Quote from: integrity42 on September 25, 2013, 09:21:25 PM

Quote from: Peter R on September 25, 2013, 09:18:14 PM

Quote from: tucenaber on September 25, 2013, 09:11:37 PM

Quote from: Peter R on September 25, 2013, 09:04:01 PM

Quote from: mughat on September 25, 2013, 08:58:49 PM

Quote from: integrity42 on September 25, 2013, 08:54:42 PM

The number of people disagreeing with Dooglus outnumbers those agreeing by 2:1.

I hope he reconsiders what he's done. He listened to mechs instead of listening to 30,000BTC in investors who left their money in at 1%.

+1
Setting your own risk % is the solution to this madness.

What would happen then if I always increased my risk % to something high like 2.5% when the fishes were playing, and then decreased back to 0.25% when a whale comes along?

You will lose the big wins. Think of it as a less extreme version of divesting when the whale comes along.

OK that makes sense. But what if I also increase to *over* 1% when the fishes are playing? Like Oleander pointed out, would I not be diluting all the other investors that don't actively manage their account?

What stops a big investor with 10,000 coins taking their risk to 5% when small fish are playing. Then when whales play, their bot automatically drops the risk to 0.25%, diluting investors like mechs.?

So large investors with a bot that actively manages the risk will fuck smaller investors?

Either way, I think if the max bet is constantly changing so drastically, then whales won't play.

Haha! So the logical investor strategy would be to actively manage. Just-Dice would be a tease: advertise 500 BTC max bets, and then as soon as we attract a whale and start to dance, the max bet plummets.