Quote from: FortuneJack on October 04, 2019, 03:38:35 PM

Firstly, we again want to thank the player that helped us to find the bug, which might have affected some dice games played on our website. However, the case described in the initial bounty inquiry was extreme and relevant only with the option of playing over 99.90. The effect of the bug will drastically decrease while lowering the payout: if on 990x payout the bug had mistaken house edge and drew it for 10.89%, the aftermath from system miscalculation will be reduced, as the payout will vary (see the chart).

The case we had to deal with is no ordinary, and the company felt obliged to find a fair and relevant solution, so this took a couple of days. It has been years since we are in business, and the only way we kept our presence steady in this turbulent market, is FortuneJack's dedication to acting as fair as possible towards players and every each of them.

Following the logic initially set from a player in this bitcointalk thread and data that have been available for us to do calculations, we conclude the following:

Data Available as we clearly cannot tell when the bug started to affect our dice game, we decided not to start guessing and credit players from the moment we have the oldest record - November 2014, almost the date of establishment of the FortuneJack Casino.

What we have is Bet Amount and Win Amount recorded on our players. Most of the data is not kept forever, so it made calculation quite hard, and we had to rely upon more general and big data.

We have constructed the model of possible harm the bug might have had on players' bets, combining general assumptions and general knowledge to finally achieve average formula of payout for every player, who might have been affected.

We consider that most default style of play, practiced by the vast majority of players in to play on the edge of 50.00 and even the default game on FortuneJack Dice is Roll Under 49.50 (The bet that cannot be affected by bug), we decide not to calculate definite chance of default in our calculations and divide bets on rough two Over and Under 50. All the are Over 50 might have been affected and non who are under 50 could have been.

We have also calculated that, on average, playing case of being in the range of 50.00, the effect of the bug would have been 0.0198% following the model initially voiced in the bug bounty approach and written in the first post of this thread.

Following the data and module, we decided to econ average out of the players bet amount from November 2014 until today using the formula:

(Bet Amount * 50% ) X 0.0198% - Where every possible bet that might have been done over 50 on FortuneJack Dice by every player is multiplied on the possible average effect of the bug on the house edge.

Following this calculation, we have decided that starting next week, until the end of October, we will be airdropping this amount on each of the player's accounts that have the history of playing dice on FortuneJack.

To claim the coins back, a person will only need to log in to FortuneJack Dice, and everyone who might have been affected will get the difference that on average bug might have had back on their accounts.

We think our approach is fair and will make up for everyone. We believe finding the average effect was crucial in dealing with this case, and the final decision is equally reasonable to every dice player on FortuneJack.

We want to sincerely apologize for allowing the bug to affect the game and would like to thank players, the most respectful competitors, and the insightful Bitcointalk community for participating in the discussion.

We will post updates over airdrop in this thread shortly next week.
FortuneJack.

I am glad that you reconsidered and decided to explore this issue. While I'm not sure if I agree with the accuracy of these payouts given the methodology used, I still have to commend this action versus sweeping it under the rug.