Search content
Sort by

Showing 3 of 3 results by LongJohnJake
Post
Topic
Board Service Discussion
Re: Coinbase Investment fund email?
by
LongJohnJake
on 08/04/2015, 19:08:19 UTC
Seems really sketchy, absolutely not from CoinBase.

What annoys me is how did these scammers get access to CoinBase's users' emails (CoinBase's fault?).


Following is from Coinbase online chat.  Cannot believe how nonchalant they are about this whole incident!

"Now Chatting
Seth: Hi there! What can I help you with today?
→Got your News message about the investment product. Please supply more information, such as a Prospectus.
Seth: That appears to be a scam email. It's not from us.
→So how did they get my username and your domain?
Seth: That is beyond my technical understanding, I'm afraid.
→Good god, man!! Your site got hacked and that's the best you can say!!
→Wait til I blog that moronic response!
Seth: I do not believe our site has been hacked. But feel free to do what you want. Have a nice day!"
Post
Topic
Board Gambling
Re: SealsWithClubs.eu | Largest Bitcoin Poker Site | No Banking | Fast Cashouts
by
LongJohnJake
on 28/02/2015, 01:03:57 UTC
If anyone is interested...

SWCPOKER.com (Highly targeted name pure genuine traffic)
Godaddy Push of ownership only at this time.
First few hours monitoring traffic looks like it may do XXX unique visits a day + as time goes on.
When one does a conversion via affiliate at 20% for life when compared to the old .com name...
100+ uv at a small X% conversion rate is approx. $15,000 USD per annum (approx 50-75 BTC) + at current BTC price, price goes up, revenue goes up! Again when using old .com name as reference.

Asking 500 Bitcoin or best offer. Big amount sure but big revenue stream potential as well!
Ciurrent high offer is 200 BTC + $25,000 USD.

Reasoning being is ownership directly of this name by swcpoker would mean approx $75,000 per annum in revenue roi in 1-2 years!

PM offers, ultimately may just use it for affiliate myself next week. Again all above is projected, no gaur.



That URL is worthless. If someone is offering 200 BTC + $25k, take it. Seriously. Before they realize they're making a horrible business deal.

That specific domain has nothing going for it. It's not special. If you just want to rank, rank for "swc poker" using the domain "urafloppydonkey.com" and you'll have the same success.

Math doesn't add up - as BTC increases, players simply play smaller mBTC games, since, effectively, they are thinking in USD.  Exercise: Set BTC at $10K.  You think the player base will float up with it so that rake will go up 40X from here??  This, of course, is even without considering their caps policies.  for NL it's min(.005 BTC, 3BB).  So even as BTC rises, rake maxes out very quickly.

So looks like Crypto stole one here!
Post
Topic
Board Gambling
Early comments: SWCPoker.eu
by
LongJohnJake
on 28/02/2015, 00:35:54 UTC
Here's some early comments after several hours of play and general hanging around the site last 24 hours.
Notwithstanding the pretty slick UI - I mean, how cool is it to be able to choose from 6 different carpets and card-back colors!? - there's some serious holes:
No browser client.
No showdown info. 
No running rake totals during hand.
No game info - Mavens was always the leader with this - you could see exactly what you were getting into regarding rake rates and caps, buyins, time banks and more. 
Speaking of Mavens: One of the strongest reasons to use their game engine is the RNG - fully documented on their site, and fully testable by doing your own sims (which my co. has done). And along with this are the millions of hands that have been played with this engine by their huge non-RM and home-poker user base.  Just check out their Forum to see the depth and quality.  Note: We absolutely have NOTHING to do with Mavens.   

Of course, these shortcomings and questions may be moot for the Grid system Micon is using,  but then why not provide them up front.  I can assure you that if they are still in the development pipeline, time and treasure are not on their side with mini-micro games.  With these shortcomings I can't see serious grinders giving him the volume needed.

Also, their communications don't provide much reassurance either. For example, the SWC FAQ:

How much do you charge in rake?
Rake at ring game tables is 1 chip per 40 (2.5% rounded down) with a cap of the lesser of 3BB or 5 chips (0.005BTC).Limit tables with a big blind of 0.5 chips (0.0005BTC) or higher have rake of 1 chip per 50 (2% rounded down) with a cap of the lesser of 2BB or 4 chips (0.004BTC).HU tables with a big blind of 0.5 chips (0.0005BTC) or higher have rake of 1 chip per 75 (~1.33% rounded down) with a cap of the lesser of 1BB or 3 chips (0.003BTC).If a game would have a rake cap of less than 0.5 chips (0.0005BTC) then the rake cap will be 0.5 chips (0.0005BTC).No rake is collected on hands that do not make it to the flop.


Reads like it was composed a stoner or someone with English as a 3rd language.  Apart from the grade-school layout, it's unclear, for example, what the HU rules are for Limit and No Limit unless, unlike 3+ games, they are now the same?)  Simple matrix layout is what's needed.