Is it possible that not all winners came to the Bitcointalk forum and reported their winnings? 5 or 10 big wins in this statistic can significantly change the final assessment, and that is quite a possible scenario.
That possibility was brought up before (probably back in 2018). But I don't think that's likely: they get paid $5 to post on Bitcointalk, and we're talking about people who clicked hourly captchas to earn $0.002. They literally earn 2500 times more by posting on Bitcointalk, so I don't think the larger prize winners are less likely to post. And they'd have to be 12.5 times less likely to post than $20 prize winners.Quote
You know that sample size doesn't prove anything, because if it did, no matter how conservative you are with your feedbacks you would have red tagged them long ago.
It's hard to convince people a tag is justified, when it comes to statistical evidence.Quote
Not even counting everyone in that thread one by one would do it. I'm used to in poker that to get an idea the minimum sample size is 50K hands. And as brutal as variance can be, to prove things, better half a million hands.
That's peanuts compared to the sample I mentioned. With half the data from 10 out of 152 pages, I got a 0.00000239452 chance of it happening. Assuming (I'm not going to count 152 pages) that continues on the other pages, the chance of so little $200 prizes is (give or take) 0.0000023945230. That's around 2.4*10-169. Your one in a million poker hands are going to happen eventually. The E-169 thing confirms foul play.Quote
In any case, with such a small sample, it seems quite a high deviation from what the mean should be, I agree.
That's all I wanted to hear 