Wait, HIAG, you're telling me you made a bet, lost and DIDN'T expect the winner to rub it in and wind you up?! Welcome to the Internet HIAG. In the event that you ever win such a bet, I will look to see if you display the same type of modesty in victory
Oh, I fully expected that, Bodi. What I think is unfair is that it is being claimed that I (a) bottled the bet, and then (b) welched on it when I lost. Clearly, neither statement is true. By logical deduction, the first cannot be true if the second is true. As regards the second, one has only to look at my avatar to be forced into accepting that I honoured the bet by changing my avatar. Pixie's real beef is that I haven't changed it to the avatar that he wants, but that is an entirely different matter, and has nothing to do with either bottling or welching. What galls me most is that I am being called a bottler by someone who is a serial bottler! I was shocked to hear what @Saintsfan08 had to tell us, last night! I'm not sure that we ought to permit such rampant hypocrisy go unpunished. Perhaps the super mods ought to be notified?
Did you both agree on the assigned avatar to be used in the event that you lost? If you did, and you used a different avatar than that which was agreed, then you welched on the bet.
... to be succinct ... the original bet as agreed by both HIAG and Piskie was that the losing avatar would be chosen by @luvgonzo from suggestions put forward by other board members (which could include HIAG and Piskie) ... the idea being, or so I personally assumed, that this would enable Luv to be the arbiter of 'good taste' and act as a safeguard against offensive, inappropriate or otherwise extreme pictures ... HIAG has indeed changed his avatar to one of Tony Adams ... but not one that was put forward for @luvgonzo to consider and subsequently choose ... so in that sense he has not honoured the original bet ... at least not as I see it.
At the time that the bet was agreed, nothing had been decided. That is a fact. It was subsequently decided - but not binding within the bet, because the bet had already been taken - that the parties would agree on an avatar. Initially, I did agree on one particular avatar, but because Pixie acted like such a twat, I changed my mind, and have gone with the current avatar of Tony Adams. So, no bottling and no welching. That Pixie doesn't like my choice of avatar and would rather have me carry another avatar for better piss-taking-value is beside the point, as far as I am concerned.
So you HAVE reneged on the agreement made within the specifics of the bet? "Because PIXIE is a twat....." is not a valid reason. You knew that before you made the bet! I couldn't borrow £100 from someone then decide I am only going to give them back £30 because "he is a twat". Well i could, but I couldn't expect people to not call me out for it!
No, there has been no reneging on the bet. Pixie purported to accept the bet, but, in fact, he rejected it, because he purported to accept it on the ground that he choose the avatar. That wasn't how the bet was framed, so his "acceptance" was, in fact, a rejection of the bet. I was, in fact, the first to accept the bet, and Pixie only accepted the bet after his bottling was about to be exposed to the lads. He panicked and cravenly gave in to peer pressure. I, then, had to put up with this kind of **** (within the first couple of pages of the thread, before the rules had been finalised, or the bet properly accepted by both parties):- And so it continued for page after page after page, even though I had accepted the bet, but Pixie had not. The issue regarding the avatar was never properly settled until well after the bet had been accepted by both parties, and by then I had grown sick and tired of Pixie's juvenile crowing and general twattishness. In the end, I decided to choose my own avatar of Pixie, rather than go with the one that Pixie wanted, on the basis that "I am damned if I do, and damned if I don't." I am content that any reasonable person will accept that I have honoured a very ramshackle bet, in circumstances where I could so easily have walked away on the basis that the other participant was being a bottling twat about everything. He even started a separate thread to try to get support from his scummy segments to change the rules of the bet! Can you believe that! It was a shameful act of craven cowardice, and one that I, to this day, shudder at the thought of! But the lads were having none of it, and Pixie was forced into a humiliating climb-down. Then, as if to top it all, I now discover that this is not the first, or even the second or third time that Pixie has bottled a wager! What I learned recently from @Saintsfan08 is genuinely shocking! I feel soiled, once again.
I understand that, but then i thought you both accepted the bet on the condition that Luv chose the Avatar? Is that not the case?
We both accepted the rules, HIAG was then even quoted as agreeing to the avatar once Luv had chosen it. He welched it.
Kind of, but not quite. The whole process was a shambles from the very start to the very end, entirely the result of Pixie's continual juvenile and provocative crowing. When his scummy supporters turned up to over-indulge in the ridicule, that was when I really had enough. As Mr Loophole has pointed out, Luvvy was eventually goaded by Pixie's Human Centipede into choosing an avatar that Pixie wanted. What should have happened is that the avatars should have been chosen at the very start, then there would have been absolutely no doubt on the matter.
