towards devaluing the alt accounts held by players in good standing. Without any discussion with these players, Stake have opted unilaterally to impose severe restrictions on these accounts and given little if any explanation.
    Restrictions to alt accounts are being applied retroactively, the result of which is a degrading of service and a material loss to those account holders.
    In particular I note the change to the chat rules regarding alt-accounts which is in all respects a de facto muting of all alt accounts, this has the effect of denying players entry to chat based competitive events and challenges, sending rain/tips, receiving rain and any other features that rely on using the chat box.
    This is unfair in so much that it contravenes established custom and practice and therefore Stake's implied terms of service.
    I would advise stake to revoke the recent restrictions placed on player alt-accounts and to cancel any future plans to further degrade the quality of service to alt-accounts. Aside from being unfair and unreasonable to impose these restrictions retroactively on all players in good standing, it is also damaging to stake's reputation of which fairness is promoted as a core value.

    The current Stake administration would be well advised to give the players the respect that they are due. The issue above is a symptom that highlights stake's disregard for their obligations to the player. Players fund everything. They hold all the power, and at any time they can just take it.

     
  2. Thanks
    Ghostnipple reacted to Dave1280 in Devaluing of Alt-accounts   
    No problem, you work away with the important issue. 
  3. Wow
    Ghostnipple got a reaction from RedDottGranger in Devaluing of Alt-accounts   
    There are many valid reasons a reasonable person would create an alt account, but this post is not about that. Stake through their activities, policies and procedures and implied terms of service, actively encouraged the creation of alt-accounts. Alt-accounts pay their way, they have the same house edge imposed and therefore suffer the same losses over time. They make the same contribution to stake's profit balance as any other player account.
    In the last 2 months there has been a move towards devaluing the alt accounts held by players in good standing. Without any discussion with these players, Stake have opted unilaterally to impose severe restrictions on these accounts and given little if any explanation.
    Restrictions to alt accounts are being applied retroactively, the result of which is a degrading of service and a material loss to those account holders.
    In particular I note the change to the chat rules regarding alt-accounts which is in all respects a de facto muting of all alt accounts, this has the effect of denying players entry to chat based competitive events and challenges, sending rain/tips, receiving rain and any other features that rely on using the chat box.
    This is unfair in so much that it contravenes established custom and practice and therefore Stake's implied terms of service.
    I would advise stake to revoke the recent restrictions placed on player alt-accounts and to cancel any future plans to further degrade the quality of service to alt-accounts. Aside from being unfair and unreasonable to impose these restrictions retroactively on all players in good standing, it is also damaging to stake's reputation of which fairness is promoted as a core value.

    The current Stake administration would be well advised to give the players the respect that they are due. The issue above is a symptom that highlights stake's disregard for their obligations to the player. Players fund everything. They hold all the power, and at any time they can just take it.

     
  4. Bitcoin
    Ghostnipple got a reaction from Alyem in Devaluing of Alt-accounts   
    There are many valid reasons a reasonable person would create an alt account, but this post is not about that. Stake through their activities, policies and procedures and implied terms of service, actively encouraged the creation of alt-accounts. Alt-accounts pay their way, they have the same house edge imposed and therefore suffer the same losses over time. They make the same contribution to stake's profit balance as any other player account.
    In the last 2 months there has been a move towards devaluing the alt accounts held by players in good standing. Without any discussion with these players, Stake have opted unilaterally to impose severe restrictions on these accounts and given little if any explanation.
    Restrictions to alt accounts are being applied retroactively, the result of which is a degrading of service and a material loss to those account holders.
    In particular I note the change to the chat rules regarding alt-accounts which is in all respects a de facto muting of all alt accounts, this has the effect of denying players entry to chat based competitive events and challenges, sending rain/tips, receiving rain and any other features that rely on using the chat box.
    This is unfair in so much that it contravenes established custom and practice and therefore Stake's implied terms of service.
    I would advise stake to revoke the recent restrictions placed on player alt-accounts and to cancel any future plans to further degrade the quality of service to alt-accounts. Aside from being unfair and unreasonable to impose these restrictions retroactively on all players in good standing, it is also damaging to stake's reputation of which fairness is promoted as a core value.

    The current Stake administration would be well advised to give the players the respect that they are due. The issue above is a symptom that highlights stake's disregard for their obligations to the player. Players fund everything. They hold all the power, and at any time they can just take it.

     
  5. Love
    Ghostnipple got a reaction from seanwattson in The real king on Stake   
    sigh 50,000% = 500x
    you can lead an ewhore to culture but you can't make her think
  6. Thanks
    Ghostnipple got a reaction from Uspech33 in Win Chance vs Win rate   
    Posting this for those interested in this sort of data. Draw your own conclusions. Thanks to those who pointed out errors in a previous copy.  My script was rounding the payouts, which was throwing off the numbers. I simplified the payouts, so everything should be fine now.

     
  7. Thanks
    Ghostnipple got a reaction from Valeron in Hi. Shrimpmoneyy cheated me. Can you help me?   
    never borrow never lend
    gamblers over estimate their abilities and underestimate the variance
    consider also the banks are the experts in lending money, if they wont lend him money for gambling purposes, why would you do it?
  8. Thanks
    Ghostnipple got a reaction from JovanR in Hello, hello! ✌   
    Hi Jovan,
    Good luck with your new role. Can you tell me what a community managers responsibilities are?
  9. Sad
    Ghostnipple got a reaction from kin77 in Message to the stake dome   
    keep him
  10. Love
    Ghostnipple got a reaction from tinybooty69 in KYC at Stake   
    Honey trap never fails.
  11. Wow
    Ghostnipple got a reaction from rahat420 in Have you ever been arrested?   
    no, I'm the one who does the arresting, so watch your step.
     
  12. Thanks
    Ghostnipple got a reaction from htetaungxx in Do you change seeds?   
    I dont change seed target multipliers oscillate around the theoretical average occurrence probability (variance). If you plot the occurrence of any target within a fixed number of rolls on an x y axis with expected probability at 0, you will have a sine wave. If you do this you will see that in general good follows bad, and bad follows good. Good being more hits to your target and bad being less.
    If you rip in a section that has low occurrence of your target. Every bet that you've made in a bad section gets you one bet closer to the section of your seed that is good. Many will abandon the seed when they almost past the rough point.
    I would not change I have paid for every step closer to the good part of the seed. Changing seed throws that money away.
  13. Lame
    Ghostnipple got a reaction from MarziasDaddy in $100,000 Christmas Giveaway Results!   
    How else are you going to run a casino, rewards go to those who contribute most to the bottom line.
  14. Bitcoin
    Ghostnipple got a reaction from pocstar in $100,000 Christmas Giveaway Results!   
    How else are you going to run a casino, rewards go to those who contribute most to the bottom line.
  15. Thanks
    Ghostnipple got a reaction from FeelsSadge in My dice strategy will make you rich   
    Short term any strat can work. BUT.....
    5.26x can go 60 games without hitting. 39x can go over 400 games without hitting. 11x can go over 120 games without hitting. 1.5x can go 20 games without hitting. For any strategy it is Good to know how you will rip before you start to use it.
     
    Im guessing you are a marketing graduate.
  16. Love
    Ghostnipple got a reaction from Takezo Kensei in My dice strategy will make you rich   
    Short term any strat can work. BUT.....
    5.26x can go 60 games without hitting. 39x can go over 400 games without hitting. 11x can go over 120 games without hitting. 1.5x can go 20 games without hitting. For any strategy it is Good to know how you will rip before you start to use it.
     
    Im guessing you are a marketing graduate.
  17. Thanks
    Ghostnipple got a reaction from gougou in End of Provably Fair?   
    Well thats great for you, but there are thousands of bets missing from my archive. In the middle of a json archive file the nonce suddenly jumps a thousand bets. Missing bets aren't verifiable.
  18. Thanks
    Ghostnipple got a reaction from John3 in MinesBot - Hunt max payout while u sleep   
    No it may be possible to use bots, but only if / when the developers manage to update their bots to take account of changes made by stake. The strategy is not to completely block the bots, but to break them often enough to make their use troublesome and unreliable.
    Stake will claim they do this for security reasons to protect players. This is the same strategy the US government uses to remove personal freedom and privacy laws in order to fight terrorism. Sure you've sacrificed privacy rights and personal freedom, but aren't you safer from terrorists?
  19. Thanks
    Ghostnipple got a reaction from John3 in MinesBot - Hunt max payout while u sleep   
    Stake do not want players using bots, they want players on site using whatever limited betting strategies they decide to facilitate. Stake regularly make changes to the api that make the use of bots unreliable. As a profit driven enterprise Stake will always act to ensure that they maximise profit and minimize losses (player wins).
  20. Thanks
    Ghostnipple got a reaction from Uspech33 in MinesBot - Hunt max payout while u sleep   
    Stake do not want players using bots, they want players on site using whatever limited betting strategies they decide to facilitate. Stake regularly make changes to the api that make the use of bots unreliable. As a profit driven enterprise Stake will always act to ensure that they maximise profit and minimize losses (player wins).
  21. Thanks
    Ghostnipple got a reaction from Uspech33 in MinesBot - Hunt max payout while u sleep   
    No it may be possible to use bots, but only if / when the developers manage to update their bots to take account of changes made by stake. The strategy is not to completely block the bots, but to break them often enough to make their use troublesome and unreliable.
    Stake will claim they do this for security reasons to protect players. This is the same strategy the US government uses to remove personal freedom and privacy laws in order to fight terrorism. Sure you've sacrificed privacy rights and personal freedom, but aren't you safer from terrorists?
  22. Thanks
    Ghostnipple reacted to Blahx in Stake Advanced Auto Betting Assistance   
    Please include the payout conditions. I understand why you made the initial decision to choose win chance, but I do not understand why you decided to limit it to just win chance and not have both. I have tried other advance betting implementations and they were so much more flexible with both options.
    Also I think you can see that  with your example, instead of doing a simple 2-3 conditions, we end up have to setup thousands if the goal was to do 2x to 9900x until a win.
    Lastly, only glance though the posts so sorry if I missed it, but currently after creating a strategy we are only able to edit it the conditions if we add new conditions after editing/deleting the old conditions. However we are not able to delete or rename the whole strategy itself, I hope we will be able to do this.
  23. Thanks
    Ghostnipple got a reaction from Blahx in Stake Advanced Auto Betting Assistance   
    payout 7x = 14.14285714% win chance
    Players do not specify a win chance when they bet (14.14285714%).
    They specify a payout multiplier (7x).
    Could you please tell me how can I implement the following simple strategy using the proposed win chance condition?
    bet 1 sat                                                          
    target multiplier 7x                                                 
    on each loss add 1x to target until win.                               
                                                                        
  24. Thanks
    Ghostnipple got a reaction from Blahx in Stake Advanced Auto Betting Assistance   
    hi, 
    i'm happy to see some development in the autobet system. 
    there is one glaring omission and that is a condition to increase or decrease the payout multiplier on win or loss.
    player's target multipliers such as 2x or 10x or 100x when they bet because this has a direct relationship to what they receive on a win, and winning is for most players their core objective.
    the same can not be said for chance, as due to considerable variance in the game seeds, over the short term, chance rarely coincides with actual hit rate . for example the stated chance of hitting 10x is 9.9%, however you can make a hundred bets and only hit 10x once.
    when players play limbo or dice, for example, they enter a bet amount and target multiplier. chance is a secondary consideration. personally i see little value in a 'chance' condition in the advanced betting mode. i would not use it.
    i would however use a payout multiplier condition, so i urge the devs to include that as a condition in the advanced betting panel.
  25. Thanks
    Ghostnipple got a reaction from Flan in Stake Advanced Auto Betting Assistance   
    Thank you, much appreciated.
    I take your point here in relation to the dice numbering format.

    However going forward, I presume the advanced betting facility will be extended to other games such as Slide, Limbo and Crash, these are very much orientated around the payout multiplier as this is central to the theme on which these games are based. You will find that players who play those games will certainly request an advanced betting condition based on payout multiplier. So I think it is just as well to include it from the outset.
    Thank you for your consideration.

     
×
×
  • Create New...