Does the gambling policy forbid the Prisoner's Dilemma?

Here's a casino game:

1) You pay a stake to join in the game.
2) After paying this stake you get to pick either the red or the blue box.
3) After a certain amount of time has passed, we total all the picks. Whichever box was picked LEAST often wins, and all the people who picked it get to split the pot.

Is this covered by the ban? It includes no explicit chance or random numbers, but is based on the Prisoner's Dilemma that generates a paradoxical choice.

Very much a game of Chance, and therefore, Banned.
Sorry.

Hmmm... i think you might have found a loophole.

an the loophole closer?

LL sez - "This includes (but is not limited to), for example, Casino Games such as:..................."

Its wagering, period.

No, there's a colon after "wagering" ...



So YES, there is a wager. That activates the rest of the logic: NO, it does not rely on a random number generator and NO it does not rely on the outcome of a RL sporting event. YES it does provide a payout but the first predicate of the OR statement is already false making the entire statement false.

You forgot one OR: Chance OR a random number generator. Chance determines who got the least amount of picks. Still screwed.

AND

(2) provide a payout in

(a) Linden Dollars, OR

(b) any real-world currency or thing of value.

Notice how the payout on b is specific to real-world currency "thing of value" in which world? What equates to "value"? We need clarification please

I, too, missed the word "chance" in the policy statement. Yeah, that game covered and forbidden by the policy.

Okay.. although it's sort of dangerous. Because if "social randomness" is covered then (for example) a stock market could be covered too.

ding!

Whereas I think the game would be forbidden as it involves a wager and randomness, isn't the logic LL are applying an AND gate rather than an OR gate? So if there's a wager and no payout, that's fine, if there's no wager and a payout, that's fine.

I'm up too late again!

Hold on there's skill in the equation too, the gate is getting more complicated now that I think about it.

Actually, there isn't skill. The whole point of the Prisoner's Dilemma and similar problems is that although they seem to contain no randomness, they're unsolvable by rational reasoning.

It should be easy to come up with legal games of skill. Create an SL Tetris or Space Invaders, have people pay to participate and pay out for each finished level. Make the higher levels quite hard though.

Let's say, L$50 per game, first level pays out L$10, second level L$20 and so on... difficulty set in a way that most people won't get past level 3. Lag will add to the difficulty

Sorry, I was waffling about the policy in general by the time I'd got to talking about skill. The prisoner's dilemna had lost me long before then

That is a quiet interresting idea, actualy a player can donate his ingame time to count wich box gets most hits, and for that reason that would be considered a skill. Same as in an investment, something that is not considered gambling because the outcome is mainly based by knownlegde/skill rather than luck. And one cant apply same principle to neither bj, slots nor any casino game. As long as the game allows ppl to count its no longer a gambling device, but i'd spice up that game with something more interresting and you might have a product for the new world order of second life.

Why waste time trying to think up loopholes, because:

a) The gambling ban is here to stay.
b) A lot of residents do NOT want gambling any more.
c) LL will just close each loophole with a minor policy change as they are discovered.

It's all just a waste of time. I wish people would accept the inevitable and put their energies to something more productive. There's plenty of online - and offline - gambling opportunities for those that have such a problem they can't cope without it; not least the real world too.

Broccoli

Alot of Resident's don't like it, alot of Residents live on it.

6 months ago at a well known Casino, I bet 3000L once on double or nothing because I didn't have enough for a plot of land. I got double and could purchase a plot.

Only one problem with that, someone will practice and practice until they have mastered the game, then send everyone who owns that game out of business.

Thats the problem with skill games, if someone gets really good at them they can get to the point where they never lose, so therefore the house has to lose and then all gaming establishments will really go out of business.

However, skill games will definitely work if it is player vs player with the house taking a small cut.

When i first came here i was very surprised there weren't areas dedicated areas dedicated to games such as chess or hearts but i now know it was because everyone was to occupied with gambling.

Honestly, i have to say thank you to LL for this gambling ban as i believe it will force creators and gaming centres to be become more creative and as a result SL will become a better and more entertaining place.

Now before any gamblers flame me for my comments let me inform you that i was both running a casino and a pro-gambler here in SL until last week (making good money too) so it's not like i.m against gambling.

Bring on the chess tournaments i say, i am pretty good at that game so i might end up making more money playing that than i did as a pro-gambler.

And don't try to tell me that a chess tournament with an entry fee would be against the rules, i've read the knowledge base several times and no matter what way i take it, chess would still be classed as a game of skill.

Yes, but poker is also a game of skill, just as much as chess.

But chess contains no element of chance whatsoever, the better player will always win.

A newbie will never beat a grandmaster.

I wouldn't trust a Linden's colon.