You do understand how odd it is you take on this kind of approach but harass another member about proving they are a woman, right?
I have nothing against you, frizzelli. And I'm sure you've never heard of me, even though we're pals. I will say this, when you said you wanted photo proof, you never stipulated that you wanted it regardless of win or loss.
So the original bet was upon a loss, Jessica would be giving up points and a picture of herself (though she does clearly state this side bet only applies to the user Rod). So here we've established 3 things:
1. 25 points wagered on a SEA ML win.
2. A picture would be given if the bet was graded a loss.
2a. The picture would only be given if the user Rod "was around" to accept the bet.
Now you accepted the bet stating the following:
So here you clearly accept the bet on Jessica's terms, which were outlined earlier. Because you aren't the user Rod, the picture clause does not apply to you. But if you look at what you wrote, you never stipulated you would be awarded the picture if Jessica lost. You just said you "want picture proof" which, if the original bet is quoted, is only going to be awarded if SEA ML is graded a loss, which it wasn't.
Jessica accepts your bet with this post:
So had SEA ML been graded a loss, Jessica would have to have been given you a picture because Jessica clearly says "ok fine sure". Even though Jessica originally stipulated the picture proof side bet was only for Rod, she never clarifies this when you demand it be applied to your wager. So yes, I think you should have been awarded a picture if you had won, which you did not.
So, with all this said, had you won and Jessica not sent a picture she would have been a stiff, but because she won the bet you should have to honour the terms. Now you can say she never intended on sending a picture in the first place, but that's really not the point, is it?
As a side note, underthetotal, no offense but you come off as a complete tool in this thread. No idea why you are posting in it or asking for personal information of another poster when you yourself aren't willing to prove you aren't a broke fool. So, with that said, never heard of you, pal.
I have nothing against you, frizzelli. And I'm sure you've never heard of me, even though we're pals. I will say this, when you said you wanted photo proof, you never stipulated that you wanted it regardless of win or loss.
So the original bet was upon a loss, Jessica would be giving up points and a picture of herself (though she does clearly state this side bet only applies to the user Rod). So here we've established 3 things:
1. 25 points wagered on a SEA ML win.
2. A picture would be given if the bet was graded a loss.
2a. The picture would only be given if the user Rod "was around" to accept the bet.
Now you accepted the bet stating the following:
So here you clearly accept the bet on Jessica's terms, which were outlined earlier. Because you aren't the user Rod, the picture clause does not apply to you. But if you look at what you wrote, you never stipulated you would be awarded the picture if Jessica lost. You just said you "want picture proof" which, if the original bet is quoted, is only going to be awarded if SEA ML is graded a loss, which it wasn't.
Jessica accepts your bet with this post:
So had SEA ML been graded a loss, Jessica would have to have been given you a picture because Jessica clearly says "ok fine sure". Even though Jessica originally stipulated the picture proof side bet was only for Rod, she never clarifies this when you demand it be applied to your wager. So yes, I think you should have been awarded a picture if you had won, which you did not.
So, with all this said, had you won and Jessica not sent a picture she would have been a stiff, but because she won the bet you should have to honour the terms. Now you can say she never intended on sending a picture in the first place, but that's really not the point, is it?
As a side note, underthetotal, no offense but you come off as a complete tool in this thread. No idea why you are posting in it or asking for personal information of another poster when you yourself aren't willing to prove you aren't a broke fool. So, with that said, never heard of you, pal.
I feel vindicated some people on this site are absolute idiots. How some of these freeloaders figure out how to turn on a PC is beyond me.
