Limited Ticket per-adress Pools

[RichardJansma]

The currently running pools are open and not limited to the number of tickets that 1 wallet address can have…

This means whales can get more tickets and create a non-fair pool for less wealthy people. And this is not a problem but its just not fair for people that just got into the wonderful decentralized blockchain world, or for people that are not that wealthy.

Now I got an idea that can make it possible to make a more fair pool for the standard crowd. And that idea is Limited Tickets per-address for certain pools with some restrictions and requirements and this makes the use of these small limited pools fairer.

And that makes it more interesting for people to join the small pool (more win chance)

So in short “an extra pool with some added requirements to be eligible to win with some caps”

Only a few problems with making a pool with limited tickets per address

1. The total amount of tickets/funds for the pool will be lower

2. People/addresses need to be unique

3. How to separate the number of edible tickets

Solutions

1. making it possible for people to only fund the pool without the win chance before they deposit they can make the choice.

2. verification using a verification protocol and I suggest BrightID read below why.

3. a static amount, for example, I suggest a small one for small pools like 100 edible tickets and after that, any amount is only for funding the pool and no winning chances.
   Also, the tickets can be only edible when people are verified (look below)

BrightID

Why Bright ID well I have been part of the Bright ID community as an BrightID Star, and it is also linked to various other blockchain projects and creates a way to prove that someone is unique.

Look at their website

BrightID

It’s an excellent place to start proving that people are unique and have people only enter with one address.
And if they are not verified their tickets are funding only. And makes them not able to win the prize.
Take a look at another post I made about BrightID

BrightID Implentation

I have been using PoolTogether for some time already (look at my ETH address if you are interested) but I have to the conclusion that there is no way to verify individuals. Now that’s not a problem at this time but maybe in the future when some changes are made to make a more fair system or just to verify people It could also be used to award people extra privileges. For example entering a jackpot lottery with 1 ticket win chance for verified addresses only But now you hav…

Also, the functionality of my other post can be implemented.

Win Factor Value

At this time only the amount of tickets is the only factor that calculates the chance of winning… this makes it easy for whales to reap big rewards each time in almost every draw… Now I have an idea to make a scale of winning fairer for everyone And that makes it more interesting for people to join PoolTogether (more win change in the longer term) The Idea and solution Let’s say everyone starts at 100% of their tickets are eligible for the price now the…

This is what I have in mind. I would love to hear from people what they think of it.

Yours sincerely,

Richard Jansma
Empowering the vision and possibilities of everyone and anything
RichardJansma.nl & RichardJ.nl
ETH: 0xa9196E531aE237B3edFE0B10299932CfD5dd494B
Opensea: RichardJansma

[gabor]

Hi Richard,

good post and initiative. This issue has been discussed in various threads with many pro/con arguments so I would suggest you chip in your thoughts into those.

Cheers

[RichardJansma]

Indeed, it has been addressed some times, but I haven’t really seen (in my perspective) a solution that’s well-balanced, and I hope that this will help out balancing it out. And opening the view in a more broad view

That’s why I made this topic.
I also reply to the topics to open up the ideas.

Also, I would love to hear your opinion about the solution I posted, so I can improve

Yours sincerely,

Richard Jansma

Empowering the vision and possibilities of everyone and anything
RichardJansma.nl & RichardJ.nl
ETH: 0xa9196E531aE237B3edFE0B10299932CfD5dd494B
Opensea: RichardJansma

[salsasteve]

I was just about to say something similar. I like the fact that whales come to play. but they make it an unfair marketplace, but that is also an attractive part of POOL.It is a lottery.

What if we had a pool for the whales and tiered pools for the little guys.

For example:

• Create a “free for all” tier no max ticket
  • The prize is greater because of whales but the little guy knows his chances are slim to none
• Create a max 1000 ticket tier
• Create a max 2000 ticket tier
• Create a max 5000 ticker tier

Everyone takes the same amount of risk against their own tax bracket. and the pools can become larger by the number of little guys that come to play.

Now everyone can play and everyone knows the risk upfront if you choose the free for all.

Hopefully that makes sense. Please let me know if my logic is flawed.

[wouimbly]

Sorry but i don’t see the benefit of this.
People don’t like KYC and i don’t thing they will like brightid more.
For the tier tickets it sounds weird to me because right now you… You won’t have more chances to win with tier ticket you will just controle the number of ticket someone can have…
Just my tough

[Cap1966]

Great ideas bouncing around here. I was noticing the size of a whale UNI wallet the other day. This wallet held 50,000 UNI tokens and the odds of him winning were 1:1 so 50% chance of winning. That’s almost stealing IMO. How about if the smart contract gave ever so slightly less favorable odds as you bought more tickets. How about if there was a way to pool the smaller bags to make a bigger more competitive bag? Maybe the pooled (combined smaller bags) bag would accrue higher APY so the reward pot would be bigger?

[RichardJansma]

@wouimbly

People don’t like KYC and i don’t thing they will like brightid more.

BrightID is not the same as KYC i suggest taking a look.

It has also multiple benefits.

@salsasteve

What if we had a pool for the whales and tiered pools for the little guys.

Exactly. Thats a way what i mean and if it can be bundled overal that everyone had a chance on a jackpot (same chance) then it would even be more fun.

Richard Jansma

Empowering the vision and possibilities of everyone and anything
RichardJansma.nl & RichardJ.nl
ETH: 0xa9196E531aE237B3edFE0B10299932CfD5dd494B
Opensea: RichardJansma

[Overanalyser]

One idea would be to use a quadratic style equation to reduce the odds for larger holders.

I think Badger used a (0.75 ??) power law to reduce the rewards to larger holders for the Digg Drop.

It doesn’t solve the problem entirely, but it adds some friction / pain for larger wallets without any need for formal identification.

[wouimbly]

I did look at brightid long time ago and from my stand point is not so different.

[TheRealTuna]

My idea for a fair pool is to have it funded from the revenue of all other pools. We still need to figure out the revenue model but maybe 4% of all interest is collected as revenue and 25-33% of that revenue could be awarded to the weekly “Fair Pool”. We could also use POOL as the currency to buy into the “Fair Pool” and that deposited POOL can generate POOL for the award as well. Maximum 1 POOL per wallet.

[poolboy]

I agree with your proposal.
Put a fixed limit around 500-100 DAI also lock the funds for atleast 6-12 months such that whales cant create multiple accounts before the draw.
In Large pools whales will have opportunity and in fixed pools small fishes will have opportunity , which creates level playing field for everyone and nobody gets hurt.

[sandroo]

I’ve been thinking about this too. here is my suggestion:

• 1 person 1 ticket
• pay what you want for a ticket
• rewards double governance token for tickets with above average balance amount

[Humanerror1]

I believe the more you deposit into a given pool the higher your chances on winning until you hit a threshold … you can continue to deposit to earn interest but your chances of winning stop increasing…. It’s crazy that some whales have a 1:1 chance of winning… it’s completely unfair