Regarding Vague / Open to Interpreation Wagers

[mem]

DONT DO IT

The headaches Im seeing recently from the betsofbitco.in and bitbet.us fiasco's is crazy.

Site Operators:
* Start being more responsible if you wish to host these obscure wagers.
* Ensure the bet can be verified without questions being raised.

Players:
* Treat wagers like contract (which they basically are). If unsure of the wording request clarification and that the clarification be attached to the original wager for all to see.
* If you cannot get clarification DONT BET.


How these bets could have been handled better.

Betsofbitco.in should have selected X amount of trusted members who had BFL orders, any of them could able to provide photo and shipping reciept on recieval to confirm the bet.  Also the shipping method should have been specified and it should have required a scanned copy of the shipping invoice to verify it was indeed shipped and not an empty shoebox.

bitbet.us - This site hosts a bet about perfomance specifications and fails to quote them anywhere meaning we have to rely on the most recent figures released by BFL before the bet was made. How easy is it to cite your sources ?, really unprofessional.

[darkmule]

Betsofbitco.in should have selected X amount of trusted members who had BFL orders, any of them could able to provide photo and shipping reciept on recieval to confirm the bet.  Also the shipping method should have been specified and require scanned invoice to verify it was indeed shipped and not an empty shoebox.

While there are conceivable situations in which that bet might have been difficult to resolve, what actually happened is not one of those situations.  They didn't ship anything whatsoever.  It never even left their offices.  It certainly didn't leave by the date specified in the bet.

[mem]

Betsofbitco.in should have selected X amount of trusted members who had BFL orders, any of them could able to provide photo and shipping reciept on recieval to confirm the bet.  Also the shipping method should have been specified and require scanned invoice to verify it was indeed shipped and not an empty shoebox.

While there are conceivable situations in which that bet might have been difficult to resolve, what actually happened is not one of those situations.  They didn't ship anything whatsoever.  It never even left their offices.  It certainly didn't leave by the date specified in the bet.

Yes, unfortunately when looking @ the dictionary definition while shipping an item original meant literally "by ship" it now means to deliver.
Im no Judge Judy but LukeJr could go and wait at the receptionists while Soony waddles out with his parcel and hand deliver it to him and it would still be considered "shipped".



Captain Hindsight tells me that

* delivered via courier to a recipient's postal address/place of work/home

should have been one of the bet conditions.

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

It was not delivered to anyone. Luke-Jr did not take it, hold it, see it with his eyes, whatever, he was just given access to the unit over ssh. Not delivered or shipped, whatever definition you use.

[mem]

It was not delivered to anyone. Luke-Jr did not take it, hold it, see it with his eyes, whatever, he was just given access to the unit over ssh. Not delivered or shipped, whatever definition you use.

I suspect as much myself, but has this been proven and was it a condition of the bet that the recipient provide indisputable proof such as delivery invoice ?

[darkmule]

It was not delivered to anyone. Luke-Jr did not take it, hold it, see it with his eyes, whatever, he was just given access to the unit over ssh. Not delivered or shipped, whatever definition you use.

I suspect as much myself, but has this been proven and was it a condition of the bet that the recipient provide indisputable proof such as delivery invoice ?

In my opinion, Luke-Jr is a scammer himself, who only "accepted" the "Luke Unit" in a deliberate attempt to shill for BFL and rig the bet.  The "Luke Unit" was not one of the three units the bet specified, so even if they had "shipped" it, it didn't qualify.  Like any other case in which an insider is also taking action on the wager, it's a scam.  I don't really care so long as there is at least something in the list to indicate there's an issue the better should consider.

[mem]

In my opinion, Luke-Jr is a scammer himself, who only "accepted" the "Luke Unit" in a deliberate attempt to shill for BFL and rig the bet.

I would not be surprised, this is why the bet should have specified X forums members, perhaps using 1 of those preorder lists and stating must be confirmed by 1 of the first 25 people. Still then you have to worry that the 25 people will collude, bet against BFL delivering and then lie if the package is delivered in time.

The "Luke Unit" was not one of the three units the bet specified, so even if they had "shipped" it, it didn't qualify.

Thats an interesting, I shall query this further with some of the people in questions (just incase this is more than a mere bet being canceled due to conflicting descriptions).

I feel the site operators decision to nullify the bet due to a conflicting title and description was the right one, but the timing of when it was done was just plain lousy.

[Stunna]

I whole heartedly agree.

Also to the people placing these wagers, you need to be more vigilant over what you are actually gambling on. Always better to bet on something that is purely black and white (Will One sports team win a game or the other etc..)

If you leave in room for unexpected half-outcomes you are betting at terrible odds most likely.

In situations like the ones mentioned above, the websites themselves should be held accountable if they approved it and should simply award everyone the prize.

[mem]

Also to the people placing these wagers, you need to be more vigilant over what you are actually gambling on.

exactly, bitcoin is about personal responsibility - dont suddenly forget this when your gambling, its more important than ever.

If you leave in room for unexpected half-outcomes you are betting at terrible odds most likely.

Well said.

In situations like the ones mentioned above, the websites themselves should be held accountable if they approved it and should simply award everyone the prize.

Now that is an interesting punishment and one I could definitely get behind. 

In fact, a site that did this I would openly applaud as it would truly show your clients you have no designs to scam them.