The War Room Bet Thread V3

[senri]

@HomerThompson, you know I love you, but I think you have a pattern of expecting things to move faster and more sharply than is probably justified (I guess just faster than I think they'll move).

You now begin to see how good it feels to secrete the poetry of your glorious fluids that flow so wonderfully deep inside your tight existence. The Nexus runs through all of us, it is a part of us, and it's imperative we love all in order to absorb the collective transcendence towards the beautiful... The finality of your desires Mr Savage, you will crave it... You are beginning to sense the musk.... You are beginning to taste...

 

[senri]

@Imbrued Esculence

Glad to see you are well on your way my youthful compactful Sapien. Never forget to moisturize your wonderful skin, at such an age it's critical that you start early, we need you at your best Mr Lead.

 

[Lead]

This was perfect to happen on a Monday.

 

[Lead]

Glad to see you are well on your way my youthful compactful Sapien. Never forget to moisturize your wonderful skin, at such an age it's critical that you start early, we need you at your best Mr Lead.

I don't exfoliate Senri

 

[senri]

This was perfect to happen on a Monday.

Of course Mr Lead, I am here to make you better. I am here to assuage your path. Indeed this is such a good day to happen in the beginning of the arduous week we must abide by. You are gaping wonderfully...

 

[waiguoren]

By confirm, are you saying his evidence doesn't hold up to criticism or that if he flat out indicts Trump and says in the indictment, Trump offered concessions, Polish wins?

If Mueller says that Trump offered concessions in exchange for (1) the act of hacking (2) the fruits of the hack, then @PolishHeadlock wins.

If the charge(s) in the indictment are unrelated to hacking, and the indictment mentions some policy changes/concessions (e.g., Magnitsky Act) but the indictment does not link the policy changes/concessions to hacking in any way, I win.

Indictment on something not related to what we are currently narrowing it down to would be a null bet?

Indictment about something unrelated to hacking is a win for me. For example, if Trump perjures himself about getting a blowjob in the Oval Office from Stormy Daniels, and if that perjury charge is the only charge in the indictment, I win.

 

[senri]

I don't exfoliate Senri

You need to Mr Lead. Or you can fast, this will maximize your tight bodies ability to undergo autophagy to it's maximum potential, cleansing away the decay that you accrued over the past few months, and making your body fresh and properly crafted to your the framework of your genesis.

 

[Lead]

If Mueller says that Trump offered concessions in exchange for (1) the act of hacking (2) the fruits of the hack, then @PolishHeadlock wins.

Okay. This is what I can get. The key word here is "says". We wouldn't be making any judgement call as to whether Mueller's decision is correct or not but if he does say Trump did this, Polish would win.

If the charge(s) in the indictment are unrelated to hacking, and the indictment mentions some policy changes/concessions (e.g., Magnitsky Act) but the indictment does not link the policy changes/concessions to hacking in any way, I win.

In this scenario, did you win the bet because the indictment is unrelated to hacking which is one of the necessary things? Cause I think we agreed with that at this point. Technically, there could even be an indictment that claims Trump colluded with Russia through a means that wasn't the hacking event and you technically would win from what I'm understanding, correct?

Indictment about something unrelated to hacking is a win for me. For example, if Trump perjures himself about getting a blowjob in the Oval Office from Stormy Daniels, and if that perjury charge is the only charge in the indictment, I win.

Got it. So there isn't really a null bet zone if that's the case.

 

[waiguoren]

Okay. This is what I can get. The key word here is "says". We wouldn't be making any judgement call as to whether Mueller's decision is correct or not but if he does say Trump did this, Polish would win.

Right. This is a bet about what Mueller's accusations are, not whether Mueller's accusations are true or false.

In this scenario, did you win the bet because the indictment is unrelated to hacking which is one of the necessary things?

Yes, this is a bet about hacking.

Got it. So there isn't really a null bet zone if that's the case.

Pretty much, but there might be "unknown unknowns" and I trust your judgement to nullify the bet in those cases.

 

[Lead]

Right. This is a bet about what Mueller's accusations are, not whether Mueller's accusations are true or false.



Yes, this is a bet about hacking.



Pretty much, but there might be "unknown unknowns" and I trust your judgement to nullify the bet in those cases.

And the timeframe on this is just when the investigation concludes?

 

[waiguoren]

And the timeframe on this is just when the investigation concludes?

right.

 

[Lead]

right.

I think we have this narrowed enough.

Coming back to the null bet, I thought of two scenarios:
-there's the potential of the Mueller investigation being shut down via Trump. Does this sound like a case for a null bet? By shutting down, I mean firing Mueller.
-Other null bet would be an event like Trump suddenly passing away while in office before the investigation concludes.


Also, this is a pretty high stakes bet that although I feel like we have clarified everything, it might be useful to have more than one mod decide on the result. I have in the OP a way to contest a bet decision but for this one, we could just start off with three mods total (one you and Polish each pick who are brought up to terms with the bet). When the bet is decided, we would discuss and see if we all fell on the same decision. If we didn't, it would just be a majority call. I admit this is just something I rather not have completely on my shoulders as I like both you and Polish and the bet is pretty severe in consequences.

 

[waiguoren]

there's the potential of the Mueller investigation being shut down via Trump. Does this sound like a case for a null bet? By shutting down, I mean firing Mueller.

Null bet.

Other null bet would be an event like Trump suddenly passing away while in office before the investigation concludes.

Null bet.

Also, this is a pretty high stakes bet that although I feel like we have clarified everything, it might be useful to have more than one mod decide on the result. I have in the OP a way to contest a bet decision but for this one, we could just start off with three mods total (one you and Polish each pick who are brought up to terms with the bet). When the bet is decided, we would discuss and see if we all fell on the same decision. If we didn't, it would just be a majority call. I admit this is just something I rather not have completely on my shoulders as I like both you and Polish and the bet is pretty severe in consequences.

I'm fine with that.

 

[Lead]

Null bet.

Null bet.

Thought so. Good.

I'm fine with that.

Well feel free to choose from the listing of active mods here:
Zankou
Madmick
Ruprecht
Limbo Pete
panamaican
computer fogie

@PolishHeadlock , pick one as well. I'm pulling a pontius pilate here by making it three mods decide instead of just me.

 

[PolishHeadlock]

Thought so. Good.



Well feel free to choose from the listing of active mods here:
Zankou
Madmick
Ruprecht
Limbo Pete
panamaican
computer fogie

@PolishHeadlock , pick one as well. I'm pulling a pontius pilate here by making it three mods decide instead of just me.

I trust all those guys

 

[Lead]

I trust all those guys

That makes it easier then. Just pick one though.

 

[waiguoren]

Thought so. Good.



Well feel free to choose from the listing of active mods here:
Zankou
Madmick
Ruprecht
Limbo Pete
panamaican
computer fogie

@PolishHeadlock , pick one as well. I'm pulling a pontius pilate here by making it three mods decide instead of just me.

I choose @Zankou .

 

[PolishHeadlock]

That makes it easier then. Just pick one though.

@panamaican

 

[Lead]

I choose @Zankou .

@panamaican

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.

@waiguoren v. @PolishHeadlock
1. The Mueller investigation will indict Trump and accuse Trump of committing a crime to EITHER
a) cooperate with / help Russia carry out the DNC/DCCC/Clinton office hack
OR
b) offer Russia concessions (policy, money, etc) in exchange for the fruits of one of the hacks above
3. When the Mueller investigation concludes
4. Avatar and Signature bet
5. Five years
6. Null if Mueller is fired or Trump unexpectedly passes
*Lead, Zankou, and panamaican will make the call on the bet when the investigation concludes.

@Zankou and @panamaican , I'm sorry to pull you into this but please let me know if you can participate in deciding this bet when the time comes. Please point out any ambiguity that might make determining the winner an issue so we can clear it up before. There are discussions beforehand with waiguoren in the thread that might help clear things up.

@waiguoren @PolishHeadlock , you can quote this and give an okay. So long as Zankou and panamaican don't have issues with how it's set up, I'll make it official in a week or as soon as they answer back.

 

[waiguoren]

@Zankou and @panamaican

N.B. "accuse Trump of committing a crime to..."

@Lead

I agree to the terms of the bet, pending @Jack V Savage and @Quipling 's agreement in the Lounge.