Doog, I saw you tinkering with Doge-dice yesterday and understand your busy schedule, thank you for taking the time to update us.
I think what you are experimenting with is very innovative and does potentially alleviate the risk for investors while adding another dimension to the entire risk/reward idea. I will think about what you said today and hopefully I can come up with a more insightful answer to your questions.

In the mean time, one thing I can say right away pertains to the staking: I am convinced that staking should be given out based only on the coins that are actually invested on-site, and should not be leveraged. The logic is as follows: Investor puts in 1000 clam and doescold 9000, there are two possibilities here, one is that he is truthful about his off-site holdings, or he isn't. If he is truthful, his coins will claim a stake as long as he has the client running, therefore he shouldn't be rewarded with a double-stake from JD. If he is not truthful, then he doesn't get stake from JD on imaginary funds.

Like I said, I will think about the rest of your proposal and if I can add something further of value, I will certainly do that. I will also start keeping track of my account there and report my findings as time goes by.

Once again, I applaud you for not stopping to think about how you can better this experience for everyone, and for coming up with such ground-breaking ideas!

On a side-note, that still doesn't completely address my first questions above completely, but I understand you are busy so I will wait patiently, hopefully you can get to them at some point

Regards,

I think having a maximum investment per person/IP address is not a good idea as it is possible to cheat and a big amount of money is relative to each person's situation.

It's better to leave the choice to the investors on how much they risk. The default risk should be 0.5%.

The stacking rewards should be rewarded in relation to the investment held on just-dice because that's the coins held on just-dice that bring those rewards. Also the CLAM offsite will already stack coins and some investors will want to keep their CLAM on just-dice to avoid having to keep the CLAM client online at all times.

The exchange risk limits the amount invested in just-dice and it's up to each one of us to make a decision of how much he wants to risk.

That's precisely part of the issue, I based my logic on the premise that some, if not most, will declare more offsite coins than they actually have. Since we have no way of knowing the truth, we should level the playing field by rewarding only coins that are actually deposited.

I do foresee a run to declare close to the max amount of coins by people who desire to maintain their "stake" as you mentioned. Which, as you mentioned, will over-leverage people and make the site prone to wild swings in capitalization and max profit in case a whale comes in.

I also see the alternative that you mentioned, but I think the negatives outweigh the positives. By the way, could it be possible to separate staking from profit on the site, without doing a major re-design? For example, if profits are awarded based on online and offline coin amounts, but staking is rewarded only for online coins, then it seems like it would be more practical to separate the two income streams?

You should not allow users to increase their staking amount for offsite coins.  Offsite coins are not staked by JD so they should not be credited towards those users.  That would allow double dipping as someone already pointed out. 

As long as variable kelly is available for all investors, I can see only one problem with the kelly multiplier idea, and I admit it is minor.  Whales tend to win or lose in streaks.  So you should always use max allowable kelly and put the smallest fraction you can on the site.  If a whale loses, great you rack up, if a whale wins, you only lose your amount on the site.  So you'll see a lot of fluctuations in max profit.

Pretty minor, thanks for all your work to make Just-Dice such a good site.

There are a few people that like to bet on DD (incuding me) and have fun. Was wondering if you could integrate a bot that tips - same as JD's chat-bot (tips only), or the chat-bot's commands fully? Would be awesome.

It's tough, really. I'm a pretty small holder myself, I'll admit, so for me, it's either JD staking or I wouldn't get anything. I'm definitely in the majority with that as well, which creates a bit of a complication when it comes to being objective on the matter.

You have to keep in mind, though, that the risk of investing has to be in line with the reward. Reducing our stake means there's the same risk for less reward. And we're dealing with not one volatile currency but two here, which already puts us at a high risk (and that's assuming I invested 20 CLAM and was able to withdraw more than I deposited). We have to hope that CLAM doesn't tank AND that BTC doesn't tank more.

Another issue I forgot to mention:

On the test site I'd seen people switching their 'offsite coins' between 0 and (lots) every second or two. That's causing big swings in the max profit, and is really annoying for players to play against. You don't know from one second to the next whether you're going to be able to have your bet accepted or not.

The intention is for this new feature to allow investors to reduce their counterparty risk by keeping the majority of their coins offsite, and so I don't see any reason to allow people to change their offsite declaration repeatedly.

I'm thinking maybe allowing it to be changed 4 times per day or something like that would be sufficient, and prevent the kind of shenanigans we've been seeing. Maybe we need to always allow a "/cold 0" for use in cases of emergency, but once the 4 changes per day are used up, that's the onlycold value that will be accepted.

Thoughts?

I can't imagine that once "real" coins come into play, it'll be swinging as drastically as it does now with the freebies.  Also the max profit is usually much higher than the usual wagers, so bets being placed should rarely have to worry about paying attention to the max profit.

He already stated it's not about honesty. It's about options.

i.e., I can have 100 CLAM but have enough fiat sitting aside to buy BTC and then convert that into CLAM to buy another 900. So this would allow me to claim I have 1k, and if needed, I can do the purchase to replenish my losses.

Or I could just be a big risk taker that has no issue losing it all on one bad roll, but still want the ability to earn a lot more if things go well.

Something to consider is that when it will be on just-dice many big investors will not change their offsite coins as often so there will be less swings in the max profit. Small investors may change their offsite coins often but it will be for smaller amounts.

Always allowing the commandcold 0 is a very good idea if you decide to limit the number of switches an investor is allowed.