In that case are we making the names hidden or are we hiding them all together? I mean there are two ways to go with this, one is having a leaderboard option on your account, you click on hide me and it hides you, it shows the top 10 that didn't clicked and shows themselves, that way you are technically not seeing the top 10, but you are seeing the people who are willing to be shown and top 10 of those people.

The second option is to just have "hidden" on the leaderboard, you can click on hide me again like the other one, it actually shows you the real top 10, but some of those names are censored as "hidden name" so you will not know who it is. Those are two very different approaches, I don't know which one I would prefer more, but I think the first one is closer to my heart.

The screenshot of me is from a leaderboard of a wagering contest. There the first option you suggested would not make sense, because the user would not appear on the leaderboard and would not be eligible for a prize. Participation in the contest would not make sense at all if you don't want to show up.
Option 1 would only be possible for weekly/monthly/yearly Leaderboards. But even there, the results will be distorted if entries are missing and you can never be sure if you are the weekly leader or if there are not 10 players in front of you, but they didn't want to appear in the list.


In my opinion this has nothing to do with whether the name is displayed or not. For example, you don't know if there is actually a person behind the player "bestgambler123", someone just runs a script or the casino plays against itself. So it doesn't matter if it says "bestgambler123" or "hidden", it has the same effect.

I think it's more about protecting the players. At wagering contests like this there are sometimes very high amounts of money involved, you see players who have wagered 50 BTC and more on 2-3 days:



These numbers can be reached without a bankroll by betting a lot of small bets, that's for sure. However, the chance that a whale is behind the player with such sums (the loss by House Edge at 1% alone would be around 0.5 BTC) is quite high. Especially in casinos that offer chat, PM and forum functions, for example, the chance is quite high that these players are specifically choosen for a scam attacks.

bustabit doesn't ask for you to provide your real name for the userneame. You can put anything you like be it numbers or symbols. And unlike other gambling platform, it doesn't have the limit of users you can create. So, if you feel you've used an obvious username from which others can recognize you, you can always create a new user with a unique name.

Hey guys,
Check out this article written on the ‘Top 3 Most Unique Casinos in 2020'! So cool to see that Bustabit is on the list: https://4king.com/3-most-unique-casinos/

wow, great for bustabit. if you are the writer of that list, what criteria do you have in mind to set that list?

I agree with you this is a really great site This site is very popular for gambling from the very beginning Bustabit is playing much better now Currently most people are leaning towards it because of the lockdown. In this case, the huge demand for this site in the field of gambling is increasing and many have made a profit Many credible sites are less likely to lose in that case.

There is "unique" and there is unique. Bustabit has always been a unique place in the sense that it was the first place that ever started, I think it was called moneypot at the very early days if I am not wrong and then they changed the name to bustabit and made moneypot into like this big casino bankroll main website type of thing.

RHavar was the creator if I am not wrong on both of them and sold everything. At the end of the day there are ton of places like this now sure, but the first one was bustabit, it came before all of them and it even licenses its own code to others to create competition as well, they probably realized there would be anyway so might as well make profit from it. So is it unique? Yes it is unique that it was the first of this style, but is it rare? No it is not anymore.

No, that's not it, I had the estimations change within literally two seconds so it looks like it's a bug.

But I posted in the wrong thread, meant to post in the bustadice thread (although it's possible that the same would happen on bustabit, too, seeing how both sites are similar in many ways).

I think ~25 sats would have been very difficult to withdraw since it would have taken a lot of hours but that is probably bare minimum without failing to go, like 2 days to go type of situation. However 182 was the norm, yesterday I did with 163 sats and it worked with like 3 hours or so, still not fast but that was the cheapest I could find with enough time to wait before I go to bed so that is what I did. At the end of the day you could basically use anything above 30sat/byte and you will get it so its kind of makes sense.

If you check bitcoin fee on those fee calculations website you will realize that the difference is that big in there as well, there is a huge difference between "I am willing to wait 24 hours" and "I want it in 20 minutes" levels, like 30 sats to 300 sats type of huge difference.