Quote (Trust100Percent @ Jan 10 2012 11:36pm)
It is enough, I don't see any way to make it more clear. It doesn't say "A variation of a confirmation" It says, "A variation OF THE WORD Confirmed"
If it's not clear enough, then what the fuck.
The way it was constructed (in this case) you can say that luck c'd the s/u bet and then did not confirm the spread bet, while extort c'd the spread bet but was opposed to the s/u bet.
Either way, extort obviously lost the "bet," but you can say that there was never an agreement to the bet.
It was extremely bm, but it technically did not break the rules.
This post was edited by 18_1 on Jan 10 2012 10:39pm