It's worth the 5 minutes it takes to scroll through the pages. Hahahaha

OP is being a douche in the beginning then got hustled with a "cool gl" instead of c'd. I think,

And I was pointing out that it should be irrelevant whether he was the list ruinner at that time, and what is right shouldn't change simply because he is in power now.


Did you read the thread?

Ill try explaining again.

Person 1: Hey i want this bet on x vs y
Person 2: offers terms of the bet he wants, and says "cool gl"
Person 1: Deal

Its pretty self-evident how that not being considered a bet helps scammers.
They trick people into taking bets that appear perfectly valid in accordance with the English language, that a reasonable person would consider a bet anywhere on the planet.
The (often newer) person fully believes the bet is valid and for good reason.
If the scammer loses the scammer won't have to pay and won't get tagged. If he wins he makes off with the fg.

This post was edited by cambovenzi on Mar 29 2015 06:59pm

People are taking this too serious, I think teabag was just messing with the original poster cause he was being a douche to everyone..?

frozen used to do this all the time as trusted



yeah

This post was edited by TeaBaggery on Mar 29 2015 07:02pm

In your old link to the rules its even more blatant that what teabaggery did:

"NOT a bet"
Scammer Bettor 1: 100 fg on my Cowboys
Stupid Bettor 2: I'll take it.
Scammer Bettor 1: Cool gl

Why the fuck would anyone think that isnt a bet?


Sure he was doing it to troll, it was 5fg, but its still a fundamental problem here.
It could have easily been more and if you didnt put him on blast and tell him about the rule he likely would have sent it as he believed it was a bet.

It's a dumb rule obviously.

But I guess the argument would be you have to draw the line somewhere and the c'd system has worked well.

But I think the forum generally policies these types of things to make sure people don't get scammed. Like this guy... People warned him that the bet wasnt confirmed or valid lol..

This post was edited by MVPx on Mar 29 2015 07:09pm

and (mostly) everyone here knows i would have refunded him

That too.

If its a dumb rule as you say, then we should change the rule.



The hundreds of other scammers and welchers would not have been so kind.

The real question is whether you would have paid 200fg if you lost. Being under no obligation to pay is a problem.