good call sir.

I was literally about to pm you about this.
Do we need a rule about goals being scored before an in game bet is confirmed, as well? (Posting here in case others have feedback)

Bolded part is lacking IMO. Define "Reasonable timeframe". Looks good though.

Was thinking the same at first, but the current wording leaves it open to the discretion of the trusted/meds, which is probably the best since any issues would be a case by case basis.

"Sorry dude, I was taking a 10 minute shit"

If a mediator is requested, the bet is not confirmed until both parties send to the mediator.
If both parties confirmed a bet prior to the game, but one party requests a mediator after the scheduled game time, then the bet is still confirmed. (is this what you are saying?)
If a mediator is requested during an in-game bet, the bet is not confirmed until both parties have sent to the mediator.

I don't know what you would consider a reasonable time frame ... that is a little bit of a grey area.

The thing is, that reasonable time frame HAS to be vague. If it is a set time then goals can be scored during that time and the second party can wait for that to happen and then send

Edit: yes Crispers, that is what I am saying

This post was edited by Cratic on Feb 5 2013 10:56pm

I don't understand if you're trying to be funny or just attempting to stir up drama?

Neither actually. I could see some d-bag using something like this as an excuse for late sending, therefore nullifying a bet.

The same thing could happen now. The proposed rule has nothing to do with that.