Quote (SheriffCool @ Oct 19 2020 07:22pm)
Lmao JSP doesn't support a no retract clause... you guys are fucking ridiculous
JSP doesn't support a no retract clause because they have never been presented with a case where they have to. They don't support gambling or poker either, yet they rule on S/A for BNP and sports sections all the time, usually BNP though. Over the years BNP has developed a comprehensive set of rules based on decisions mostly by
. As crazy and stupid as that forum is sometimes, people know what a scam is for the most part, and how to avoid being tagged as a scammer when no wrongdoing was done on their part. And when things come up its important to talk about them and how they affect other potential bets as well. If this was not a 3 month long bet and the bet could not be re-obtained this would be a very different discussion. And after reading this entire thread I still have no idea if I would get paid for a bet if the other party was locked while the bet was still going on if I was using a moderator. -Furthermore when Chan scammed he had the FG to pay but he gambled it away in other endeavors. I wonder if those people had to also return the fg that they won to pay off Chan's scam. If not, then the OP is getting a bit of a shaft.
Quote (Horadric_Pube @ Oct 19 2020 07:29pm)
Because scamming and getting locked is bigger than a bet on the next president. Too many people trying to find loopholes to get paid for shit they shouldn’t be paid for. Not saying you are doing it!
Well technically sir, being paid as a winner for a game that didn't take place is ALSO a loophole. Which is exactly why Chan was locked (if you believe he never saw his cards)
Curious to see what Eerock says to OP.