The lotto winner.... number ZERO? Are you serious???

[S0lara]

I think you some of you are getting way too technical and some of the posts are convoluted when they need not be. A lot of people make great points, but regardless of what they did, the RNG code is created by a person, and they inputted 0 as one of the possible choices for output. I have coded in Python and Mathematica before, and if you import random, and then you list the parameters, e.g. list=1,2,3,4,5... It is pretty easy to see, that when they listed their parameters for the housing lottery system, they included 0 (zero) in the list of possible choices that could be rolled. If they did in fact did put zero into their list, as in: listhousing or list1 (whatever you want to call it) = 0,1,2,3,4,5..., when as stated earlier, it should have been list1=1,2,3,4,5...

If what I stated is correct, then in all fairness, they should roll back EVERYONE's bids, because if 0 (zero) was counted as a possible RNG choice, then EVERY roll is invalidated and needs to be done again. I know it sucks for some people, but in all fairness, if zero (0) was included, then redoing it is the most fair solution.

[Ardyvald]

I think you some of you are getting way too technical and some of the posts are convoluted when they need not be. A lot of people make great points, but regardless of what they did, the RNG code is created by a person, and they inputted 0 as one of the possible choices for output. I have coded in Python and Mathematica before, and if you import random, and then you list the parameters, e.g. list=1,2,3,4,5... It is pretty easy to see, that when they listed their parameters for the housing lottery system, they included 0 (zero) in the list of possible choices that could be rolled. If they did in fact did put zero into their list, as in: listhousing or list1 (whatever you want to call it) = 0,1,2,3,4,5..., when as stated earlier, it should have been list1=1,2,3,4,5...

If what I stated is correct, then in all fairness, they should roll back EVERYONE's bids, because if 0 (zero) was counted as a possible RNG choice, then EVERY roll is invalidated and needs to be done again. I know it sucks for some people, but in all fairness, if zero (0) was included, then redoing it is the most fair solution.

I only see one thing bugging me in your example here : hidden rule.
When you play a game where rules are given, you can expect some outcomes to happen. but if some unexpected outcomes happen, then we have a problem : either the rules were not clear enough (there were room for interpretation), or there were hidden rules.

As far as I remember, they didn't say anywhere that "there's a chance that there will be no winning ticket".

I hope we'll have some explanation of sorts, I must say that seeing the number of 0 occurences, it doesn't feel like a "0 was added to a list of possible tickets". The odds of it happening are slim, unless the RNG drawing is "mutualized".

I had in mind the fact that the emergency maintenance done on Thursday may have "broken" already done biding, but some testimonies are just ruling out this aspect apparently