|
Title: Matthew is renigging on his bet. He doesn't recognize Pirate's debt to Goat. Post by: Coincomm on August 31, 2012, 04:31:37 AM So if Pirate does not pay Goat out according to the agreement but pays everyone else, you will lose your bet with Matthew.
So cancel your escrows and void your bets. He is not playing fair. Title: Re: Matthew is renigging on his bet. He doesn't recognize Pirate's debt to Goat. Post by: imsaguy on August 31, 2012, 04:32:18 AM So if Pirate does not pay Goat out according to the agreement but pays everyone else, you will lose your bet with Matthew. So cancel your escrows and void your bets. He is not playing fair. Trying to set a new record for most threads started in a day? Title: Re: Matthew is renigging on his bet. He doesn't recognize Pirate's debt to Goat. Post by: Matthew N. Wright on August 31, 2012, 04:32:46 AM SameAtlas is SameAtlas.
Title: Re: Matthew is renigging on his bet. He doesn't recognize Pirate's debt to Goat. Post by: myrkul on August 31, 2012, 04:43:11 AM SameAtlas is SameAtlas. He was doing pretty good, there for a bit. Title: Re: Matthew is renigging on his bet. He doesn't recognize Pirate's debt to Goat. Post by: repentance on August 31, 2012, 05:17:47 AM Pirate owes the investors. If he pays the investors of the PPTs whose operators do give him the information he asked for, then who do you hold responsible for him not paying the rest?
Personally, I don't think pirate can pay out 100% of investors because I believe that there will be some investors who won't lodge a claim if it requires revealing real life information about themselves. It will be interesting to see what pirate has to say after the midnight Friday deadline passed. When Goat asked him on IRC for the contact details for his lawyer, he implied that information would be made available on Friday. Quote <Chaang-Noi> pirate, can you make your lawyers phone number public? i want to have somethings confirmed. <reeses> that might be the smart move, because you can say things now that fuck you into piercing your corp. shield <pirateat40> Chaang-Noi, those details will be available on Friday and all communication will be by certified mail. I'm curious about what he means by that last part and whether his lawyers will not be communicating with anyone by phone or email. Title: Re: Matthew is renigging on his bet. He doesn't recognize Pirate's debt to Goat. Post by: imsaguy on August 31, 2012, 05:21:52 AM Pirate owes the investors. If he pays the investors of the PPTs whose operators do give him the information he asked for, then who do you hold responsible for him not paying the rest? Personally, I don't think pirate can pay out 100% of investors because I believe that there will be some investors who won't lodge a claim if it requires revealing real life information about themselves. It will be interesting to see what pirate has to say after the midnight Friday deadline passed. When Goat asked him on IRC for the contact details for his lawyer, he implied that information would be made available on Friday. Quote <Chaang-Noi> pirate, can you make your lawyers phone number public? i want to have somethings confirmed. <reeses> that might be the smart move, because you can say things now that fuck you into piercing your corp. shield <pirateat40> Chaang-Noi, those details will be available on Friday and all communication will be by certified mail. I'm curious about what he means by that last part and whether his lawyers will not be communicating with anyone by phone or email. If nothing else, I'm sure if it goes legal, the first set of documents would be sent certified/registered, with additional correspondence between counsel done via other methods. Title: Re: Matthew is renigging on his bet. He doesn't recognize Pirate's debt to Goat. Post by: Coincomm on August 31, 2012, 05:24:34 AM Pirate's debt is to Goat and Goat only.
What Goat does outside the debt is irrelevant. Title: Re: Matthew is renigging on his bet. He doesn't recognize Pirate's debt to Goat. Post by: Coincomm on August 31, 2012, 05:25:32 AM He may use to the payouts to pay for medical care for his hooker, feed the poor or resell the payouts. Whatever he does doesn't matter in regards to his loan with Pirate.
Title: Re: Matthew is renigging on his bet. He doesn't recognize Pirate's debt to Goat. Post by: imsaguy on August 31, 2012, 05:25:37 AM Pirate's debt is to Goat and Goat only. What Goat does outside the debt is irrelevant. Good try, but no. Title: Re: Matthew is renigging on his bet. He doesn't recognize Pirate's debt to Goat. Post by: SysRun on August 31, 2012, 05:28:52 AM imsaguy, please explain.
Title: Re: Matthew is renigging on his bet. He doesn't recognize Pirate's debt to Goat. Post by: Coincomm on August 31, 2012, 05:29:34 AM imsaguy, please explain. This. Pirate's agreement with Goat only includes themselves. Nobody else. Title: Re: Matthew is renigging on his bet. He doesn't recognize Pirate's debt to Goat. Post by: myrkul on August 31, 2012, 05:31:44 AM Pirate owes the investors. If he pays the investors of the PPTs whose operators do give him the information he asked for, then who do you hold responsible for him not paying the rest? Pirate's debt is to Goat and Goat only. This. Investors->PPT->Pirate. Pirate's obligation is completed when he pays the PPT operators. The operators are obligated to honor their contracts. If you have a pass through account, deal with your operator, not with Pirate. Pirate doesn't have your account, he has one for the operator of the pass through. Title: Re: Matthew is renigging on his bet. He doesn't recognize Pirate's debt to Goat. Post by: imsaguy on August 31, 2012, 05:33:15 AM imsaguy, please explain. This. Pirate's agreement with Goat only includes themselves. Nobody else. Its basically 3rd party beneficiary. The bond never limited this liability. The whole reason goat setup the bond was so others could use it as a PPT. It was setup to benefit someone else. Title: Re: Matthew is renigging on his bet. He doesn't recognize Pirate's debt to Goat. Post by: Coincomm on August 31, 2012, 05:35:36 AM imsaguy, please explain. This. Pirate's agreement with Goat only includes themselves. Nobody else. Its basically 3rd party beneficiary. The bond never limited this liability. The whole reason goat setup the bond was so others could use it as a PPT. It was setup to benefit someone else. The liability is not implied. Ask Goat if he told Pirate what he was doing with HIS account. The agreement does not give Pirate a free-for-all. Title: Re: Matthew is renigging on his bet. He doesn't recognize Pirate's debt to Goat. Post by: imsaguy on August 31, 2012, 05:37:47 AM imsaguy, please explain. This. Pirate's agreement with Goat only includes themselves. Nobody else. Its basically 3rd party beneficiary. The bond never limited this liability. The whole reason goat setup the bond was so others could use it as a PPT. It was setup to benefit someone else. The liability is not implied. Ask Goat if he told Pirate what he was doing with HIS account. The agreement does not give Pirate a free-for-all. No, goat actually created the liability when he started doing the PPT. Title: Re: Matthew is renigging on his bet. He doesn't recognize Pirate's debt to Goat. Post by: Coincomm on August 31, 2012, 05:39:22 AM imsaguy, please explain. This. Pirate's agreement with Goat only includes themselves. Nobody else. Its basically 3rd party beneficiary. The bond never limited this liability. The whole reason goat setup the bond was so others could use it as a PPT. It was setup to benefit someone else. The liability is not implied. Ask Goat if he told Pirate what he was doing with HIS account. The agreement does not give Pirate a free-for-all. No, goat actually created the liability when he started doing the PPT. There is no common law on the books that allows you to create liability for other people by using their products or otherwise. Title: Re: Matthew is renigging on his bet. He doesn't recognize Pirate's debt to Goat. Post by: Matthew N. Wright on August 31, 2012, 05:39:30 AM imsaguy, please explain. This. Pirate's agreement with Goat only includes themselves. Nobody else. Its basically 3rd party beneficiary. The bond never limited this liability. The whole reason goat setup the bond was so others could use it as a PPT. It was setup to benefit someone else. Fuck it this is all silliness and FUD... I highly suspect pirate is just fucking around and playing games... Ditto. Title: Re: Matthew is renigging on his bet. He doesn't recognize Pirate's debt to Goat. Post by: SysRun on August 31, 2012, 05:39:37 AM I don't know guys, it sounds dubious. Maybe its time to let some attorneys take a look and put in their 200,000 cents
Title: Re: Matthew is renigging on his bet. He doesn't recognize Pirate's debt to Goat. Post by: Coincomm on August 31, 2012, 05:40:54 AM imsaguy, please explain. This. Pirate's agreement with Goat only includes themselves. Nobody else. Its basically 3rd party beneficiary. The bond never limited this liability. The whole reason goat setup the bond was so others could use it as a PPT. It was setup to benefit someone else. Fuck it this is all silliness and FUD... I highly suspect pirate is just fucking around and playing games... Ditto. You better do good on your bet, you fucker. I will not pay if you pull this shit. Title: Re: Matthew is renigging on his bet. He doesn't recognize Pirate's debt to Goat. Post by: Matthew N. Wright on August 31, 2012, 05:41:19 AM imsaguy, please explain. This. Pirate's agreement with Goat only includes themselves. Nobody else. Its basically 3rd party beneficiary. The bond never limited this liability. The whole reason goat setup the bond was so others could use it as a PPT. It was setup to benefit someone else. Fuck it this is all silliness and FUD... I highly suspect pirate is just fucking around and playing games... Ditto. You better do good on your bet, you fucker. I will not pay if you pull this shit. Atlas? Are you threatened? Title: Re: Matthew is renigging on his bet. He doesn't recognize Pirate's debt to Goat. Post by: Coincomm on August 31, 2012, 05:46:02 AM imsaguy, please explain. This. Pirate's agreement with Goat only includes themselves. Nobody else. Its basically 3rd party beneficiary. The bond never limited this liability. The whole reason goat setup the bond was so others could use it as a PPT. It was setup to benefit someone else. Fuck it this is all silliness and FUD... I highly suspect pirate is just fucking around and playing games... Ditto. You better do good on your bet, you fucker. I will not pay if you pull this shit. Atlas? Are you threatened? I am not your fucktarded buddy. Take a look at your bet thread and take a guess. Title: Re: Matthew is renigging on his bet. He doesn't recognize Pirate's debt to Goat. Post by: repentance on August 31, 2012, 05:56:24 AM imsaguy, please explain. This. Pirate's agreement with Goat only includes themselves. Nobody else. Its basically 3rd party beneficiary. The bond never limited this liability. The whole reason goat setup the bond was so others could use it as a PPT. It was setup to benefit someone else. To some extent, I think the question revolves around who would have standing to sue pirate - the investors or the PPT operators. Pirate's not obliged to pay anyone who has no legal standing to collect the debts owed or accept settlements on their behalf and it's not clear that the agreements made between the investors and the pass-throughs give their operators that authority. It's definitely not clear that the PPT operators would have a claim that is provable in bankruptcy if pirate goes through a legal insolvency process (which seems unlikely if his business model involved illegal activity as so many suspect). I definitely want to hear what transpires at the next supersekrit IRC meeting, especially as GPUMax payments have reportedly been flaky lately. Just out of interest. Are any of the PPT operators going to agree to a settlement on undisclosed terms if that's what pirate demands? Title: Re: Matthew is renigging on his bet. He doesn't recognize Pirate's debt to Goat. Post by: repentance on August 31, 2012, 07:02:48 AM No fucking way would i do that. Pleased to hear it. Title: Re: Matthew is renigging on his bet. He doesn't recognize Pirate's debt to Goat. Post by: PinkyPie on August 31, 2012, 09:50:28 AM I thought matthew had already lost his bet...
Quote from: Hexadecibel Quote from: Matthew N. Wright If he owes 100% and only pays back 90% without agreement to investors, -that- is fraud and a failure to pay back. I would obviously lose the bet. If he owes 100% and only pays back 90% but the investors agreed to it, -that- is the agreement and therefor he has paid it back. I would win the bet. If he owes 100% and pays back 100%, I would win the bet. If he owes 100% and does not pay anything anything back, I would lose the bet. but then: Quote from: Matthew N. Wright Post in this thread how much you're committing and I will double that amount you commit (maximum of 10,000BTC in bets allowed in this thread total) if Pirate does not pay out in 3 weeks as he described in his thread. And pirate's thread: Quote from: Pirateat40 When will I get my coins? Starting Monday I値l begin systematically closing and withdrawing accounts as coins are transferred. I don't expect the entire process to last longer than a week. The moment your account is closed you値l receive your coins plus any interest accrued up to the hour it was sent. By this criteria Matthew has lost the bet. Pirate has admitted default and interest is no longer accruing which is in breach of the terms. QED. Title: Re: Matthew is renigging on his bet. He doesn't recognize Pirate's debt to Goat. Post by: repentance on August 31, 2012, 10:16:06 AM I thought matthew had already lost his bet... Quote from: Hexadecibel Quote from: Matthew N. Wright If he owes 100% and only pays back 90% without agreement to investors, -that- is fraud and a failure to pay back. I would obviously lose the bet. If he owes 100% and only pays back 90% but the investors agreed to it, -that- is the agreement and therefor he has paid it back. I would win the bet. If he owes 100% and pays back 100%, I would win the bet. If he owes 100% and does not pay anything anything back, I would lose the bet. but then: Quote from: Matthew N. Wright Post in this thread how much you're committing and I will double that amount you commit (maximum of 10,000BTC in bets allowed in this thread total) if Pirate does not pay out in 3 weeks as he described in his thread. And pirate's thread: Quote from: Pirateat40 When will I get my coins? Starting Monday I値l begin systematically closing and withdrawing accounts as coins are transferred. I don't expect the entire process to last longer than a week. The moment your account is closed you値l receive your coins plus any interest accrued up to the hour it was sent. By this criteria Matthew has lost the bet. Pirate has admitted default and interest is no longer accruing which is in breach of the terms. QED. Under the terms of the bet, pirate has until 9 September to pay the investors 100% of what they are owed or an alternative amount agreed to by the investors. However certain it might seem that pirate will do neither, the date was set in the original bet and there's no reason to require Matthew to pay out before that time. Title: Re: Matthew is renigging on his bet. He doesn't recognize Pirate's debt to Goat. Post by: BadBear on August 31, 2012, 02:33:43 PM I thought matthew had already lost his bet... Quote from: Hexadecibel Quote from: Matthew N. Wright If he owes 100% and only pays back 90% without agreement to investors, -that- is fraud and a failure to pay back. I would obviously lose the bet. If he owes 100% and only pays back 90% but the investors agreed to it, -that- is the agreement and therefor he has paid it back. I would win the bet. If he owes 100% and pays back 100%, I would win the bet. If he owes 100% and does not pay anything anything back, I would lose the bet. but then: Quote from: Matthew N. Wright Post in this thread how much you're committing and I will double that amount you commit (maximum of 10,000BTC in bets allowed in this thread total) if Pirate does not pay out in 3 weeks as he described in his thread. And pirate's thread: Quote from: Pirateat40 When will I get my coins? Starting Monday I値l begin systematically closing and withdrawing accounts as coins are transferred. I don't expect the entire process to last longer than a week. The moment your account is closed you値l receive your coins plus any interest accrued up to the hour it was sent. By this criteria Matthew has lost the bet. Pirate has admitted default and interest is no longer accruing which is in breach of the terms. QED. Under the terms of the bet, pirate has until 9 September to pay the investors 100% of what they are owed or an alternative amount agreed to by the investors. However certain it might seem that pirate will do neither, the date was set in the original bet and there's no reason to require Matthew to pay out before that time. I concur, it does look like he lost and there's really no way to win but might as well stick to the deadline. Title: Re: Matthew is renigging on his bet. He doesn't recognize Pirate's debt to Goat. Post by: evolve on August 31, 2012, 02:35:14 PM I thought matthew had already lost his bet... Quote from: Hexadecibel Quote from: Matthew N. Wright If he owes 100% and only pays back 90% without agreement to investors, -that- is fraud and a failure to pay back. I would obviously lose the bet. If he owes 100% and only pays back 90% but the investors agreed to it, -that- is the agreement and therefor he has paid it back. I would win the bet. If he owes 100% and pays back 100%, I would win the bet. If he owes 100% and does not pay anything anything back, I would lose the bet. but then: Quote from: Matthew N. Wright Post in this thread how much you're committing and I will double that amount you commit (maximum of 10,000BTC in bets allowed in this thread total) if Pirate does not pay out in 3 weeks as he described in his thread. And pirate's thread: Quote from: Pirateat40 When will I get my coins? Starting Monday I値l begin systematically closing and withdrawing accounts as coins are transferred. I don't expect the entire process to last longer than a week. The moment your account is closed you値l receive your coins plus any interest accrued up to the hour it was sent. By this criteria Matthew has lost the bet. Pirate has admitted default and interest is no longer accruing which is in breach of the terms. QED. Under the terms of the bet, pirate has until 9 September to pay the investors 100% of what they are owed or an alternative amount agreed to by the investors. However certain it might seem that pirate will do neither, the date was set in the original bet and there's no reason to require Matthew to pay out before that time. When I made my bet, I put the specific caveat in my bet that I win if pirate doesn't pay out 100% (regardless of any agreement by pirate). He agreed to those terms when he accepted the bet, so he is not weasling out that easy. Title: Re: Matthew is renigging on his bet. He doesn't recognize Pirate's debt to Goat. Post by: cryptoanarchist on August 31, 2012, 02:39:57 PM You'd have to be either naive or just out to make a point to get in a bet with a piece of shit like Matthew. The guy is a meth head sleazeball who has yet to do anything meaningful in life.
Title: Re: Matthew is renigging on his bet. He doesn't recognize Pirate's debt to Goat. Post by: bitlane on August 31, 2012, 02:42:17 PM .......a meth head sleazeball who has yet to do anything meaningful in life. I take offense to that. METH IS AWESOME....and some of us are just a bit 'behind schedule' in life ;) Title: Re: Matthew is renigging on his bet. He doesn't recognize Pirate's debt to Goat. Post by: myrkul on August 31, 2012, 02:44:11 PM You'd have to be either naive or just out to make a point to get in a bet with a piece of shit like Matthew. The guy is a meth head sleazeball who has yet to do anything meaningful in life. [需要的引證] Title: Re: Matthew is renigging on his bet. He doesn't recognize Pirate's debt to Goat. Post by: muyuu on August 31, 2012, 02:49:37 PM Of course Pirate would rather not pay Goat, who he thinks is his little bitch, than not paying potentially dangerous fuckers he doesn't know.
As for the bet, the good thing is that Bitcoin London 2012 is a good 1 week after it's settled and Matthew will be there :D Title: Re: Matthew is renigging on his bet. He doesn't recognize Pirate's debt to Goat. Post by: organofcorti on August 31, 2012, 02:53:06 PM It's spelled "renege", Coincomm. Not "renigg". That's not even a word. Why should I pay attention to what you write if you can't spell?
Title: Re: Matthew is renigging on his bet. He doesn't recognize Pirate's debt to Goat. Post by: finkleshnorts on August 31, 2012, 03:11:02 PM He probably learned the word by playing spades at summer camp.
Title: Re: Matthew is renigging on his bet. He doesn't recognize Pirate's debt to Goat. Post by: organofcorti on August 31, 2012, 03:13:20 PM ........ a piece of shit like Matthew. The guy is a meth head sleazeball ..... Proof or it never happened. Title: Re: Matthew is renigging on his bet. He doesn't recognize Pirate's debt to Goat. Post by: Raoul Duke on August 31, 2012, 03:28:17 PM You better do good on your bet, you fucker. I will not pay if you pull this shit. Atlas? Are you threatened? I am not your fucktarded buddy. Take a look at your bet thread and take a guess. Taking into account that the only 2 persons who ever used the word renigging on this board were MNW himself and FreeMoney I would say you are FreeMoney. lol https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=66988.msg780435#msg780435 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=93401.msg1031723#msg1031723 Title: Re: Matthew is renigging on his bet. He doesn't recognize Pirate's debt to Goat. Post by: JoelKatz on August 31, 2012, 03:35:19 PM There is no common law on the books that allows you to create liability for other people by using their products or otherwise. Not true. See my post about intended third party beneficiaries. The PPT operator has no incentive to pursue Pirate, so equity requires the pass through account holders be able to hold Pirate liable for his default to the PPT operator. Pirate's obligation is to the operators, but most likely PPT holders can enforce it due to their standing as creditor beneficiaries.Title: Re: Matthew is renigging on his bet. He doesn't recognize Pirate's debt to Goat. Post by: Raoul Duke on August 31, 2012, 03:37:43 PM You better do good on your bet, you fucker. I will not pay if you pull this shit. Atlas? Are you threatened? I am not your fucktarded buddy. Take a look at your bet thread and take a guess. Taking into account that the only 2 persons who ever used the word renigging on this board were MNW himself and FreeMoney I would say you are FreeMoney. lol https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=66988.msg780435#msg780435 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=93401.msg1031723#msg1031723 I would lol and bet he is MNW! :) But MNW didn't bet against MNW. FreeMoney did. 250BTC. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=101751.msg1121350#msg1121350 Quote 250BTC 1NB7tHLzccurAudr7n3RtjjuxeirCqoGGG Title: Re: Matthew is renigging on his bet. He doesn't recognize Pirate's debt to Goat. Post by: JoelKatz on August 31, 2012, 03:51:06 PM "The PPT operator has no incentive to pursue Pirate" Yeah fucking right... Not only do I hold 1/4th of the bonds but... I'm only talking about debt corresponding to sold bonds.Title: Re: Matthew is renigging on his bet. He doesn't recognize Pirate's debt to Goat. Post by: JoelKatz on August 31, 2012, 03:55:06 PM "The PPT operator has no incentive to pursue Pirate" Yeah fucking right... Not only do I hold 1/4th of the bonds but... I'm only talking about debt corresponding to sold bonds.I bought 1/4th of my bonds. Title: Re: Matthew is renigging on his bet. He doesn't recognize Pirate's debt to Goat. Post by: myrkul on August 31, 2012, 03:58:19 PM "The PPT operator has no incentive to pursue Pirate" Yeah fucking right... Not only do I hold 1/4th of the bonds but... I'm only talking about debt corresponding to sold bonds.I bought 1/4th of my bonds. What happened to the sandwich, Joel? Does not the deli owner have incentive to chase you down? Title: Re: Matthew is renigging on his bet. He doesn't recognize Pirate's debt to Goat. Post by: Phinnaeus Gage on August 31, 2012, 04:27:15 PM You'd have to be either naive or just out to make a point to get in a bet with a piece of shit like Matthew. The guy is a meth head sleazeball who has yet to do anything meaningful in life. I, for one, don't necessarily echo the sentiment above about Matthew, although I'm well aware of his missteps in the past on this forum. Currently, I have no facts that Matthew is mixed up in any nefarious schemes, but I did promise Matthew that if I ever did find something not up to snuff, that I would PM/email him first prior to publishing. I guess you can say he's one of those guys that you can love him and hate him at the same time. ~Bruno~ Title: Re: Matthew is renigging on his bet. He doesn't recognize Pirate's debt to Goat. Post by: imsaguy on August 31, 2012, 04:28:17 PM There is no common law on the books that allows you to create liability for other people by using their products or otherwise. Not true. See my post about intended third party beneficiaries. The PPT operator has no incentive to pursue Pirate, so equity requires the pass through account holders be able to hold Pirate liable for his default to the PPT operator. Pirate's obligation is to the operators, but most likely PPT holders can enforce it due to their standing as creditor beneficiaries.aha, I knew someone had posted about it. I just couldn't remember who. Title: Re: Matthew is renigging on his bet. He doesn't recognize Pirate's debt to Goat. Post by: JoelKatz on August 31, 2012, 08:45:51 PM What happened to the sandwich, Joel? Does not the deli owner have incentive to chase you down? In that case, yes, because the agreements are different. The sandwich example only shows why indirect payments don't work.Title: Re: Matthew is renigging on his bet. He doesn't recognize Pirate's debt to Goat. Post by: bitlane on August 31, 2012, 08:54:07 PM I have told Matthew time and time again. HE CAN NOT WIN, as Pirate has made it clear that he intends to fuck me over.
Matthew seems to think different and INCLUDES ME as well as all other terms of the Vandroiy Bet, in his own bet. It makes no sense. Title: Re: Matthew is renigging on his bet. He doesn't recognize Pirate's debt to Goat. Post by: AndrewBUD on August 31, 2012, 08:58:59 PM This is a huge cluster fuck of retartedness......... someone punch someone already........ and I would have spelled renege "renigg" it's just how you say it.... Playing Euchre :D (meth is disgusting, big huge tokes of ASS flavor)
Title: Re: Matthew is renigging on his bet. He doesn't recognize Pirate's debt to Goat. Post by: bitlane on August 31, 2012, 09:06:39 PM ..... (meth is disgusting, big huge tokes of ASS flavor) Fair enough. Excuse me while I climb back down into my K-hole. See you all in a couple days. Title: Re: Matthew is renigging on his bet. He doesn't recognize Pirate's debt to Goat. Post by: Coincomm on August 31, 2012, 09:10:09 PM I am aware renege is the proper spelling. I just like renig much more.
Title: Re: Matthew is renigging on his bet. He doesn't recognize Pirate's debt to Goat. Post by: AndrewBUD on August 31, 2012, 09:11:35 PM I am aware renege is the proper spelling. I just like renig much more. I concur Title: Re: Matthew is renigging on his bet. He doesn't recognize Pirate's debt to Goat. Post by: bitlane on August 31, 2012, 09:19:18 PM |