1. does not matter/not relevant
2. no one knows as Manl has not broached the subject about this user AT ALL. Fishy?
3. they only got back their initial deposits, NOT the winnings that they should have won, had the code been correct and winning bets not been skipped.
4. they only received whatever was left, 15%. IF they paid out Mateo, then fine, they fucked up and paid out a potential scammer, and the investors were on the hook for that. BUT if they did not pay out Mateo, then they should refund the investors with that money. have they? Nope.
whats your defense UV?
1. 100% relevant if not - then how can you blame him
2. Fishy but does anyone other than manl have bet log / seed info?
3. So the "site" got rolled back, same as PRC if I remember
4. They invested so they where gambling with +EV (assumes new correct RNG installed to prevent the screwed up one) - I watched Nakowa go from +8000 to -8000 to +8000 BTC. PeterR did a great calculation on this for JD on Nakowa - might be someone who you all pay to verify
My defense - I did not do it so why do I need a defense - I was not invested
1) my arguments don't rely on assuming if manl is or is not mateo. i'll allow people to examine the evidence
2) Manl has not agreed to release any info on mateo. so we'll never know for sure.
3) this is NOT the same as the PRC rollback. PRC went further to payout bets that WOULD have won, had you been afflicted by the bad code. DB did not do that. DB simply made your initial deposit whole. Totally not the same thing.
4) we've already done mathematical analysis on this player that what he did had an extremely small chance of happening. What nakowa did was perhaps 2-3SD from the mean? but what Mateo did was almost 5SD from the mean. ALSO, it is not an argument that JUST because investors happened to profit from bad code, that its fair that they lose it back to some lucky player. Also, what happens if an investor had JUST invested that day? Did not even get a chance to "profit" from bad code, and gets hit by mateo's "lucky" run?