Thayos wrote:
I'm sorry, I still don't see the huge foul here.
The moogles did their jobs. They gave you marbles with numbers on them. Because separate drawings were held for each category, your EOEOE number had the exact same chance to be picked as my OEOEE number.
The only way anyone could have possibly been "wronged" by this is if the moogle gave you DUPLICATE marbles.
Also, lets not forget... these were not secret numbers! Everyone had equal opportunity to look at their numbers, and decide whether to keep them.
Anyone who didn't like their EOEOE marbles could have dropped them to choose new marbles.
EDIT: If the winning numbers were not randomly generated, then yeah, that would be unfair, if some numbers never had a chance of winning to begin with. But, that's a separate issue.
Edited, Jul 1st 2008 11:54am by Thayos
The moogles did their jobs. They gave you marbles with numbers on them. Because separate drawings were held for each category, your EOEOE number had the exact same chance to be picked as my OEOEE number.
The only way anyone could have possibly been "wronged" by this is if the moogle gave you DUPLICATE marbles.
Also, lets not forget... these were not secret numbers! Everyone had equal opportunity to look at their numbers, and decide whether to keep them.
Anyone who didn't like their EOEOE marbles could have dropped them to choose new marbles.
EDIT: If the winning numbers were not randomly generated, then yeah, that would be unfair, if some numbers never had a chance of winning to begin with. But, that's a separate issue.
Edited, Jul 1st 2008 11:54am by Thayos
I did get some marbles that were duplicates. I did notice it at the time the marbles were given. I decided to keep the duplicates as I figured if it won, then I would have 2. I did not pay close enough attn at time of marbles given to notice the even odd pattern, In fact I was not looking for a pattern as I believed it to be as random as possible. I do know that a computer generated random is not truly random, but it should be programmed in a way that a user can not notice a pattern, thus I did not look for one.
edit: re-reading my list, I actually had 1 number 3 times "randomly" generated, was 65636
Edited, Jul 1st 2008 3:33pm by shibaaa