Re: 5th protect password?

At 01:59 PM 4/23/96 -0400, Black Unicorn wrote:
>On Tue, 23 Apr 1996 jamesd@echeque.com wrote:
>
>> At 06:19 AM 4/23/96 -0700, Sandy Sandfort wrote:
>
>> > didn't Unicorn offer Mr. Bell a 
>> > wager on this issue?  Isn't the ball in Mr. Bell's court to put
>> > his money where his mouth is?
>> 
>> Yeah:  fifty thousand dollars.  
>
>[...]
>
>> Now if Unicorn had proposed a bet for one hundred dollars, then
>> I would sit up and take notice.  A hundred dollars is real money.  
>
>US$ 100.00 it is.  Mr. Bell?

As I recall from a message a day ago, you claimed that you saw no way that 
we could come to any kind of agreement as to the terms and conditions.  I'm 
willing to accept your word on this prediction.

Jim Bell
jimbell@pacifier.com

On Tue, 23 Apr 1996, jim bell wrote:

> Black Unicorn wote:
> >  JamesD wrote:
> >> Now if Unicorn had proposed a bet for one hundred dollars, then
> >> I would sit up and take notice.  A hundred dollars is real money.  
> >
> >US$ 100.00 it is.  Mr. Bell?
> 
> As I recall from a message a day ago, you claimed that you saw no way that 
> we could come to any kind of agreement as to the terms and conditions.  I'm 
> willing to accept your word on this prediction.

I note for the record that I never predicted that the terms and
conditions would be complex or unresolved, but that you would alter
the claim and the logistics of the wager to the point where you might
evade the consequences of loss.

I note for the record that it was your post that originally supported its
accuracy with a call for wagering.

I note for the record that your claim, as you originally put it, was quite
clear.

There is no dispute of terms or conditions.  This is an uncomplicated
issue.

If your claim, as written, is correct, I shall pay to you or your
appointed agent US$ 100.

If it is false, you shall pay to me or my appointed agent US$ 100.

The only issue is how you wish to modify that claim for the purposes of
the wager so as to bring it within a semblence of accuracy.

Absent further interest on your part, I consider the matter closed and 
your claim retracted.

> 
> Jim Bell
> jimbell@pacifier.com
> 
> 

---
My preferred and soon to be permanent e-mail address:unicorn@schloss.li
"In fact, had Bancroft not existed,       potestas scientiae in usu est
Franklin might have had to invent him."    in nihilum nil posse reverti
00B9289C28DC0E55  E16D5378B81E1C96 - Finger for Current Key Information
Opp. Counsel: For all your expert testimony needs: jimbell@pacifier.com

Excerpts from internet.cypherpunks: 23-Apr-96 [Wager: Seeming
Resolution] by Black Unicorn@schloss.li 
> The only issue is how you wish to modify that claim for the purposes of
> the wager so as to bring it within a semblence of accuracy.
>  
> Absent further interest on your part, I consider the matter closed and 
> your claim retracted.

I confess I had a good laugh at Jim Bell's expense. His attempt at
weaseling was sadly uninspired, and Black Unicorn was quite right to
move in for the kill.

But to be fair to Jim Bell, perhaps $100 is still too high? I mean this
in complete seriousness: I have to come up with nearly $2,000 cash by
this weekend, and I wouldn't be able to make such a wager at this time,
no matter how right I felt I was.

-Declan

On Wed, 24 Apr 1996, Declan B. McCullagh wrote:

> I confess I had a good laugh at Jim Bell's expense. His attempt at
> weaseling was sadly uninspired, and Black Unicorn was quite right to
> move in for the kill.
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

   Is it possible that we are witnessing a self-fulfilling prophecy?
I believe that we are contributing to the gradual implementation of Jim's AP
system to deal with excessive noise posting (which makes AP to be The 
Assassination Posting) and unenforceable betting. It's interesting to note 
that this is the side-effect of Mr. Bell's own postings on the subject 
(congrats).

   I therefore bet 100 Monopoly Roubles that by the end of the "Unibell" 
dispute (sometime before all the stars freeze over) a contract on the 
original assassination politician's head(s) will have been successfully 
carried out. I also note that Mr. Unicorn, being wealthy and having wisely
protected his anonymity is in a fine position to carry this out. without 
any fear of retaliation or discovery. 

   What's more, during the "No matter where you go, there they are" thread, 
Jim sent a reply to Dr. Denning with the infamous cypherpunks@toad.com in 
the headers. Not smart. Alas, from now on, no matter where Jim goes, Dorothy 
will know. (Say, don't Uni and Denning both live around DC? Hmmm...)

   So I submit to the list that any reinvention of the AP is ultimately 
self-terminating. (Though it might reduce noise and deal with unsuscrivers)

The odds aren't good, Jim. You should have been more careful.

;-)

> But to be fair to Jim Bell, perhaps $100 is still too high? I mean this
> in complete seriousness: I have to come up with nearly $2,000 cash by
> this weekend, and I wouldn't be able to make such a wager at this time,
> no matter how right I felt I was.

Watch out Declan, the frustrated gamblers on the list might take your 
statements as encouragement to Jim and decide to test out the prototype 
AP on you first. )8-0


Be careful folks, Little Dorothy is watching You!


Ps. As this pseudonym will disappear before September, I am quite safe, 
myself.