The issue is only like 3% of the original distribution has been claimed, and far less of the total. Assuming it'll keep at 0.003 would require capital investments of 10-20x the current cap, if not more, to sustain it (and that just assumed 30-60% of the coins will be claimed).

Hard to tell for sure what's going to happen, but the price is still on a slow decline.

I like it when the stake is above 1.0000. Not because it pays more, but because it means people are using CLAM (a very important part of giving any coin value is liquidity/usage).

So question: I know you've been kind of hesitant to run another site alongside the main one, but as we saw from DOGE and BTC together, it increased the play as both sites had a great deal of players. Would you consider opening up a second site such that it'd be CLAM and another? From a market perspective, I don't see a downside. And since it should be almost just like the CLAM site, management should be easy enough as well, no?

I am wondering if Dooglus collects 10% of earnings from stake as well as earnings from gambling profits for commission, or just from site gambling profits?

Yes.

Doog collects 10% of the profits.  (Gambling + Stakes)

From my understand yes.  Every Sunday his 10% earnings is also invested back into the site though his account. 

If you divest early and pay early then it sits in Limbo until Sunday when it is invested in his account.

Can you explain this? I don't understand how the depth of market (it's not deep) is in any way related to the fact that it is a proof of stake coin.

The problem as I see it is that there is only one widely used service which accepts CLAM and so most of the CLAM is currently there. Given the choice between letting your coins sit idle on an exchange and actively working for you on Just-Dice most people pick the latter. Would that be any different if the coin was proof of work instead?

Also, note that if you put a decent buy order on Poloniex it really doesn't take long for someone to see it, deposit CLAMs, and dump into it. It's not like it's hard to buy CLAMs, you just have to be willing to place a reasonable buy order and wait a while.

I think it depends on when you got in... not sure when the site went active, but my clams are up in value by 160%, not including the investing or staking.

160% is the profit he made on the appreciation of the CLAM price since he bought them. Someone who invested CLAM when the site opened must have made something like 0.7%/day that is compounded so +26% in 33 days but someone who invest when the site opened and never reinvest or divested could answer more accurately; I bet dooglus invest 1, 10 or 100 CLAM when he opened just to have some statistics.

Last price is 0.0059 so to be up on your investment in just-dice, you need to have bought at 0.0074 or less  (if the +26% figure is accurate but it's just an estimate) which is the case of most investors.

Doog, I am a former investor in your Doge-dice.com site (I was known there as Fido) and I have a pertinent question that I didn't see anyone ask. Excuse me if I am repeating it, honestly I did not sift through all 183 pages here, but I did go through most.

My question pertains to your future plans about this site. CLAM is the currency of choice now, and until you restarted your website, almost no one was interested in this currency, relatively speaking. Your act of instating this as the only currency of JD actually caused a massive price spike. As a result, ~65% of the currency is invested here now.
Now, one of the main reasons you have cited for closing down JD and DD was that you were nervous about holding so much of people's money. However, on your blog post from June 23rd, 2014 you and Deb cited the main reason being the uncertainty around Canada's then-newly enacted regulations concerning money transmitting, online gambling, etc.
Part of my question then is, which one is it? If you closed your sites due to regulations, what has changed now? You are still in Canada from what we know, and the regulations that spooked you in the first place would very much still apply to your site; legally, it makes no difference if you accept CLAM or DOGE or BTC for investments, CLAM now has the status of a widely use means of exchange with a market cap of close to $1M and growing daily.
Second part of my question is, if your main reason for closing down your sites before was the stress from handling large sums of money, then how do you anticipate handling the situation when JD inevitably grows much bigger? Your top investor now, per your most recent blog post, already has ~50,000 CLAM invested, which is ~$75,000USD at current market prices. And that's just one person. Plus, the entire online gambling community has trust in you and will seek out your sites first and foremost to invest, so growth is all but guaranteed to continue further.
Which brings me to the main part of my question: the reasons that you cited for closing down DD and JD in the first place, it seems to me, still apply (or will apply soon again). What then? Will you abruptly shut down the site again? How will you handle it? The problem now is that if you were to do that again, the consequences will be catastrophic: people will make a run to exchange their now useless CLAM's for BTC and it will crash the price, wiping out a huge part of their funds. Forgive me for using the word "useless", I think the idea behind CLAM is great, but let's face it, CLAMS are mainly used and bought now so that people can gamble on your site. Your idea to use CLAM because they are more evenly distributed, while noble, will not prevent people from buying CLAM and driving the price up.
Now, some folks may say "well, if you want to be greedy and buy CLAMS only so you can invest here for a profit, that's your risk", and I will agree with a part of that, that's why I am asking these questions so that I can alleviate that risk to an extent. Doog, you may even claim that you don't care about large investors in here, and that you prefer not to have them, since you yourself have stated that you want this site to be mainly for fun.... why have the investment option at all then? Or why not cap it to a maximum per person/IP address, so that for the most part you will not hold too much of anyone's money?

I appreciate you taking the time to read this and consider my questions. You have given us no reason to doubt you, and I want to make it clear to everyone reading this that while being cautious due to the new challenges presented by the current course this site has taken, I believe in Doog, I think he is trustworthy, and he is the only person who owns such site that I would consider putting my money into, otherwise I wouldn't even bother asking these questions.

I've tried a couple of times to read and reply to the big wall-of-text post, but didn't get to it yet.

I've been working on code to allow big investors to reduce their counter-party risk by declaring "offsite" coins that they want to invest.

It goes like this (in the prototype):

You have 10k coins. You want to invest them at JD, but you don't want to trust them to a dodgy dice site that might run off with them. You also don't want to contribute to the centralisation of all the CLAMs.

So you deposit 1000 coins, invest them, then in the chat you type "/cold 9000" which means "I have 9000 more coins in at home that I also want to invest". The site takes you at your word, adds another 9k to the bankroll, and you get to risk 0.5% of the 10k total on every roll from now on. The max profit on the site goes up an extra 180 in addition to the 20 it went up when you invested the 1000.

If the site does badly you'll take losses, and they come out of the 1k you deposited. If it ever gets to the point that you can no longer afford for the site to suffer a full max-profit loss without it driving your on-site investment negative, your "/cold" command will be undone, and you'll be left with just whatever is left of your initial 1000 coins invested.

This gives you all the benefits of depositing and investing your full 10k bankroll with only 10% of the counter-party risk.

I've put a rough prototype up at https://doge-dice.com/ for you to try it out. It spams the chat with INFO: lines about upcoming forced divestments and such like, which wouldn't appear in a final release, but I think they help make it clearer what's going on. It also gives you a target to aim for - "if I win just 2k more I can force <user 27> out of their position" etc.

So I figure it's worth having people play around with it before making any decisions about how and whether to go live with it on JD. The test site uses worthless play coins. You get 100 free with every new account, and people are mostly happy to tip them to you if you run out. Please let me know if you discover any issues with it, and I'd like to hear comments and ideas about how it should be changed before going live on JD.

Currently you can set your "/cold" amount to be anything up to 199 times your actual onsite investment amount, meaning the total of onsite and offsite investments can be up to 200 times your actual onsite amount. Since you risk up to 0.5% of your investment per roll, that means that specifying the maximum of 199 times for the offsite amount is effectively saying you are prepared to risk your entire deposit per roll. That's clearly insane.

Some have suggested that I should pick a nice low maximum multiplier, like 10x or something. But I worry that if the maximum is half sensible then everyone will use it, whether they have coins offsite or not. What should the maximum be?

I notice that with this system there's no way to risk less than 0.5% of your deposit per roll. So how about if we lower the max-profit-percent to 0.1%, and increase the maximum multiplier to 1000x - this gives the same top limit, but allows ultra-conservative people the chance of running at 1/10 Kelly.

Another question is how to distribute the staking rewards. If there are two investors, both deposit 1000 coins, and one uses "/cold 3000" to increase his effective investment to 4000, he now has 80% of the bankroll, and gets 80% of all betting profits and losses. But what about staking rewards? Should he also get 80% of those? Or should they be split in proportion to the actual onsite invested amount, since those are the only coins that are earning staking rewards?

Lots of questions - hopefully I'll get some thoughtful answers...