The War Room Bet Thread v2

Status
Not open for further replies.
Fawlty said:
Proposition-

Flynn, Stone, Manafort, Page, Kushner, Don Jr, Eric, President Trump, Ivanka, Sessions, DeVos, Preibus, Ryan, Pruitt, Pompeo, Bannon, or Perry are indicted by 23:59 EST 15 June 2018.

I set the line at 1 of those persons indicted. You take under or over. 3 month av and sig. Sig to be 140 characters or less, displayed at the top of the sig, loser may keep old sig beneath.

Offer good through 16 July my time.
Click to expand...

Way too many people.
 
Fawlty said:
That's why I'm offering the choice of my opponent taking either the over or the under- I'm betting exactly 1 indictment. I also tweaked the terms a lil.
Click to expand...
I'll do a 3 month sig with you. I'll take the over. I don't bet my AV.
 
Cool, sig is good with me.

The av is still up for grabs if anybody else wants some.
 
1. The exact statement the bet is premised upon
2. Stance each poster is taking in regards to the statement
3. The date the bet will be decided
4. The reward/punishment for the winner/loser
5. The duration of the reward/punishment before I will post it.
6 (OPTIONAL) A situation which makes the bet void that isn't clear with the content in 1 & 2. This needs to be very clear if included.
Once, you both are in agreement, tag me so I can add it.
Click to expand...

@Fawlty v. @HomerThompson
1. Two or more of the following will be indicted by 23:59 EST 15 June 2018: Flynn, Stone, Manafort, Page, Kushner, Don Jr, Eric, President Trump, Ivanka, Sessions, DeVos, Preibus, Ryan, Pruitt, Pompeo, Bannon, or Perry
2. Homer- For, Fawlty- Against
3. 06/15/18
4. Signature bet
5. 3 months

Just need okays from you both for it to be posted
 
@Fawlty , can we clarify the word "indict". Is this someone pressing a charge and/or just someone formally accusing them of it?
 
Lead said:
@Fawlty , can we clarify the word "indict". Is this someone pressing a charge and/or just someone formally accusing them of it?
Click to expand...
We should also negotiate what crimes count toward the bet. As worded, it's any charge for any crime. @HomerThompson may not be down for that. But an indictment means a criminal charge is filed, imo.
 
Fawlty said:
That formatting doesn't work very well for an over/under bet. There is a stipulation that if zero are indicted, we each get the other's sig for 1 month.
Click to expand...

Where did that stipulation occur? I thought you were asking for over/under meaning they pick and you get the opposite, not just the number 1?
 
Lead said:
Where did that stipulation occur? I thought you were asking for over/under meaning they pick and you get the opposite, not just the number 1?
Click to expand...
It's in the post, I probably edited it after you saw it initially (I didnt' word it correctly). I didn't mean for this to be a clusterfuck lol. I need to start over...

The way over/under bets usually work is that one person sets the line, and the other person chooses and either wins or loses the bet. But I'm actually betting on exactly 1 indictment. It's a little odd.
 
Limbo Pete said:
Wikileaks is not a charity lmao

If you want to keep arguing about this, let's take it over to the bet thread
Click to expand...

Bet thread? Why would you go there? Isn't that for people that actually make bets and not search for loopholes to find their way out of them?

(Sorry. Had to bust your balls there for old times sake)
 
Fawlty said:
It's in the post, I probably edited it after you saw it initially (I didnt' word it correctly). I didn't mean for this to be a clusterfuck lol. I need to start over...

The way over/under bets usually work is that one person sets the line, and the other person chooses and either wins or loses the bet. But I'm actually betting on exactly 1 indictment. It's a little odd.
Click to expand...

I mean, that's perfectly fine to do as well. I just assumed @HomerThompson thought you were getting the complete under. He should clarify if this matter to him. If he does want you as just one, you could even bring in a third person for the 0. Someone did this for the electon margins I belief or we just had a tie if it was an option neither picked.
 
Yeah it's all upside for his side of the bet, so I'm sure he won't have an issue with that. We'll wait though. He may want a three way bet, that's cool too.
 
Fawlty said:
Yeah it's all upside for his side of the bet, so I'm sure he won't have an issue with that. We'll wait though. He may want a three way bet, that's cool too.
Click to expand...

Either way, it can still work here. Like you said though, you guys should clarify the premise just so we don't have issues when it's decided.
 
Hans Gruber said:
Bet thread? Why would you go there? Isn't that for people that actually make bets and not search for loopholes to find their way out of them?

(Sorry. Had to bust your balls there for old times sake)
Click to expand...
There we go

As I was saying, not a charity
 
Formal criminal indictments is a fine standard for me. 2 or more and that sig is mine, bruh.
 
HomerThompson said:
Formal criminal indictments is a fine standard for me. 2 or more and that sig is mine, bruh.
Click to expand...

Do you care if fawlty has 1 and 0 or were you assuming he just had 1 and 0 was neither wins?
 
HomerThompson said:
Formal criminal indictments is a fine standard for me. 2 or more and that sig is mine, bruh.
Click to expand...

Lead said:
Do you care if fawlty has 1 and 0 or were you assuming he just had 1 and 0 was neither wins?
Click to expand...

HomerThompson said:
I assume he just had 1 and 0 neither wins.
Click to expand...

So it's what @Fawlty thought too and formal criminal indictments. Was there specific charges you two needed to clarify or was this enough to repost the offer again?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,280,740
Messages
58,315,108
Members
175,999
Latest member
Rosabelot

Share this page

Back
Top