jsearles and Chinamaniac debate about the value of his WSOP pieces

[Hockey Guy]

Please do yourself a favor and learn the difference between "then" and "than" before calling someone else borderline retarded. As you are well aware I have unfortunately read a lot of your posts, and not once have you ever used those two words correctly. Not fucking once. So fucking funny that a guy that talks so much shit still can't grasp something you learn in elementary school.

It's not a spelling error, it's a grammar issue. And I would take that bet if you could pay because I know you have not used it correctly once. Please prove me wrong and link me to ONE post where you have used it correctly. It's something I noticed about you a while ago, but I just laughed about it and never said anything. Trust me, up until my last post you didn't know the difference between then and than.
Also, my last 6 posts over the last week before this one had absolutely nothing to do with you, don't flatter yourself thinking I come here to troll you, that would be false. I just feel the need to point out stupidity when I see it, and it just so happens you tend to be the one saying stupid shit more than anyone else. 408mike has gotten off the meth, so obv you have stepped up in that category.

Do you not realize how much dumber this is making you look asking me to book a bet about something that you learn in elementary school? Maybe you luckboxed your way into using it correctly ONE fucking time, I could be wrong as I don't read every post you make, but the point is, and you haven't even denied this, YOU ARE CALLING PEOPLE BORDERLINE RETARDED YET YOU DIDN'T EVEN UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THEN AND THAN UNTIL I JUST POINTED IT OUT.
I have a better bet for you... How about I find, lets say 15 posts, where you have used those two words incorrectly? I will bet you $1000. Booked?

Ok, sorry, haven't had time to respond to this.
I did a search on then and than and come up empty, it says it is too common, which means I will have to search through all of your posts, which is a lot of fucking work. Also considering I will have to read all of your drivel I don't think $250 is enough for 25 posts. I will go with 15 posts for $250, and frankly what does the 10 extra posts mean anyway... 15 is a damn good sample size IMO. If you insist on 25 I will go for $500. So, your choice, either 15 for $250 or 25 for $500, your call, I'm the one taking most of the risk here considering you seem confident I am wrong.
Also, LOL @ 3 impartial judges... I'll give you your 3 fucking judges... THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE you mope. If you insist though, I nominate Druff, Tony B and maybe this Steve-O- guy. Fair enough?
One last thing... No editing of your posts prior to yesterday's date. If I go back and see a post from March that was just edited today, you owe me regardless if I produce the 15 or 25 errors. I doubt you would do that, but I just have to state the obv.

LOL, @ clowning on me when you don't even have a grasp on the simplest terms in the English language. You were serious, you just had some time to rethink this and realize you would most likely lose. Also, how could you win you ask? Very simple, we set a time limit... You would think a guy with your intellectual prowess would have thought that one up already. We set it for 48 hours, and if I don't produce, I lose.
Also, I would not count your misuses yesterday.
You're the one here trying to make wagers when tilted kid, don't sit here now and act like you weren't serious, anyone that reads this knows you were. So either admit that you simply are a borderline retard who doesn't know the difference between then and than, or accept the terms of the bet that you proposed to begin with.

What are you talking about with 24 hours? I haven't checked anything, I haven't even been on the internet since my post last night, up until right now. So you want 24 hours to go through your posts to see if you lose, then you cancel the bet if you do? LOL... Tell you what, let's bet on a Royals game tomorrow, I get the opposing team, but I don't want to book the bet till the game is over... OK? LOL! No 24 hours, that's ridiculous... Also, you not posting is not something I am interested in, and that definitely isn't worth the $500 to me.
I think it would be fair also to be able to go through your posts here and at DD, but at least half of the 25 have to be from here. Your 400+ posts aren't all that much considering I have to look for the use of 2 certain words, which I think you probably try to avoid using since they confuse you.
I will accept the 25 for $500.

I'd take you on myself, if you wish. 100 bucks, a dozen posts from here, in an hour. I will PM them to whomever you wish so as not to reveal them on to vegas. Or name whatever terms you are looking for.

Both words misused in the same post? $100 for 12 in an hr. Go!

What time is radio? I think I might be out to dinner with the wife tonight. I think its fairly later here though so I might be able to make it. I could be wrong but do you guys really want to hear me say "Vegas implicitly said both words, other wise I never would have taken the bet!" Then Vegas will say "you know thats not what I meant!" Then we will go over that in other terms about 15 different times and ways. I mean Im game if it fits in my schedule, Im just not sure the other listeners care to ruin the first scheduled radio show.

Do you know the definition of implicitly? I'll give you a hint, it doesn't mean implied nor is it the same word as implicit. Some words that can be used in place of implicitly & remember these are directly from a thesaurus are: absolutely, completely, utterly, unconditionally, unreservedly, firmly, & unhesitatingly.
Here's a link for you: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/implicitly


I have provided every word vegas1369 wrote in this thread leading up to the bet & where he accepted the bet.

You have stated several times that you were just accepting a bet that he put forth. Find & highlight for everyone where vegas used the word both. Seriously!!! You've wrote it several times now. He never used that word once in any post leading up to the bet. As a matter of fact, I believe you were the first person to use the word both in this thread during your brief back & forth with Crowe Diddly & I've also provided this for you.

You've boxed yourself in with your own words. He never said both, as a matter of fact, that word does not appear in any of his posts & you have stated he implicitly said both words & you've made this statement on numerous occasions.

Now you can say "that's not the definition of implicitly I use" & maybe come up with a link stating something else but where you really fucked up is by broaching the concept of there being 3 judges. vegas1369 put forth 3 judges & by not objecting to them before accepting the bet that could be construed as you accepting them as the judges. Judging is subjective & open to the way they interpret the agreement & there is no way 3 impartial & sane judges would ever rule in your favor.
You'd have to explain convincingly to them how he wrote both words when he in fact never used the word both at all. The closest he came was when he wrote "those two words" & no judge would say that this means both words & you have stated on numerous occasions that he used these words "implicitly".

You have once again hung yourself with your own stupidity.

Seriously find where he implicitly uses the word both.

YOU CANNOT DO IT.

I see Steve has already broached this in the last few pages. Unluckily for you he is one of the 3 judges you accepted. I guess you're fucked.

[jsearles22]

It's not a spelling error, it's a grammar issue. And I would take that bet if you could pay because I know you have not used it correctly once. Please prove me wrong and link me to ONE post where you have used it correctly. It's something I noticed about you a while ago, but I just laughed about it and never said anything. Trust me, up until my last post you didn't know the difference between then and than.
Also, my last 6 posts over the last week before this one had absolutely nothing to do with you, don't flatter yourself thinking I come here to troll you, that would be false. I just feel the need to point out stupidity when I see it, and it just so happens you tend to be the one saying stupid shit more than anyone else. 408mike has gotten off the meth, so obv you have stepped up in that category.

Do you not realize how much dumber this is making you look asking me to book a bet about something that you learn in elementary school? Maybe you luckboxed your way into using it correctly ONE fucking time, I could be wrong as I don't read every post you make, but the point is, and you haven't even denied this, YOU ARE CALLING PEOPLE BORDERLINE RETARDED YET YOU DIDN'T EVEN UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THEN AND THAN UNTIL I JUST POINTED IT OUT.
I have a better bet for you... How about I find, lets say 15 posts, where you have used those two words incorrectly? I will bet you $1000. Booked?

Ok, sorry, haven't had time to respond to this.
I did a search on then and than and come up empty, it says it is too common, which means I will have to search through all of your posts, which is a lot of fucking work. Also considering I will have to read all of your drivel I don't think $250 is enough for 25 posts. I will go with 15 posts for $250, and frankly what does the 10 extra posts mean anyway... 15 is a damn good sample size IMO. If you insist on 25 I will go for $500. So, your choice, either 15 for $250 or 25 for $500, your call, I'm the one taking most of the risk here considering you seem confident I am wrong.
Also, LOL @ 3 impartial judges... I'll give you your 3 fucking judges... THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE you mope. If you insist though, I nominate Druff, Tony B and maybe this Steve-O- guy. Fair enough?
One last thing... No editing of your posts prior to yesterday's date. If I go back and see a post from March that was just edited today, you owe me regardless if I produce the 15 or 25 errors. I doubt you would do that, but I just have to state the obv.

LOL, @ clowning on me when you don't even have a grasp on the simplest terms in the English language. You were serious, you just had some time to rethink this and realize you would most likely lose. Also, how could you win you ask? Very simple, we set a time limit... You would think a guy with your intellectual prowess would have thought that one up already. We set it for 48 hours, and if I don't produce, I lose.
Also, I would not count your misuses yesterday.
You're the one here trying to make wagers when tilted kid, don't sit here now and act like you weren't serious, anyone that reads this knows you were. So either admit that you simply are a borderline retard who doesn't know the difference between then and than, or accept the terms of the bet that you proposed to begin with.

What are you talking about with 24 hours? I haven't checked anything, I haven't even been on the internet since my post last night, up until right now. So you want 24 hours to go through your posts to see if you lose, then you cancel the bet if you do? LOL... Tell you what, let's bet on a Royals game tomorrow, I get the opposing team, but I don't want to book the bet till the game is over... OK? LOL! No 24 hours, that's ridiculous... Also, you not posting is not something I am interested in, and that definitely isn't worth the $500 to me.
I think it would be fair also to be able to go through your posts here and at DD, but at least half of the 25 have to be from here. Your 400+ posts aren't all that much considering I have to look for the use of 2 certain words, which I think you probably try to avoid using since they confuse you.
I will accept the 25 for $500.

I'd take you on myself, if you wish. 100 bucks, a dozen posts from here, in an hour. I will PM them to whomever you wish so as not to reveal them on to vegas. Or name whatever terms you are looking for.

Both words misused in the same post? $100 for 12 in an hr. Go!

What time is radio? I think I might be out to dinner with the wife tonight. I think its fairly later here though so I might be able to make it. I could be wrong but do you guys really want to hear me say "Vegas implicitly said both words, other wise I never would have taken the bet!" Then Vegas will say "you know thats not what I meant!" Then we will go over that in other terms about 15 different times and ways. I mean Im game if it fits in my schedule, Im just not sure the other listeners care to ruin the first scheduled radio show.

Do you know the definition of implicitly? I'll give you a hint, it doesn't mean implied nor is it the same word as implicit. Some words that can be used in place of implicitly & remember these are directly from a thesaurus are: absolutely, completely, utterly, unconditionally, unreservedly, firmly, & unhesitatingly.
Here's a link for you: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/implicitly


I have provided every word vegas1369 wrote in this thread leading up to the bet & where he accepted the bet.

You have stated several times that you were just accepting a bet that he put forth. Find & highlight for everyone where vegas used the word both. Seriously!!! You've wrote it several times now. He never used that word once in any post leading up to the bet. As a matter of fact, I believe you were the first person to use the word bothin this thread during your brief back & forth with Crowe Diddly & I've also provided this for you.

You've boxed yourself in with your own words. He never said both, as a matter of fact, that word does not appear in any of his posts & you have stated he implicitly said both words & you've made this statement on numerous occasions.

Now you can say "that's not the definition of implicitly I use" & maybe come up with a link stating something else but where you really fucked up is by broaching the concept of there being 3 judges. vegas1369 put forth 3 judges & by not objecting to them before accepting the bet that could be construed as you accepting them as the judges. Judging is subjective & open to the way they interpret the agreement & there is no way 3 impartial & sane judges would ever rule in your favor.
You'd have to explain convincingly to them how he wrote both words when he in fact never used the word both at all. The closest he came was when he wrote "those two words" & no judge would say that this means both words & you have stated on numerous occasions that he used these words "implicitly".

You have once again hung yourself with your own stupidity.

Seriously find where he implicitly uses the word both.

YOU CANNOT DO IT.

I may have misused the word implicitly. I misuse a lot of words. Have you been following along? I also already addressed that the word "both" and Vegas saying "those two" is one in the same.

Do you mean these judges:

Personally, I think he is doing alright, and actually has a valid arguement for the cancellation of the bet, or a reduction in the amount of it... like I said 200 posts ago

This will not be a popular decision, but I believe that both Vegas and Searles agreed to different bets, therefore the bet should be voided and cancelled.

Anyone that reads this and concludes that this fool doesn't owe me $500 needs to have their head examined.

So of the three guys you (Vegas) originally mentioned, 2 have chimed in and neither feel I owe you $500. Do they both need their heads examined

[lewfather]

Practicing avoidance, cuz

you could answer hockey guys question instead of diverting it away

[JUSTIFIEDhomicide]

Except thats not what Im saying here at all..........

What Im saying is that I accepted the bet as it was worded, that both errors must be in the same post.

the fact Vegas slipped up in his grammar in announcing the bet, when the bet itself is about grammar. Thats just classic.

I'm sure Searles knew Vegas's intent, but eh...if you're going to make a forum bet over grammar, should probably word the bet correctly.

Great Summary!

How do you not understand that one error makes them both errors? Never did he say both words must be used in the same post. You're trying to skate around this, and you're not going to prevail. Just stfu and pack it in and accept your fate.

[lewfather]

Nobody offering to buy the debt from Vegas yet?

[Sandwich]

"absolutely, completely, utterly, unconditionally, unreservedly, firmly, & unhesitatingly" is different from "literally"

Hockey Guy, you want jsearles to find THE WORD "both"? Huh?

In any event, the third quote does say "those two words". No denying that.

This aspect of jsearles's argument seems, on its face, to be more valid and coherent than Vegas's (paraphrasing) "use of one word incorrectly means both are used incorrectly" argument.

I'm not saying that wins it for jsearles or loses it for Vegas, but let's not go off on a tirade on something as ridiculous of jsearles's useof the word "implicitly"!

The "logic" in this thread is mind-boggling.

[jsearles22]

Practicing avoidance, cuz

you could answer hockey guys question instead of diverting it away

What was the question? Did Vegas use the word both? Nope, he used other words that to me meant the same thing. Did I use implicitly correct? Nope on that too.

[lewfather]

So you took a bet without understand the terms and now you don't want to pay, is that it?

[Sandwich]

How do you not understand that one error makes them both errors?

Here we go again with this ridiculousness. Re-read the "terms" of the bet. It was about using words incorrectly. If jsearles uses a word ("than", for example) once, how on earth can this be said to be using BOTH words incorrectly?? In my example, he hasn't even used the other word!

Logic, people!

[jsearles22]

So you took a bet without understand the terms and now you don't want to pay, is that it?

Why are you here Lew? I have clearly and unequivacally stated I took the bet fully understanding the terms. The offered bet was for both (or "those two") words to be in a post. Thats how I understood it.

[jsearles22]

How do you not understand that one error makes them both errors?

Here we go again with this ridiculousness. Re-read the "terms" of the bet. It was about using words incorrectly. If jsearles uses a word ("than", for example) once, how on earth can this be said to be using BOTH words incorrectly?? In my example, he hasn't even used the other word!

Logic, people!

I havent even addressed this part of the argument because its hilarious. All of these guys going to bat for Vegas and no one until now has even backed him on that argument. Its absurd.

[lewfather]

So you took a bet without understand the terms and now you don't want to pay, is that it?

Why are you here Lew? I have clearly and unequivacally stated I took the bet fully understanding the terms. The offered bet was for both (or "those two") words to be in a post. Thats how I understood it.

And now you don't want to pay, right ?

[jsearles22]

Why are you here Lew? I have clearly and unequivacally stated I took the bet fully understanding the terms. The offered bet was for both (or "those two") words to be in a post. Thats how I understood it.

And now you don't want to pay, right ?

Precisely. I took the bet understanding the terms and now I wont pay because I didnt lose per those terms. You said I didnt understand and dont want to pay and thats only 1/2 correct.

[vegas1369]

Whether or not you buy his idiotic argument about the wording of this bet, imo it is completely irrelevant. It is the intent if the bet that matters here, which was to prove jsearles is a fucking idiot who doesn't know the difference between then and than. This can not be disputed. The bet was to find 25 misuses and that is what was done. All this other shit is simply an angle shoot on his part and nothing more.

[jsearles22]

Whether or not you buy his idiotic argument about the wording of this bet, imo it is completely irrelevant. It is the intent if the bet that matters here, which was to prove jsearles is a fucking idiot who doesn't know the difference between then and than. This can not be disputed. The bet was to find 25 misuses and that is what was done. All this other shit is simply an angle shoot on his part and nothing more.

Personally, I think he is doing alright, and actually has a valid arguement for the cancellation of the bet, or a reduction in the amount of it... like I said 200 posts ago

This will not be a popular decision, but I believe that both Vegas and Searles agreed to different bets, therefore the bet should be voided and cancelled.

Anyone that reads this and concludes that this fool doesn't owe me $500 needs to have their head examined.

So of the three guys you (Vegas) originally mentioned, 2 have chimed in and neither feel I owe you $500. Do they both need their heads examined?

While you are here, check out my signature. All of these guys stepping up for you but you cant even coherently defend yourself.

[lewfather]

And now you don't want to pay, right ?

Precisely. I took the bet understanding the terms and now I wont pay because I didnt lose per those terms. You said I didnt understand and dont want to pay and thats only 1/2 correct.

If you accept a wager and lose, whether or not you understood it to whichever interpretation of your your choosing is irrelevant. Pretty sure if you don't pay or come to some agreement with Vegas you're going to get slapped with the scammer atleast to some degree a variation of it ie welcher.

Is $500 worth being trashed? I guess it's just the internet but not really a smart game to be playing.

[JUSTIFIEDhomicide]

You continue to make the salacious 15 posts before claim and that is simply a fabrication. There were 3 total posts discussing the bet before Vegas made his now infamous offer. Just because there are other posts in this thread, they literally had nothing to do with this bet.

Sorry if I was hyperbolic, but one post or 5,000, the intent was there. Fin

You lose Steve! You said it yourself:

If that is the only statement than either interpretation is correct

In the 3 posts there was no discussion at all regarding one use or multiple uses. Vegas denounced me, I made a million dollar offer, it was reduced to $500, and then he made the offer. By your own account, based on the facts, EITHER interpretation is correct.

First off, why am I doing this???????

but here goes: There were multiple posts leading up to, and after, the one you keep citing, so there is context and lets look at that shall we? ok.

Vegas' claim:

Trust me, up until my last post you didn't know the difference between then and than.

YOUR initial offer of the bet was a "you can find one instance where you used it correctly for $1 million" vegas then responds with the post you keep citing:

I have a better bet for you... How about I find, lets say 15 posts, where you have used those two words incorrectly? I will bet you $1000. Booked?

To which you respond with:

25 incorrect usages for $250 with a panel of 3 impartial judges to rule on the validity of each usage and it's merit. Would you book that bet than?

***why are you negotiating up to 25 instances if you think the bet is for both terms in the same post; it seems 15 instances is impossible or even 1???***
Vegas' response:

Ok, sorry, haven't had time to respond to this.

I did a search on then and than and come up empty, it says it is too common, which means I will have to search through all of your posts, which is a lot of fucking work. Also considering I will have to read all of your drivel I don't think $250 is enough for 25 posts. I will go with 15 posts for $250, and frankly what does the 10 extra posts mean anyway... 15 is a damn good sample size IMO. If you insist on 25 I will go for $500. So, your choice, either 15 for $250 or 25 for $500, your call, I'm the one taking most of the risk here considering you seem confident I am wrong.

Also, LOL @ 3 impartial judges... I'll give you your 3 fucking judges... THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE you mope. If you insist though, I nominate Druff, Tony B and maybe this Steve-O- guy. Fair enough?


One last thing... No editing of your posts prior to yesterday's date. If I go back and see a post from March that was just edited today, you owe me regardless if I produce the 15 or 25 errors. I doubt you would do that, but I just have to state the obv.

After you said you were "clowning" vegas he responded with:

So either admit that you simply are a borderline retard who doesn't know the difference between then and than, or accept the terms of the bet that you proposed to begin with.

You then posted:

I will take one of two wagers. The 25 for $500 or a different bet. Produce 30 such misuses in 48 hrs and I will never post again. Otherwise you ship me $500.

This is followed by a little back and forth about the number of posts and whether it is PFA or DD and PFA, but never is the notion that both words need to be present in a single post discussed. you then posted this saying the bet was booked:

25 posts but 15 have to be from here. $500. You have 48 hrs

AFTER a side discussion with Crowe Diddly you then posted this to HIM, with the first implicit mention of your new terms:

Both words misused in the same post? $100 for 12 in an hr. Go!

Crowe responds with:

No sir, not both words in the same post; one word used incorrectly in a place where the other word should be used. No silly angles here. 12 cases where you use then OR than incorrectly, when the other word should be used. Is this agreeable?

And this is when you suddenly change the nature of your bet with Vegas (publicly anyway):

Nope, because that's a different bet then Vegas and I have. Our bet is for both words in the same post. His words, not mine. I merely accepted his terms

If this is the language you are using tgo book a bet with Crowe why weren't you as specific with Vegas????

Notice how in every single thing you are quoting there is always the mention of errors? Its always multiple, the terms discussed always points to there needing to be more then one. This is precisely in line with the bet offered, IMO.

"If this is the language you are using tgo book a bet with Crowe why weren't you as specific with Vegas????

I didnt feel it was necessary frankly. Vegas made the offer. I felt compelled to clarify with Crowe because he very well may have misunderstood what out bet was. I didnt feel this was the case with Vegas.

So, earlier in this thread you admit to understanding the terms and Vegas not understanding them. Hence the reason you said you took the bet in the first place. Now you're saying you're almost certain Vegas was on the same page as you, but Crowe may not have been/>

You can only lie so many times before you slip up just once you utter fucking douchebag

[jsearles22]

Precisely. I took the bet understanding the terms and now I wont pay because I didnt lose per those terms. You said I didnt understand and dont want to pay and thats only 1/2 correct.

If you accept a wager and lose, whether or not you understood it to whichever interpretation of your your choosing is irrelevant. Pretty sure if you don't pay or come to some agreement with Vegas you're going to get slapped with the scammer atleast to some degree a variation of it ie welcher.

Is $500 worth being trashed? I guess it's just the internet but not really a smart game to be playing.

Who said I lost?

Personally, I think he is doing alright, and actually has a valid arguement for the cancellation of the bet, or a reduction in the amount of it... like I said 200 posts ago

This will not be a popular decision, but I believe that both Vegas and Searles agreed to different bets, therefore the bet should be voided and cancelled.

[lewfather]

If you accept a wager and lose, whether or not you understood it to whichever interpretation of your your choosing is irrelevant. Pretty sure if you don't pay or come to some agreement with Vegas you're going to get slapped with the scammer atleast to some degree a variation of it ie welcher.

Is $500 worth being trashed? I guess it's just the internet but not really a smart game to be playing.

Who said I lost?

Personally, I think he is doing alright, and actually has a valid arguement for the cancellation of the bet, or a reduction in the amount of it... like I said 200 posts ago

This will not be a popular decision, but I believe that both Vegas and Searles agreed to different bets, therefore the bet should be voided and cancelled.

You're clinging onto these two posts like they hold any validity, Steve-O for one never sided with you. He's just pointing out how you might have a case, he did the same with Vegas1369. T-Bags is god but this is just his opinion on the matter.

Tony is not the ruler on this board, unfortunately.

[jsearles22]

Who said I lost?

Personally, I think he is doing alright, and actually has a valid arguement for the cancellation of the bet, or a reduction in the amount of it... like I said 200 posts ago

This will not be a popular decision, but I believe that both Vegas and Searles agreed to different bets, therefore the bet should be voided and cancelled.

You're clinging onto these two posts like they hold any validity, Steve-O for one never sided with you. He's just pointing out how you might have a case, he did the same with Vegas1369. T-Bags is god but this is just his opinion on the matter.

Tony is not the ruler on this board, unfortunately.

I apologize. I thought Vegas hand picked Steve-O, Tony, and Druff?