jsearles and Chinamaniac debate about the value of his WSOP pieces

[Steve-O]

You do realize that if your claim is the statement is ambiguous than that cuts both ways right? Even if you're right that there are multiple interpretations, you're wrong in that Vegas would owe you money for the very same reason...

The absolute best you could ever hope for is the best is cancelled, you would never be entitled money

Don't put words in my mouth. I never said the offer was ambiguous. I think the offer made was very clear and concise:

How about I find, lets say 15 posts, where you have used those two words incorrectly?

Your own words will hang you:

The first level headed person to weigh in acknowledges that the bet can be interpreted multiple ways. Although he ultimately sides with Vegas, he attempts to mitigate the loss amount by acknowledging that the bet was not clear and concise per both parties. ***Also known as ambiguous***

The fact of the matter is that I accepted the bet on the premise that both words would be used in the same post as this is precisely what was offered. Steve-O acknowledges that this is a legit interpretation.

Your arguement is that the bet has multiple interpretations. My friendly advice is to stop digging and figure out a way to make this right

Also, you should probably realize that I'm the closest to your version of facts in this thread (which isn't all that close but is still better than anyone else is giving you) coming at me as your main instigator is probably the worst decision you could make