NODE 11599d6cRe: Meta: The Arguing about the Terms of the Wager Continues
jim bell <jimbell@pacifier.com>Wed, 24 Apr 1996 21:54:39 -0700 (PDT)
At 07:07 AM 4/24/96 -0700, jamesd@echeque.com wrote:
>At 11:45 PM 4/23/96 -0700, Timothy C. May wrote:
>> And so the back-and-forth continues...taking up even more list space
>> arguing, waffling, finessing, rebutting, disputing, and on an on.
>>
>> Exactly as several of us have predicted.
>
>True, but one should note that it is Jim Bell that is weaseling,
>and that Unicorn is not weaseling.
Who says? Unicorn started by making an unbelievable challenge (especially
given the fact that he, unlike I, is anonymous) and THEN he claimed that he
didn't believe we'd ever agree to terms, etc.
This sounds like weaseling to me. Let Unicorn FIRST identify himself. Then
we'll see who's "weaseling."
NODE 727e1c0aRe: Meta: The Arguing about the Terms of the Wager Continues
Sandy Sandfort <sandfort@crl.com>Thu, 25 Apr 1996 07:14:43 -0700 (PDT)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
SANDY SANDFORT
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
C'punks,
On Wed, 24 Apr 1996, jim bell wrote:
> ... Let Unicorn FIRST identify himself. Then
> we'll see who's "weaseling."
What has identity got to do with it? If Jim is so worried about
it (as opposed to just trying to cover up his own weaseling),
then I will cover Black Unicorn's wager. I have a persistant
identity on this list. Hell, Eric Hughes has keys to my house.
I stand ready to hand Eric a postal money order made out to
"Jim Bell or Sandy Sandfort" and let him or Tim May or any of a
dozen other Cypherpunks decide this issue once and for all.
Is Bell willing to do the same?
Jim, take the damned bet or shut the fuck up.
S a n d y
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~