Topic: BitPonzi.Net - Offline - page 6. (Read 34755 times)

That'd be excellent, yes.


Of course not.  It was yet another idea to make the massive rounds end as soon as possible after making profit from the the second deposit to start a new round very soon.  The rounds should last what the hosts decided, in my opinion.

Would be nice to have captcha optional per game host.
That would allow the game host to setup games specifically for bots.

I've decided to just disable the api for now to at lease somewhat get the site back to normal. I'm still hundreds of miles from home and working off a 800x480 phone screen, so no serious changes are going to happen until i have direct access to my laptop.

What do yall want to see done here? permanently remove access from bots? is a decaying expiration time still a desired feature?

lol visual basic...

I have downloaded it.  Of course I didn't plan to use it, since I think the bot is the second worse thing that is happening to the Bitponzi site.  But I was curious about the code (I'm looking for PHP code handling BTC to learn from it).  After downloading it I learnt it's written in visual basic, and so it has no interest for me.

remote accessing laptop with phone. fixed.

Yeah, runlinux publicly released the source code of his bot.  It's been downloaded at least once.

apparently runlinux isnt the only one with a bot. there are 3 deposit with timestamps the same down to the 100 nanoseconds which is causing an exception in the round expiration code. this will be fixed as soon as i have access to my laptop.

Thank you for agreeing with me in all my points.  I also agree with you in that the adjective I used is an opinion and, as such, is subjective.  But it's my opinion, and I state it as such.

It is true that nobody forces me to join in.  The only time I did, I freely decided to do it, believing there was an honest round like the rest, only that people were playin hard (larger minimun and maximun, larger pots, etc.).  Obviously it wasn't.

If nobody plays (as it is happening, and I reallly hope is definitive), you loose your pledgers and your risk-free status, indeed, but your risk and your lose still have been zero.  You only need to find other pledgers to keep going.  Still 0 risk.  You ask what's wrong?  I think everything.  And yes, it's subjective.  And yes, it's my opinion.  Your strategy, disguise as a game, is despicable.

Everything you say is true except for the despicable part.  I think that's really subjective.  It is true that some people get higher chances of getting paid.  However, I make this public.  You can choose whether or not to bet in my rounds... I don't force you to.  If you don't, and nobody does, then I lose my pledgers and I lose my risk-free status.  If you do, and a lot of people do, then I get money and some people get paid out.  Is that so wrong?  No, that's the market at work.

In any case, I'm not going to try to justify the previous rounds anymore.  If you think it's despicable, feel free to do so.  If I were to remove all pledges, ask mb300sd to ban bots, and also deposit much less, then you would be happy, right?
Because if site traffic proves that that strategy is sustainable and low-risk, I will be doing so.  The feeder sites are almost up, and I'm going to start looking at advertising tomorrow, so we're going to have a lot more traffic which is going to allow me to remove all the "despicable" stuff that you have listed.  I wouldn't have implemented the pledge system, or the 1+big depositing, or the other "shit" on bitcoinduit.
The truth is, the attention that the site is getting right now necessitates risk-cutting measures.

That was the reason why you asked the person who runs the site to prevent bots from making the second deposit, but let them join latter.  You are not even capable to take the smallest risk.  It was just too much in such a short time.  Please, stop all this shit and let the Bitponzi site recover.


A ridiculous tiny risk that you were not prepared to take.  So you asked the owner of the site to help you eliminate it by preventing the bots from getting in before you.  Come on, pay the fees or assume a tiny risk.

I really would like the second and following deposits (when made by the same person as the first and/or seconds after it) to pay the same fee.  Your strategy is despicable and I really hope to see it all together gone for good.


Of course not.  I'd be happy only if I saw your round style gone once and for all.  People don't have the same outcome or chances when you pre-agree with some people, because appart from you, they also have to get paid before the rest have any chances.  Come on, don't try to justify it any longer.  You don't want a game, you want an eassy 100% risk free profit.


The reason is making 100% sure you get your profit by agreeing with others to give it to you in echage for increasing their chances over the rest of the participants to get paid.

Please, there is no way to justify all that.  It's very nasty and despicable.  Keep doing it if you want, but don't try to make it look decent or honest, it is not.

The bot has never been a part of any planned strategy.  Also, you know, my strategy for avoiding fees pays me a small amount most of the time, but on two occasions has almost cost me 4-7btc each, because people got in before my second.  It's really a calculated gamble more than a firm strategy.  As for the pre-agreed issue, I won't be doing that with my lower-initial rounds, and even for the larger ones I can't really see how giving myself 0 risk while other people have the same outcome as they would have had originally is "bad."  Happy?
For pledging:
Let's say I get 5btc in pledges.  I go ahead and make my 10btc round.  Total: 15btc.  You say this is a daunting hurdle for everyone to cross.
The concept of a pledge is such that people would have bet that much anyways.
Without pledges:
I go ahead and make my 10btc round.  People come in and invest 5btc.  Total: STILL 15btc!

I think most rounds are fair.  I participate in them, get some payments, loose some deposits, I've also got the jackpot some times.  The fact that there is a prize (jackpot) and opportunities to get paid for your deposits, make this site a game, not a real ponzi scheme (although the idea is based on it).  Most people don't cheat.  Of course they want to win.  Of course they like to make a profit.  I like it too.  But I risk and loose some times, and win others.  That's what makes it fun.

The rounds proposed by ineededausername are preagreed with some people to make sure he never risks.  The first deposit is tiny and the second huge, to still the fee from the house.  And the jackpot is stollen by a bot (they are saying they won't be doing it anymore, but now the bot source code is published, so there will be more than one bots around, I guess).  I go a bit further than you and, while I think most of the rounds are real games and fair, the ones hosted by  ineededausername are not only scams, but dirty dishonest planed strategies to still people's wallets.

That's exactly the point.  You never risk, you always profit.  You are not hosting a game.  You are taking away the money from people asking others to make sure you don't risk anything by promissing them to reduce their chances of loosing their deposits.  Nobody should be tricked into such kind of thing, ever.

Jon, it's not a scam when everyone's aware of the jackpot, the pot, the roi and the fees.  Everything's crystal clear.  It's entirely fair. 
The only thing unfair is the bot, which I now think should be banned.

I like gambling. But I only like gambling when it is a fair game.

I've been following this thread since its inception by the way. I just wanted to highlight the major point that this game is a huge ponzi scam being played by people who cheat. If people are happy continuing playing knowing this, then that is fine.

R.I.P. Bitponzi.

Damn, Jon, if you hate games that result in people losing money, why don't you get out of the gambling forum?

If people are desperate to throw away their bitcoins, could I give you my wallet address and simply give them to me?



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ponzi_scheme

Add to that people cheating with bots, and people are still wanting to play?