How does raffle work?

I just don't get it.

If two accounts join, it meants that they pay two times as much to join, and can win two times the price. So 2x = 2x. How can you cheat this?

I don't understand what raffle means can someone explain it? It looks stupid.

If two accounts join, it meants that they pay two times as much to join, and can win two times the price. So 2x = 2x. How can you cheat this?

you pay 0 to join, so you double your chances to win compared to everyone else

You don't strictly double them, because you grow the denominator and the numerator, although the impact of joining on N accounts approaches an Nx win probability multiplier as the number of participants approaches infinity.

That said, if you double-join a raffle, you benefit more from joining smaller raffles. Even though the proportional impact to your win probability is smaller, your absolute expected winnings increase by a greater magnitude. For example, if there's two 6-coin raffles- one with 2 participants, one with 5- joining the smaller raffle with an additional player increases your odds by a smaller multiplier (1/2 to 2/3 for 4/3 vs. 1/5 to 1/3 for for 5/3) but gives a greater absolute increase in expected value (from 3 to 4 coins for 1 expected coin vs. from 1.2 to 2 coins for 0.8 expected coins).

The Global Chat raffle is free to participate for anyone who has chatted in the past 60 minutes. You can find more details on it at https://bit.ly/raffle-analysis

EDIT: almost forgot again
Anti-Fizzer is pro-Warlight. Pro-Warlight is anti-Fizzer.

Edited 10/14/2021 17:23:23

@l4v.r0v

It's the community's prerogative to know about these things

who decided that? you?

Fizzer is the only authority on the matter, because he is also accountable for his actions.
You have proclaimed yourself as the prosecutor, yet you bear no reponsibilities for the consequenced of your actions.
And there may be further consequences you didn't think about. Public shaming is a dangerous and unjust weapon

parsifal you should stop publicly shaming knyte, that is upto fizzer and not you

Fizzer is the only authority on the matter, because he is also accountable for his actions.

Is he?

Is he?

legally yes. It's his platform

who decided that? you?

Yes.

Is your argument that the public should be forbidden from discussing matters like these? Fizzer has no accountability. He buries information and gets away with lying because the facts are not auditable, e.g.:


I, like every other player, have the right to share information and voice our opinions. Doing so does not amount to playing prosecutor. This is just like how things work in the criminal justice system- the "accountability" you describe arises from public discussion and the so-called "court of public opinion." Although, of course, Warzone does not work like the criminal justice system- there's no separation between enforcers and judges, no credible system of appeals, no public record, no auditability of even one's own record, no system by which to choose those who hold power, even no public record of who is a cop or judge. The "criminal justice system" is just a flimsy rationalization thrown around to defend excesses and abuses, by a man who so misunderstands the justice system he poked a 75 billion dollar bear with a nonexistent case.

We can see its results for ourselves, in cases just like this one. The "authority" not only fails to deter cheating but in fact is responsible for enabling much of the cheating (e.g., via the design of the 1v1 ladder, the lack of basic countermeasures against alt-abuse). Shedding transparency on this is not only the right of the community but the only path forward if we want cheating to actually decline. This pattern of slaps on the wrist and quick forgiveness for cheating but long criminal records for flimsy rule violations and moderation enforcement of personal vendettas (see: DanWL) built on a foundation of no transparency, accountability, or even consistency (explicitly by design) is fundamentally untenable and deserves to be challenged.

legally yes. It's his platform

That's not how the law works. Others can use the platform to express themselves and share information as well.

Anti-Fizzer is pro-Warlight. Pro-Warlight is anti-Fizzer.

Edited 10/14/2021 17:49:06

legally yes. It's his platform

Yes, he is the authority, but I was more questioning the accountability.

The moderation system is completely opaque, which results in inconsistent moderation.

@l4v.r0v

Is your argument that the public should be forbidden from discussing matters like these?

no, my argument is that public shaming should be forbidden.
It can have severe consequences, and you won't be there to take the responsibility for it.

no, my argument is that public shaming should be forbidden.

The "public shaming" you complain about consists of:
- a verifiably true, well-sourced, objective forum post
- me using my coins to help make the victims whole (including you, who accepted them without complaint: https://www.warzone.com/MultiPlayer?GameID=28536981), and
- open discussions, like this one, by a player who can easily (and often does) face community consequences, making no attempt to hide from it by burying information or operating in the shadows

The authority you defend, on the other hand:
- buries information, which only leaks to the public through rogue mods
- couldn't even detect the two accounts being the same user, due to underinvestment in cheating software (time spent instead manually clearing profile bios on a Friday afternoon or writing scripts to stalk players or incoherently arguing with Rick and doubling his suspensions)
- was on the verge of ignoring the reports
- issued a warning after the facts became public
- let nonolet keep his coins, and
- made no effort to make nonolet's victims whole

you won't be there to take the responsibility for it.

I'm here, aren't I? This conversation alone contradicts your narrative about accountability.

The priorities you express are not those of the community's interests.

Anti-Fizzer is pro-Warlight. Pro-Warlight is anti-Fizzer.

Edited 10/14/2021 17:53:43

and btw. being admitted into TSFH clan at such an early stage was beyond my wildest dreams. i feel extremely honored and very happy to be associated with such seasoned players and first rate folks. will do anything i can to redeem their trust in me.

There are so many Warzone communities crossing over in this forum
It's really amazing

- was on the verge of ignoring the reports

No, it was always going to be a warning or short suspension

- issued a warning after the facts became public

That's just the usual delay in the 2-tier report system, but thats not visible to users. The public information did not speed up anything.

- let nonolet keep his coins, and

Thats a thing that might could be done, but idk if only Fizzer can do this or if the other admins can also do this. If Fizzer didnt handle the 2nd stage of this report, the admin who did it might not even have the power to remove coins.
I hindsight I could have suggest this in the notes for the admins.

- made no effort to make nonolet's victims whole

Thats simply not viable to do.

@ l4v.r0v

you are taking here a lot on yourself.
I have known a guy who commited suicide because of some self-proclaimed-Sherlock, who thought he can be the detective, the prosecutor and the judge all in one.

Are you ready to take the responsibility?
Are you ready to deal with the full consequences?

Are you ready to deal with the full consequences?

The worst outcome of your nonexistent witch-hunt is public awareness of nonolet's cheating. This has already happened and without consequence to nonolet.

You're crafting theoretical scenarios and ignoring actual harm to go after a person who tries to start discussion in favor of one whose MO is to instead shut them down.

Thats simply not viable to do.

There's a list of victims and coin amounts. The mechanism already exists to give people coin gifts; it's how RaffleBot works. If I'm able to restitute players, this excuse doesn't fly.

Edited 10/14/2021 18:03:42

... those rare moments I am glad to be a part of the European culture and not the American one

I originally did not wan to comment here.

First things first:
thank you, l4r.r0v for the offered "coin restitution".
Since I lost nothing (raffles are free, after all), I declined.
(and while I like having coins, the monetary value is ridiculous, it's ultimately just a "wanna have", I have no actual use for the coins, besides coin games. and that was where my first raffle wins were useful)

Second:
congrats on finding such correlations in the data, I like the effort you put into it.

Third:
thanks for the apology, inxs.
Since I don't have a second account myself, but my son plays from the same IP, it may be we also joined raffles at the same time. I do have access to his device, and do use it to keep his idle timer running in the evening.
So, I may have breached the same rule already, and therefore saw how easy it is to fall into the rule trap.
Furthermore because I initially linked it to games and tournaments, and less to raffles.
So I accept your apology, and will remind my son again to not join tournaments/raffles I habe joined, and vice-versa (with the raffle time constraint, that's less easy to do, but with tournaments we did recently join both...)

Fourth:
while I dislike the inconsistent approach to "bans"/"warning"/ etc. by the mod teams, I like public finger-pointing even less.
At least you had data that supported your allegations.
But can we please stop the finger pointing, and move on?

There are better topics for our time to be wasted on.
Thank You!

krulle the attitude of "ignore this and move on" is what leads to abuse of the moderation system. discussions like this are what help in bringing about change.
I was also of the "ignore and move on" type till it happened to me and developed into an obsession to suspend me over any single message

still, this discussion could have been done without a name. The data could be given to a mod for,the prosecution.
In this particular case, the data would allow the public to find out who anyway, but to those wishing to discuss consistency of mod actions, a discussion could've taken place without any names attached to it.

Anyway, I'm off to look for other topics.