If the payout is too high a direct approach would be to simply reduce the earnings rate and thus the payout. People trust known, definable parameters. They don't trust chances. People still trust a bank which lowers the interest rate accounts are paying. They don't trust one which says there's a chance they'll get their money back. Simply lowering the return is straightforward and relatively trustworthy.
I think you misunderstand the system. It's not a chance based system but rather a competitive platform. However, simply reducing the payout rates immediately issues 2 problems. The main problem is it does not solve anything. It only postpones the issue. Secondly, the current payout rate is already quite low and I believe that further reducing the payouts would cause an equal discomfort amongst some other members.
Any change will always make people uncomfortable - it has always been this way. Remember all the changes to the Facebook design? Many of my friends hated changes but are still regular users today. I can only see the competitive payout scheme as a step in the right direction. Many games are competitive in some way which is appealing to many users.
I do not misunderstand the system. However you wish to spin it there's only a chance an individual will be paid. In effect it's no different than when a site goes scam and stops paying some of the users, it's just got a fancy ribbon around it. If the site can't be maintained without not paying the majority of users each month you should just shut it down. Enough said.
Hi, it is very different to a site that goes scam. There is no issue paying members, with the new update we intended to make the game more competitive there is still the top 300 people that get paid. I do see what you mean however.