Replying to Avatar Rico

⚡ Gib or Skip ⚡ 02. Round ⚡

Pay 200丰 to you and two others [gib]

- or -

Offer 400丰 in the next round? [skip]

===== The Rules =====

I offer incrementally increasing payouts. The sum increases until three people vote for grabbing the sats.

___________________

- Code for grabbing: gib

- Code for passing: skip

- One vote per person per offer

___________________

There must be three 'gib' comments in a row from different people to split the pot between them equally.

___________________

Similar, there must be three 'skip' comments in a row to end the round and trigger a new offer.

___________________

Comments count only in direct response to my question.

___________________

Only one vote per person per offer.

___________________

Comments that neither contain gib nor skip reset the streak and count as a vote.

___________________

The speed of the game is determine by real life events (family, gym, sleep...) and there might be unannounced breaks and hours without a new offer. No camping!

___________________

Numbers go up only but not exponentially, I make it up as I go along.

If the game grows over my head and/or my nodes outbound liquidity, I maybe ask for donations to keep raising the stakes OR I hand the moderation over to someone more liquid than I am. If in the end my wallet is drained, a couple of sats crowdsourced from you Enjoyooors will be most welcome.

___________________

Examples:

Zap you & your buddy 10 sats or 20 to the next nostriches?

| Skip

| Gib

| Skip

| Gib

| Skip

| rofl wat is dis?

| Skip

| Skip

| Skip

--> skipped

Zap you & your buddy 30 sats or 50 to the next nostriches?

| Skip

| Gib

| Gib

| one more gib cmon man!!!1

| Gib

| Gib

| Gib

--> 10 sats to each of the greedy basterds.

#############

→ Est. 777171 ←

#############

# started: 777337

# Game #02

What the hell, the skips have it.

Round 3 coming.

Please note that I can only respect direct responses to the offer. It is impossible to sort comments responding to comments as the timestamps are not precise enough.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

No replies yet.