Reply With Quote
son I'm just spinning it around like you did for the last 2 hours claiming you wanted to bet, but never offered anything to bet on. how does it feel? you wanna go another couple hours?
lol bet
That completely invalidates using IP addresses as proof.
Well done.
lol project
son I'm just spinning it around like you did for the last 2 hours claiming you wanted to bet, but never offered anything to bet on. how does it feel? you wanna go another couple hours?
lol bet
I never made an offer for you to edit the terms.
It was a last minute offer to back out of the terms that were offered.
It seems you are taking that offer.
Good for you.
lol edit
and no it doesn't son. now that I think about it ... I have also posted in public places numerous times so God only knows how many IP addresses it could show on either of ours. it is a legit question considering you brought it up to edit the bet. I'm sure you have posted from somewhere other than the same place at some point. how can we prove you're not using another account by doing so? .... my point is we should make it clear.
son you're exactly right that I am backing out when offered because I realized how easily I could get screwed. I have admitted to working with fevertrees on a project in the past and I don't want that to be used against me. at least I am admitting it. Kori and Tim can see where you and I post from.
I'll keep my side of the bet since I don't know O.J.Simpson and have certainly not "done a project" with him.
If that name and mine share IP addresses, I'm IP banned for six months.
If not, you are IP banned for six months.
Does that work for you or do you want to back out altogether?
not fair at all and I do not accept. we stick to the original bet, but edit it down to within the last 3-6 months. I am not getting screwed over posting from the same place when working together.
That's not sticking to the original bet at all.
It's fine and perfectly understandable that you're backing out.
lol unfair
son I made the bet so if anyone can edit it that would be me. I gave you numerous opportunities to make the bet, you declined and kept spinning. You then offered to edit and I accepted after realizing the possible loophole that could screw me.
At least I am honest about my connection to fevertrees. I am not going to get screwed over something like that.
You backed out.
It's OK.
I let you.
you're a liar.
It's OK.
oh and good night Chump. it was fun
I lied about nothing.
I'm certainly willing to go through with my part of the bet, no squirming and no backing out like you did.
son I'm not getting screwed by something like that. I've already stated the facts as to why. You offered to edit and now you're going against your offer.
There was no offer to edit.
Only to back out.
You backed out.
It's OK.
I let you back out.
and back out he did. not like four years ago when he totally welshed on his own promise to get lost if McCain lost..
Right, it's not like he had any integrity in the first place.
It will be cool to see him whine about this again tbh.
his word is no good, but, big bull ters do keep things lively around here
son whatever helps you sleep at night. the facts are there. I was never misleading or dishonest about my connection to fevertrees and having worked with him in the past. I likely posted from the same IP address in the past on a date earlier in the year, but Kori and Tim can see where both you and I post from 99.9% of the time. You offered the edit (which now you're claiming was to back out) ... and I asked to edit those facts. I am not fevertrees and they can see that, but if you want to consider this a back out ... then go ahead Chumpy.
btw ... and I sincerely mean this in a polite way .... you would make for an excellent personal injury attorney or used car salesman. I admit, you're good at spinning .
Don't know where to drop this. This thread is as good as any. Maybe someone mentuioned it, but i didn't read everything in this forum that transired while I was at work.
Ohio...
I was keeping an eye on the votes at work today. CNN and MSNBC called the election for Obama when only Nevada had 4% reporting and Ohio had 74% reporting. I was shaking my head. These two states are what put him past 270 at this point. Obama only had 0.6% more on the votes in Ohio. I printed the page when this changed to 77% reporting. Obama: 49.5%, Romney: 48.82%. Now a 0.68% spread at this point. Later, with 82% reporting, the votes went to 48.95% Obama and 49.37% Romney, yet I don't think any media announced this. By the end of the night, Obama took the lead again, but I thought it would be funny of the media ended up being wrong again.
its a ing message board not Church
An edit was never offered.
As you already have the reputation of a terrible liar here, it's not difficult to see you are lying about that. One can only wonder why you bother to attempt to preserve a reputation that you already ruined many years ago.
There's a reason for that: percentage of county votes counted. Sure, Mitt could get a temporary surge from some small, still uncounted counties, but if you have a mammoth county with a significant amount of uncounted votes heavily leaning Barry, then the race is over. This is what the Fox data analyst was explaining to Karl Rove. Basically, with Cleveland heavily leaning Obama and a lot of votes still to go, there were not enough GOP friendly counties that could make up the difference.
So the punch line is they were right?
son now you refuse to admit the offer which was an edit. you however prefer to call it "an opportunity to back out" because well ... that sounds better for you. fine, I'll keep playing your game. I backed out then because I'm not going to get screwed by something that I am being completely honest about.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
