Thoughts on something

Yeah I was going for #1 in leaderboard when EXTAND and Lilbeary vs'd each other to increase in the leaderboard but lose money to commission. I think at first they thought they'd lose like 300~400m to commission then gain the 700m from the top 2 spots but when I kept going back to #1 they kept losing and wanted to win to minimize their losses.

They lost 1b to commission, gained 700m though. I lost ~400m gained 100m actually risking vs bot. I'm pretty sad right now ):

What's your thoughts, do you think people should just vs each other to get the top prizes on the leaderboard or should the prizes go to people actually betting?

*Just asking for thoughts, not asking for any change

*Atleast the hosts got their commission (though Xine got 85%+ of it because of a glitch lololol) and players got jackpots

1B x 85%= 850M
Bank was made.
OT: I don't think that should be allowed anymore. Especially if they're seriously just going to keep transferring to each other and bet to lose only commission..

You can do whatever you'd like with your money.

Daft Punk wrote:You can do whatever you'd like with your money.

Well that's obvious but I'm talking about the integrity of the two choices I put

Integrity was not a part of your question. Your question wasn't well constructed either, to be completely honest.

People have the right to do what they want with their money. Whether or not going vs themselves to win the jackpot is not relevant nor does it seem to be profitable / beneficial to them. They are people who are wagering, but they are just losing to commission every time. I can choose to bet against myself in roulette, for example, and bet equally on both Black & Red. It's not the optimal play in the game but it is allowed. If they don't want you to win the jackpot and are willing to suffer the monetary consequence to prevent it, then it is allowed. It seems low and selfish, but it is an absolutely justifiable situation and should not be prevented. You may lose respect for them, as I may, but in the end it is your right to give your money away.

Daft Punk wrote:Integrity was not a part of your question.  Your question wasn't well constructed either, to be completely honest.  

People have the right to do what they want with their money.  Whether or not going vs themselves to win the jackpot is not relevant nor does it seem to be profitable / beneficial to them.  They are people who are wagering, but they are just losing to commission every time.  I can choose to bet against myself in roulette, for example, and bet equally on both Black & Red.  It's not the optimal play in the game but it is allowed.  If they don't want you to win the jackpot and are willing to suffer the monetary consequence to prevent it, then it is allowed.  It seems low and selfish, but it is an absolutely justifiable situation and should not be prevented.  You may lose respect for them, as I may, but in the end it is your right to give your money away.  

Sorry I thought people would be able to reach the conclusion of the question being a question on whether it's right or wrong (in their opinion) without me spelling it out. And yeah I see your point

Agreed with Ryan, but that does suck Cannons :l

Slash wrote:Agreed with Ryan, but that does suck Cannons :l

I took painkillers but the pain won't go away ):

semi cooked semi raw cod wrote:

Slash wrote:Agreed with Ryan, but that does suck Cannons :l

I took painkillers but the pain won't go away ):

  

Like Daft already said, I think that because it is their money they are able to do whatever they wish with it. If they want to risk the money against each other and knowing that the commish will add up, its their choice.

Sometimes you have to be smarter than Cora Credits cannon

Sorry Cannons, you just got outplayed.

CM wrote:Sorry Cannons, you just got outplayed.

Not true, he just got screwed out of the jackpot by people who were willing to spend more in comm than the jackpot would pay back.

It was the dick move of the year :s