so I have a > 1% share of the bankroll and have been invested in the bustabit bankroll for ages, here are my 2 cents:
I didn't care last year when the fee model was changed from 25% of the EV to 50% of the actual profits, EV wise for the investors that was close to the same anyway.
I don't care that the fee model is being changed again, and yes it is getting more and more complicated, but that's fine for me. It is some sort of reversed auction now, investors have to decide if they are willing to invest for X% of the profit. If the answer is yes, you have to decide if it stays the same for X-1, X-2 and so on. Not sure where my cutoff is exactly.
What I don't like is that the offsite investment is being discontinued and that is because I have a large offsite investment, and yes I "exploited" the system by maximizing my offsite investment back in the day. Not sure if exploiting is the correct word, I paid dilution fee for it after all. I understand that RHavar wants to minimize the amount of funds he is responsible for, personally I was never worried about the game being rigged or whales winning long-term, but third party risk. Obviously I trust RHavar, but there is always a non-zero risk, as we recently saw with the ethercrash "hack" aka exitscam.
Anyways, I'm grateful for the opportunity bustabit gave me to make a shitton of money, it is truly life-changing, I don't like the recent changes at all, but I understand where RHavar is coming from. I have another 4 weeks to decide what I wanna do with my investment and if I'm willing to give up a lot of EV.
FWIW, I haven't been involved in the site in an official capacity for like 2.5 years now =) I just stick around as I'm a (large) bankroll investor, but invest on the same terms as everyone else. Actually back when I ran the site, I 100% privately bankrolled it. The public bankroll thingy is Daniel's game.
I think Daniel obviously now has an oversupply of capital, so it makes sense for him to squeeze investors by paying them less. As an investor, I don't really mind at all as I'd do the same (e.g. if volumes slowed down, I'd divest...).
I also think you're right about the offsite thing, but also think Daniel is right to not want two classes of investors as it's rather unfair. You also obviously didn't exploit the offsite system, but also didn't use it for its intended purpose.
I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but one idea for Daniel: Instead of giving people "dilution fee credits", give them actual bitcoin. Then if they want to invest more, they can use that to cover the expense. Or if they no longer want to, they can withdraw that money. And then say you gave way X bitcoin, configure the site to direct the next X bitcoin of dilution fees to yourself instead of the bankroll.