"Virtual Lottery"

hot_tiger_woman · October 2005

What if there was like a virtual lottery? You would have to pay, oh, say 100k to enter and if 5 people entered than whoever won gets 500k. Or what if it was part of a prestige kennel and they could hold these auctions and ohh, 20% of the auction funds go to the creater and the rest goes to the winner. I guess it owuld make it more like a gambling site, but it would be kinda fun :roll:

Stormii · October 2005

I like it, but maybe have like 3 different kinds or something, like 1 can be very cheap to enter, the second can be somewhat cheap, and the third be like Mega Millions or something.

RoseCooper · October 2005

No, I don't like it. 1. It would make VP like a gambleing site, and there are little kids that do play this game... I know a few that wouldn't be allowed to play any more if your suggestion came into play. 2. There's already betting on dogs, which is kind of like gambleing and just as fun.

hot_tiger_woman · October 2005

Yes, it would be like gambling, but not real money. How would it be worse than the bets or the auctions? And Yuna, I was actualy thinking that, I just didn't know how to explain it, lol! Great minds think alike!

RoseCooper · October 2005

Bets: Your putting your money on a dog, if you research rightly then you know that by all resonable chances you're going to get some of your money back, with gambleing (if you're talking of the same kind that I am) you put your money in and then it's up to chance whether or not you get it back, and you can't increase that chance either. Auctions: You're saying (metaphorically speaking) "I'll pay $? for this dog/goodiedye." your not saying "here's my money, hope I get it back!".

hot_tiger_woman · October 2005

If you are talking about real life here, about the gambling stuff, more people get hooked on gambling (betting) than they do on buying lottery tickets. WHen you're in a corner store how often do you see someone go up to the register and spend 800 dollars in lottery tickets? If you've ever been in a casino or at a horse race, people there quite often spend thousands of dollars because they 'might win!!!' and then shortly there after are neck deep in bills. I do not think it would be a problem, if it was, why not do it like on horse land where you have to say if you're 'under 13' or 'over 13' and if you're under than there are certain things you can not do. I don't think this would happen, but if you do than, might as well have an alternative

Corgis4ever · October 2005

I just think that the betting on the dogs is enough and you have a better chance of winning and any person can bet on the same dog so there can be more than just one winner. Anyway, I hardly have the time to enter my dogs in events now as it is, I personaly woudn't waste my time entering a lottery

hot_tiger_woman · October 2005

I was thinking of it more for novices or sponsers if they want, because if you don't have enough time to play the game or if you don't have enough money, it's not fun (rust me, I know) and who wants to spend 20 rl bucks to play a game you don't like? Money makes the game alot more enjoyable and it's hard to get when you first start, this would make it easier

Corgis4ever · October 2005

yes but novices can bet on dogs for money, I've heard even if they're in the negative balance they can still place bets and if they have any dogs in their kennel they'll still be fed. Also, now this is just my opinion and not meant to offend so please don't blow up at me, most not all novices don't even want to pay to get their dogs trained so why would they want to pay money to play a lotto they only have a slight chance at winning? They'd have a better chance at betting on dogs in events.

hot_tiger_woman · October 2005

s much as I don't want to, I agree. It would be for the novices (like myself) who do like the game. The novices who don't won't stick around for long enough to actually use a betting system/loto system

Cherrokee · October 2005

If VP was a sight where you had to say you were under or over 13, then I would just now be getting the privelages of being over thirteen. But, if I signed up in Jan. as under 13, today(as I just turned 13) then I would still not get the privelages. What about sponcers????? What if you are 10 and you sign up for a sponcer account???? Then you get privelages just like you were 13??? Cause they are still under 13. This is why making VP an "over 13 to get good privelages" sight is a bad idea.

hot_tiger_woman · October 2005

Not privledges, just having all aspects of the site that's availible for novices. The only thing a under 13 year old couldn't do would be lotterys. Once again, I do not think this would be neccesary, but it's good to cover all aspects of these things :P

SableAntelope · October 2005

I say no because I don't think it would really do anything to improve the site. As for the over 13 things the site really should be 13 and over only because otherwise when there are COPPA/COPA issues and parents have to get involved and it's a big hassle for Nef. Because there are players under 13 here is one of the reasons we have to be so strict about players never giving out age, location, gender, etc. other personal info in chat or the BB or kennel pages. etc. But I can't see that changing unless a lawsuit or some other major issue does come up. I can see sponsor accounts being a problem down the road. People buy them as under 18 and that makes them legally unable to make a contract. All it's going to take is one under 18 year old getting banned and going whining to their parents to start big trouble here. 'Hopefully these issues never happen though.

Cherrokee · October 2005

Hey, I am under 18, and if I got kicked off, that is my own fault, for messing up!

Howdy, Stranger!

"Virtual Lottery"

Comments