Duckdice have answered in the scam-accusation thread and have been open to ideas of the community. Nothing more to talk about a player who failed to read the pop-up message.
Indeed more to talk about.
DuckDice sent me a PM to which I had responded 2 days ago. They have yet to reply to my concerns.
Hey man,
you had many interesting insights on how bonuses should work, what is your site actually?
I don't have one.
and a few words regarding the scam topic, this one is a bit of a principle position because the guy tried to blackmail us from the first second and honestly speaking we don't believe that he missed a confirmation screen, so the only answer here is that he knew exact amount to subtracted but wanted to do it anyway and get a full refund later.
We don't want to make such precedent.
Supposing that the 'locked balance' only counts positive profit and not losses, if one, for example, loses and gains 1 BTC upon a 1 BTC deposit and bonus, then will the locked balance then show 2 BTC?
If this is what you are suggesting then I find it illogical. The locked balance should count both profit and loss. After all, at the end of it, you're not unlocking the 'locked balance' but rather the player balance at the time. There was already another idea mentioned, where one wagers their own balance first. That would be superior to this in terms of how bonuses work.
Consider the following:
A random player deposits 1 BTC and chooses the 120% bonus. The wagering requirement is 132 BTC.
The player chooses 0.25 BTC bets, winning 16 times and losing 20.
That is a gross profit of 4 BTC and a net loss of 1 BTC.
The player is left with 1.2 BTC and decides to bet 1 BTC to break even. They win.
Gross profit: 5 BTC | Net loss: 0 BTC
The player sees the locked balance at 5 BTC. They are now
forced to play. That's unfair.
If he would just agree to make one more deposit (we actually never asked to deposit 5btc, anything above 0.01btc is eligible) we would've just add his amount as a bonus as a "consolation".
You couldn't have reverted anything to back when the bonus was active?
If they simply made the bonus conditions such that one wagered their own balance before the bonus, then all would be well and this situation would be over.
