Quote from: CrazyJoker on May 17, 2015, 10:56:24 PM

I have updated the FAQ...

Quote

3. So, what is the catch ?

A: Every single investment will expire after 120 hour, i.e. if the invested amount is not covered within 120 hour, player will lose that amount. Hence every player needs to have more players investing after him before the investment expire. The best way to do this is to spread the word about www.CrazyPonzi.com to as many bitcoiners as possible using your referral link shown in the dashboard.

If you can suggest a better english, I may like to use that.

How about this? I've removed the "hence..." since it is obvious, and the encouragement to spam others since it's obnoxious:

Quote

A: ~~Every single~~ Each investment will expire after 120 hours, i.e. if the invested amount plus 40% profit is not covered within 120 hours, the player will lose ~~that amount~~ his whole bet.

Quote from: CrazyJoker on May 17, 2015, 10:56:24 PM

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

[ Edit: it seems to me that making bets all-or-nothing just encourages people to place a long series of minimum bets instead of a single large bet, because then they can get paid out partially. You should pay out whatever is in the bankroll when a bet expires to simplify things. ]

That can not be done. Because, that way new users will be deprived to get paid by the bankroll. The main attraction of this game is that, unlike a classical Ponzi, new users may also get paid by old users. If I break that, it would be no different than other Ponzi games. But, interestingly, you'd find whoever has tried to take over the board by a series of small bets have ultimately lost out.

It's hard to say what the main attraction is. There seems to be no shortage of people willing to play traditional Ponzi games, even the dishonest "double your money guaranteed" ones that are clearly going to scam. I think that even if you do as I suggest, your game is still quite different than traditional Ponzis in that failing to pay out a single user in full doesn't break the whole scheme. I don't think it's true that "That can not be done" as you claim.

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

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.

Quote from: CrazyJoker on May 17, 2015, 10:56:24 PM

I was trying to show the bankroll, but it seems this is not possible in the way the game is designed. I have not stored bankroll anywhere. I just dynamically calculate it by subtracting 'Total Paid' from 'Total Invested' and keep comparing it with pending balance. So finding old bankrolls is very difficult. But, in case someone has any doubt, he can take a snapshot of the board before he places bet and then find the bankroll against which his bet status changed to paid/expired by the following forumula...

previous bankroll + total invested after his bet and before the status change - total paid after his bet and before the status change

You have all the information needed to reconstruct the game don't you? All it seems you would need is a list of the timestamps and sizes of each bet. Don't you have a log of that?

Quote from: CrazyJoker on May 17, 2015, 10:56:24 PM

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

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).

Thanks for the vouch. I dont know if Vod will be satisfied with all these explanations and changes made.

For dice sites, bet gets placed every second. Here the life of a bet is 120 hour. So, naturally % of commission needs to be higher to make the project viable.

"Vouch" isn't what I did. I don't have any idea how trustworthy you are, and so cannot vouch for you. From what I've seen it's quite plausible that you're not running a scam.

I don't think you're doing 10 times more work than an average dice site owner does. I don't see how the fact that bets can take multiple days to settle means it's fair to take a 10% cut. But that's none of my business. So long as you make it clear that you take 10% of the turnover it's up to the potential players to decide whether to play or not.