Topic: ★ BTC-RAFFLE.COM ★▐ Provably Fair ▐ Referral System ▐ Player VS Player ▐ (Read 4335 times)
January 12, 2016, 02:58:26 PM
Since I did not receive any reply from OP about my payment from the chat-box giveaway, I have left you a negative rating.
January 10, 2016, 05:34:19 AM
Nah bro im not, you mad i called you out for not knowing anything besides copy and pasting, a provably fair and the dice site idea?
January 10, 2016, 05:22:42 AM
Seems like you spent so much time trying to explain to the OP here 
And now it looks like wasted time unfortunately. 
And now it looks like wasted time unfortunately. It was kind of fun, but ultimately frustrating. He learned nothing.
January 10, 2016, 04:57:45 AM
To be honest, I think this site has a maximum of 3 different users per weeks. And once they lost everything, because by reading the whole thing down, OP is obviously cheating and they never comes back.
The stats showed on the site are obviously fake too.
P.S.: dooglus, I did not know you were a celebrity
. Seems like you spent so much time trying to explain to the OP here And now it looks like wasted time unfortunately.
The stats showed on the site are obviously fake too.
P.S.: dooglus, I did not know you were a celebrity
. Seems like you spent so much time trying to explain to the OP here And now it looks like wasted time unfortunately. 
January 10, 2016, 03:05:25 AM
You are so full of shit, you have only spent time telling us why its not fair. You run a dice site, you did not come up with anything!!! you got your provably fair with copy and paste, just like the dice site idea is copy and paste. Your a joke.
How many hours have you spent on this thread and looking at our code? 10? 20? more?
The fact is you are only here to bash us, if you are soooooo great at all this how about you spent 10-20 hours researching a way to make the site provably fair?
The fact is you wont. Because your a competitor. Because you are not skilled enough to come up with anything besides copy and paste.
Oh and your claim to us not being provably fair has not been proven. (But im sure you have an excuse to why you cant prove it)
How many hours have you spent on this thread and looking at our code? 10? 20? more?
The fact is you are only here to bash us, if you are soooooo great at all this how about you spent 10-20 hours researching a way to make the site provably fair?
The fact is you wont. Because your a competitor. Because you are not skilled enough to come up with anything besides copy and paste.
Oh and your claim to us not being provably fair has not been proven. (But im sure you have an excuse to why you cant prove it)
Are you mad? You seem mad. Your whole post was an insane rant full of factual errors and emotional outbursts.
Serious question. Are you on your period?
(Also, maybe you could try addressing some of my points - like the example I posted where you used a txid that never even appeared on the site you tell us to use to verify our plays until 10 minutes after the game was over)
If he's really 12 or 13 years old, which seems to be the case, what he's done is really quite impressive. Best advice I can think of though would be to just walk away from that mess of a site you made and not spend another second on this forum for a few years In the meantime, stay in school, make friends irl, go outside, touch a boob etc. When you return we can all laugh at what a retard you were back in 2016.
This would also be a good way to actually make dooglus jealous of you.
January 10, 2016, 02:23:31 AM
Least successful scam ever?
I will answer for the OP
Please do no get back into trolling the thread i thought we were past that.
No please, allow me to answer for OP.
Dooglus is obviously jealous and worried about competition for his site.
You can't be serious an. Dooglus has enough and probably the most abundant users for his site and dude remember
he was the one who started the first gambling site. So, at least think twice before you say he is jealous.
January 10, 2016, 01:47:28 AM
Nah bro im not, you mad i called you out for not knowing anything besides copy and pasting, a provably fair and the dice site idea?
I already addressed this. My site was the first dice site you could invest in. It inspired a hundred clones. To call it "copy and paste" is ignorant.
I think your butt hurt about me thinking of a better outside of the box idea, then some dumb ass dice site.
I don't think it is a better idea. From the player's point of view they have more control of the odds at a dice site. On your site I buy tickets and don't know what my chance of winning is going to be until the game is over. At a dice site I can pick whatever chance of winning I want.
And your too weak to do anything besides pick apart our system with your unproven theory. Why don't you use all the time spent to tell us a better more provably fair system.
I have tried explaining what is wrong with your system and made suggestions about how to fix it. I have asked how to verify various example games and you have been unable to answer. If your game was provably fair, you would be able to tell me how to verify those games, but you can't.
You choose to spend your time looking for flaws. That to me says your just butt hurt.
I'm just kind of ADD or something. It's what I do. Some people like to watch men fighting each other or throwing balls around. I like to find flaws in websites. Yours has been an unexpectedly rich source of them.
January 10, 2016, 01:06:06 AM
You are so full of shit, you have only spent time telling us why its not fair. You run a dice site, you did not come up with anything!!! you got your provably fair with copy and paste, just like the dice site idea is copy and paste. Your a joke.
How many hours have you spent on this thread and looking at our code? 10? 20? more?
The fact is you are only here to bash us, if you are soooooo great at all this how about you spent 10-20 hours researching a way to make the site provably fair?
The fact is you wont. Because your a competitor. Because you are not skilled enough to come up with anything besides copy and paste.
Oh and your claim to us not being provably fair has not been proven. (But im sure you have an excuse to why you cant prove it)
How many hours have you spent on this thread and looking at our code? 10? 20? more?
The fact is you are only here to bash us, if you are soooooo great at all this how about you spent 10-20 hours researching a way to make the site provably fair?
The fact is you wont. Because your a competitor. Because you are not skilled enough to come up with anything besides copy and paste.
Oh and your claim to us not being provably fair has not been proven. (But im sure you have an excuse to why you cant prove it)
Are you mad? You seem mad. Your whole post was an insane rant full of factual errors and emotional outbursts.
Serious question. Are you on your period?
(Also, maybe you could try addressing some of my points - like the example I posted where you used a txid that never even appeared on the site you tell us to use to verify our plays until 10 minutes after the game was over)
Nah bro im not, you mad i called you out for not knowing anything besides copy and pasting, a provably fair and the dice site idea?
I think your butt hurt about me thinking of a better outside of the box idea, then some dumb ass dice site. And your too weak to do anything besides pick apart our system with your unproven theory. Why don't you use all the time spent to tell us a better more provably fair system.
You choose to spend your time looking for flaws. That to me says your just butt hurt.
January 10, 2016, 12:12:04 AM
You are so full of shit, you have only spent time telling us why its not fair. You run a dice site, you did not come up with anything!!! you got your provably fair with copy and paste, just like the dice site idea is copy and paste. Your a joke.
How many hours have you spent on this thread and looking at our code? 10? 20? more?
The fact is you are only here to bash us, if you are soooooo great at all this how about you spent 10-20 hours researching a way to make the site provably fair?
The fact is you wont. Because your a competitor. Because you are not skilled enough to come up with anything besides copy and paste.
Oh and your claim to us not being provably fair has not been proven. (But im sure you have an excuse to why you cant prove it)
How many hours have you spent on this thread and looking at our code? 10? 20? more?
The fact is you are only here to bash us, if you are soooooo great at all this how about you spent 10-20 hours researching a way to make the site provably fair?
The fact is you wont. Because your a competitor. Because you are not skilled enough to come up with anything besides copy and paste.
Oh and your claim to us not being provably fair has not been proven. (But im sure you have an excuse to why you cant prove it)
Are you mad? You seem mad. Your whole post was an insane rant full of factual errors and emotional outbursts.
Serious question. Are you on your period?
(Also, maybe you could try addressing some of my points - like the example I posted where you used a txid that never even appeared on the site you tell us to use to verify our plays until 10 minutes after the game was over)
January 09, 2016, 10:49:09 PM
I came up with an explanation for why I was seeing the weird results I was seeing yesterday: the site doesn't use blockchain.info at all to get its feed of new transactions on the network. Instead their run their own node, and watch have that report the most recently seen transaction when they need it.
They were only telling us "you can verify by watching blockchain.info" because that is *a* way of watching the transactions, not *the* way that the site uses. They were assuming that everyone seems the same transactions in the same order with the same timing, which obviously isn't the case. And so their system is further from provably fair than I previously thought to be the case. The site can simply pretend not to have seen a transaction which gives a result they don't like, and we can't prove otherwise.
Well, to be fair there is no way of dividing an power of 10 by 3 equally.
Their client-side code which calculates the ranges has a special case saying that if any range ends with 9999 then set it to be 10000:
You can always be the last player by being the last user to buy the smallest number of tickets.
I wasn't mentioning it because although it does seem likely there's no way of proving it.
Either way it seems that OP has abandoned this thread, and possibly the site too. The promised giveaway in the site's chatbox seems not to have happened, and the guy complaining in this thread about a withdrawal not happening went unanswered.
Least successful scam ever?
Edit: sorry, that was rude. I'm frustrated that I spent so much time on this thread trying to help and it was all for naught.
They were only telling us "you can verify by watching blockchain.info" because that is *a* way of watching the transactions, not *the* way that the site uses. They were assuming that everyone seems the same transactions in the same order with the same timing, which obviously isn't the case. And so their system is further from provably fair than I previously thought to be the case. The site can simply pretend not to have seen a transaction which gives a result they don't like, and we can't prove otherwise.
He can't even do maths correctly.
I won't be surprised if he answer to you 'stop trolling' instead of a good relevant answer.
I mean, when there's 3 players in, their luck are 33.33% (which gives a total of 99.99% and cannot be 100%..) But, it's shown as 100% and they give a BONUS amount of tickets to the third player... (cheat & unfair?)
I won't be surprised if he answer to you 'stop trolling' instead of a good relevant answer.
I mean, when there's 3 players in, their luck are 33.33% (which gives a total of 99.99% and cannot be 100%..) But, it's shown as 100% and they give a BONUS amount of tickets to the third player... (cheat & unfair?)
Well, to be fair there is no way of dividing an power of 10 by 3 equally.
Their client-side code which calculates the ranges has a special case saying that if any range ends with 9999 then set it to be 10000:
Code:
self.Participants.forEach(function (par) {
par.playerNumber = playerNumber + 1;
playerNumber += Math.round(par.percentage * 100);
playerNumber = playerNumber >= 9999 ?10000: playerNumber;
par.playerNumber += ' - ' + playerNumber;
});
You can always be the last player by being the last user to buy the smallest number of tickets.
Has anyone brought up the fact that it's obviously bots playing on his site 24/7, although they seem to be denying it?
I wasn't mentioning it because although it does seem likely there's no way of proving it.
Either way it seems that OP has abandoned this thread, and possibly the site too. The promised giveaway in the site's chatbox seems not to have happened, and the guy complaining in this thread about a withdrawal not happening went unanswered.
Edit: sorry, that was rude. I'm frustrated that I spent so much time on this thread trying to help and it was all for naught.
Lets start with this.
I'm frustrated that I spent so much time on this thread trying to help and it was all for naught.
You are so full of shit, you have only spent time telling us why its not fair. You run a dice site, you did not come up with anything!!! you got your provably fair with copy and paste, just like the dice site idea is copy and paste. Your a joke.
How many hours have you spent on this thread and looking at our code? 10? 20? more?
The fact is you are only here to bash us, if you are soooooo great at all this how about you spent 10-20 hours researching a way to make the site provably fair?
The fact is you wont. Because your a competitor. Because you are not skilled enough to come up with anything besides copy and paste.
Oh and your claim to us not being provably fair has not been proven. (But im sure you have an excuse to why you cant prove it)
Serious question. How old are you?
January 09, 2016, 09:40:31 PM
I came up with an explanation for why I was seeing the weird results I was seeing yesterday: the site doesn't use blockchain.info at all to get its feed of new transactions on the network. Instead their run their own node, and watch have that report the most recently seen transaction when they need it.
They were only telling us "you can verify by watching blockchain.info" because that is *a* way of watching the transactions, not *the* way that the site uses. They were assuming that everyone seems the same transactions in the same order with the same timing, which obviously isn't the case. And so their system is further from provably fair than I previously thought to be the case. The site can simply pretend not to have seen a transaction which gives a result they don't like, and we can't prove otherwise.
Well, to be fair there is no way of dividing an power of 10 by 3 equally.
Their client-side code which calculates the ranges has a special case saying that if any range ends with 9999 then set it to be 10000:
You can always be the last player by being the last user to buy the smallest number of tickets.
I wasn't mentioning it because although it does seem likely there's no way of proving it.
Either way it seems that OP has abandoned this thread, and possibly the site too. The promised giveaway in the site's chatbox seems not to have happened, and the guy complaining in this thread about a withdrawal not happening went unanswered.
Least successful scam ever?
Edit: sorry, that was rude. I'm frustrated that I spent so much time on this thread trying to help and it was all for naught.
They were only telling us "you can verify by watching blockchain.info" because that is *a* way of watching the transactions, not *the* way that the site uses. They were assuming that everyone seems the same transactions in the same order with the same timing, which obviously isn't the case. And so their system is further from provably fair than I previously thought to be the case. The site can simply pretend not to have seen a transaction which gives a result they don't like, and we can't prove otherwise.
He can't even do maths correctly.
I won't be surprised if he answer to you 'stop trolling' instead of a good relevant answer.
I mean, when there's 3 players in, their luck are 33.33% (which gives a total of 99.99% and cannot be 100%..) But, it's shown as 100% and they give a BONUS amount of tickets to the third player... (cheat & unfair?)
I won't be surprised if he answer to you 'stop trolling' instead of a good relevant answer.
I mean, when there's 3 players in, their luck are 33.33% (which gives a total of 99.99% and cannot be 100%..) But, it's shown as 100% and they give a BONUS amount of tickets to the third player... (cheat & unfair?)
Well, to be fair there is no way of dividing an power of 10 by 3 equally.
Their client-side code which calculates the ranges has a special case saying that if any range ends with 9999 then set it to be 10000:
Code:
self.Participants.forEach(function (par) {
par.playerNumber = playerNumber + 1;
playerNumber += Math.round(par.percentage * 100);
playerNumber = playerNumber >= 9999 ?10000: playerNumber;
par.playerNumber += ' - ' + playerNumber;
});
You can always be the last player by being the last user to buy the smallest number of tickets.
Has anyone brought up the fact that it's obviously bots playing on his site 24/7, although they seem to be denying it?
I wasn't mentioning it because although it does seem likely there's no way of proving it.
Either way it seems that OP has abandoned this thread, and possibly the site too. The promised giveaway in the site's chatbox seems not to have happened, and the guy complaining in this thread about a withdrawal not happening went unanswered.
Edit: sorry, that was rude. I'm frustrated that I spent so much time on this thread trying to help and it was all for naught.
Lets start with this.
I'm frustrated that I spent so much time on this thread trying to help and it was all for naught.
You are so full of shit, you have only spent time telling us why its not fair. You run a dice site, you did not come up with anything!!! you got your provably fair with copy and paste, just like the dice site idea is copy and paste. Your a joke.
How many hours have you spent on this thread and looking at our code? 10? 20? more?
The fact is you are only here to bash us, if you are soooooo great at all this how about you spent 10-20 hours researching a way to make the site provably fair?
The fact is you wont. Because your a competitor. Because you are not skilled enough to come up with anything besides copy and paste.
Oh and your claim to us not being provably fair has not been proven. (But im sure you have an excuse to why you cant prove it)
January 09, 2016, 03:20:25 PM
Least successful scam ever?
I will answer for the OP
Please do no get back into trolling the thread i thought we were past that.
No please, allow me to answer for OP.
Dooglus is obviously jealous and worried about competition for his site.
January 09, 2016, 02:03:48 PM
I will answer for the OP
Please do no get back into trolling the thread i thought we were past that.
Please do no get back into trolling the thread i thought we were past that.
You're right. I edited my post.
January 09, 2016, 01:53:20 PM
Least successful scam ever?
I will answer for the OP
Please do no get back into trolling the thread i thought we were past that.
January 09, 2016, 01:43:35 PM
I came up with an explanation for why I was seeing the weird results I was seeing yesterday: the site doesn't use blockchain.info at all to get its feed of new transactions on the network. Instead their run their own node, and watch have that report the most recently seen transaction when they need it.
They were only telling us "you can verify by watching blockchain.info" because that is *a* way of watching the transactions, not *the* way that the site uses. They were assuming that everyone seems the same transactions in the same order with the same timing, which obviously isn't the case. And so their system is further from provably fair than I previously thought to be the case. The site can simply pretend not to have seen a transaction which gives a result they don't like, and we can't prove otherwise.
Well, to be fair there is no way of dividing an power of 10 by 3 equally.
Their client-side code which calculates the ranges has a special case saying that if any range ends with 9999 then set it to be 10000:
You can always be the last player by being the last user to buy the smallest number of tickets.
I wasn't mentioning it because although it does seem likely there's no way of proving it.
Either way it seems that OP has abandoned this thread, and possibly the site too. The promised giveaway in the site's chatbox seems not to have happened, and the guy complaining in this thread about a withdrawal not happening went unanswered.
Least successful scam ever?
Edit: sorry, that was rude. I'm frustrated that I spent so much time on this thread trying to help and it was all for naught.
They were only telling us "you can verify by watching blockchain.info" because that is *a* way of watching the transactions, not *the* way that the site uses. They were assuming that everyone seems the same transactions in the same order with the same timing, which obviously isn't the case. And so their system is further from provably fair than I previously thought to be the case. The site can simply pretend not to have seen a transaction which gives a result they don't like, and we can't prove otherwise.
He can't even do maths correctly.
I won't be surprised if he answer to you 'stop trolling' instead of a good relevant answer.
I mean, when there's 3 players in, their luck are 33.33% (which gives a total of 99.99% and cannot be 100%..) But, it's shown as 100% and they give a BONUS amount of tickets to the third player... (cheat & unfair?)
I won't be surprised if he answer to you 'stop trolling' instead of a good relevant answer.
I mean, when there's 3 players in, their luck are 33.33% (which gives a total of 99.99% and cannot be 100%..) But, it's shown as 100% and they give a BONUS amount of tickets to the third player... (cheat & unfair?)
Well, to be fair there is no way of dividing an power of 10 by 3 equally.
Their client-side code which calculates the ranges has a special case saying that if any range ends with 9999 then set it to be 10000:
Code:
self.Participants.forEach(function (par) {
par.playerNumber = playerNumber + 1;
playerNumber += Math.round(par.percentage * 100);
playerNumber = playerNumber >= 9999 ?10000: playerNumber;
par.playerNumber += ' - ' + playerNumber;
});
You can always be the last player by being the last user to buy the smallest number of tickets.
Has anyone brought up the fact that it's obviously bots playing on his site 24/7, although they seem to be denying it?
I wasn't mentioning it because although it does seem likely there's no way of proving it.
Either way it seems that OP has abandoned this thread, and possibly the site too. The promised giveaway in the site's chatbox seems not to have happened, and the guy complaining in this thread about a withdrawal not happening went unanswered.
Edit: sorry, that was rude. I'm frustrated that I spent so much time on this thread trying to help and it was all for naught.
January 09, 2016, 01:20:58 PM
I'm pretty sure too that they are bots.
January 09, 2016, 11:30:51 AM
Mr. Raffle,
I wonder if you are mature enough to answer these three questions....
Is btc-raffle provably fair right now?
In my mind yes, there is a theory someone could cheat it but it has not been proven to be true only speclaactions
I wonder if you are mature enough to answer these three questions....
Is btc-raffle provably fair right now?
In my mind yes, there is a theory someone could cheat it but it has not been proven to be true only speclaactions
lol
Mr. Raffle, why do you feel it necessary to preface your answer with "in my mind"
Dont you see, if you can't disprove the theory that someone could cheat - you can't prove that your system is fair.
Has anyone brought up the fact that it's obviously bots playing on his site 24/7, although they seem to be denying it?
January 09, 2016, 05:44:58 AM
He can't even do maths correctly.
I won't be surprised if he answer to you 'stop trolling' instead of a good relevant answer.
I mean, when there's 3 players in, their luck are 33.33% (which gives a total of 99.99% and cannot be 100%..) But, it's shown as 100% and they give a BONUS amount of tickets to the third player... (cheat & unfair?)
I won't be surprised if he answer to you 'stop trolling' instead of a good relevant answer.
I mean, when there's 3 players in, their luck are 33.33% (which gives a total of 99.99% and cannot be 100%..) But, it's shown as 100% and they give a BONUS amount of tickets to the third player... (cheat & unfair?)
January 08, 2016, 04:38:31 PM
This one is even worse:
Check out txid 7815d906e350297a03f64a0df531c7822d98fb6d5d0b3062c328254d6378f9d6:
You used a transaction to decide the winner of a game at 21:20 but the transaction wasn't seen by blockchain.info until it got into a block at 21:31...
Can you explain this?
Code:
{ amount: 0.0008,
lobbyid: 0,
percentage: 8889,
participant:
{ _id: '528ad796-0744-48e1-bc1d-800d28603c0e',
avatar: 'avatar_528ad796-0744-48e1-bc1d-800d28603c0e.gif',
userName: 'Katiness' },
betTime: '2016-01-08T21:20:27.306Z',
luckyNumber: 2707,
hash: '7815d906e350297a03f64a0df531c7822d98fb6d5d0b3062c328254d6378f9d6',
totalAmount: 0.0009000000000000001,
clientSeed: 'Katimonk-90000',
profitAmount: 0.0008990000000000001 }
Check out txid 7815d906e350297a03f64a0df531c7822d98fb6d5d0b3062c328254d6378f9d6:
You used a transaction to decide the winner of a game at 21:20 but the transaction wasn't seen by blockchain.info until it got into a block at 21:31...
Can you explain this?
January 08, 2016, 04:27:28 PM
Where do you get the txids from that you flash up one per second during the 10 second countdown?
I just saw one flash up that didn't appear on blockchain.info until over a minute after the game was over.
The first 3 txids you flashed up, with their blockchain.info timestamps were:
21:13:46: 7759136e7df90ee330ab76831297726e2744870d307012dcaf4ab283d96c8f76
21:15:04: 380d0e1201b9b8c824ee76d5587dbadccb11df542554b86030693af82cdb9acc
21:13:48: ca59f4f2db0da8a83c903a4512c8df292ed05b6861e8cd958097da86fe995c9d
Where did that 2nd one come from? blockchain.info had not seen it at the time.
At the end of the game you sent me:
I just saw one flash up that didn't appear on blockchain.info until over a minute after the game was over.
The first 3 txids you flashed up, with their blockchain.info timestamps were:
21:13:46: 7759136e7df90ee330ab76831297726e2744870d307012dcaf4ab283d96c8f76
21:15:04: 380d0e1201b9b8c824ee76d5587dbadccb11df542554b86030693af82cdb9acc
21:13:48: ca59f4f2db0da8a83c903a4512c8df292ed05b6861e8cd958097da86fe995c9d
Where did that 2nd one come from? blockchain.info had not seen it at the time.
At the end of the game you sent me:
Code:
{ amount: 0.0001,
lobbyid: 0,
percentage: 5000,
participant:
{ _id: '9b047b92-f473-414b-9449-e99c9da19448',
avatar: '',
userName: 'foodporn' },
betTime: '2016-01-08T21:13:57.847Z',
luckyNumber: 2022,
hash: 'ca06036ab0af1eeaaf77b5b875f3c1ea76bba546394337033a89e2f76a599caf',
totalAmount: 0.0002,
clientSeed: 'foodasht-20000',
profitAmount: 0.000199 }
Jump to: