The only way to make fair to investors is to pull the random number from a provable RNG such as a hardware one. Services such as random.org offer this. Of course, this translate CP risk from the OP now to a different 3rd party. Also, you would not have the standard type of provable fairness, though any player could audit random.org (or any other true RNG service) to prove the #s are fair to the player in that way. I think that would satisfy most players. Not sure if more investors would prefer blinding the OP to the random numbers but transferring it to a 3rd party.
lets say it would be possible and it would give players, the OP and the investors a fair shot, why not test it over a week or even more (for example) and lets see how the whale will perform, or he will not show up at all. sure the whale could come and play and could have luck or he will lose and say goodbye because he has no chance without a cheat he might have. the question what OP and investors should ask themselves is if it is worth to have a whale with a cheat and losing all the money to the whale or to recover with the time without the whale (cheat).
sure it is not proven yet that the whale has a cheat. but the signs are more and more pointing in this direction. therefore a test period where the player, OP and investors are Provably fair could clear things up.
just my 2 cents
[/quote]
The problem is Dooglus will resist saying how do you know random.org will not cheat. What would be your counter to that?