Quote from: dooglus on May 15, 2015, 08:47:04 PM

-snip-
I'd prefer a little more transparency in this game. Maybe show the bankroll after each "paid" status as well as the number of the bet which enabled that older bet to be paid out. Players have to decide whether they trust the operator not to run with their coins, just as they do with any other gambling game (provably fair or not). Probably fairness makes cheating detectable, but can't prevent it happening.

tldr: IMHO this isn't a scam (it's just a gambling game with a whopping 10% house edge and in which the operator can potentially cheat by betting against himself).

Id like to hope that its not a scam as well, but as you said cheating would be hard to detect. Also thanks for the reminder of the lengthy chain. It got to me way after this was still a point that I had to look at the complete series of bets to figure out the actual bankroll at that time. More information would definitely do good. If logged in it gives you the time the bet was placed, which help understand the events a little better.

Quote from: Vod on May 16, 2015, 03:29:41 AM

-snip-
I think some of the ideas the community has left here have merit.

1) Display the bank balance after each transaction - this way everyone can see if you are being honest or if you are slowly building up a balance to disappear with (because that's what ponzis do)

2) Display a link to the blockchain transaction after each deposit/withdrawal.

3) Make it clear on the website when and how a player can lose what they have deposited.

The way I understood the game is that the play off-chain, thus 2 would not work.

Quote from: Vod on May 16, 2015, 11:31:09 AM

One other thing that makes me not trust CrazyPonzi. On the front page he says:

Code:

Total Invested: 28.8602 btc
Total Returned: 28.7858 btc
Bankroll: 00.0745 btc

Total Returned + Bankroll equals the Total Invested!

Where is the 5%-10% the system is supposed to take?

The numbers are being manipulated somewhere. Undecided

-picture-

Profit is part of total returned, which is indeed phrased misleadingly. It should probably be deducted and put in a separate box.