^ this

I'm surprised there's any debate about this.

So is there a distinction between freerolling and being a deadbeat who gets in over his head and can't pay his bets? Wouldn't you need to know intent?

We do know what the intent was here.

ok

This debate is great for determining who to hunchcap with and who not.

Cruz,

He created a fake identity in order to book bets he knew he couldn't cover. This isn't a case were he can cover 100k and bettors go on a sick run and he needs a few days to payout. It's obvious what his plan was from the beginning.

You're still forcing the economic equivalent of a freeroll onto him, which to me is punitive. Full restitution would involve paying fubster what he would have gotten had all bets been legitimate.

If you really think about it, babs is the victim here.

Penelope,


That’s correct. Fubster has added on a penalty for trying to scam him.

It all started innocently enough. He used the Bay Area Earthquake of 1989 to get out of some bets on the school yard on the Giants vs. Athletics world series. He was frantically using his 3rd grade math wizardry to assist Cal Trans with the collapsed interstates in Oakland and the damaged Bay Bridge and had no time for stupid, petty school yard bets. Matter of fact, after wishing death upon everyone's whore mothers, he openly questioned why he even continued to come to the school yard for recess when so many out there needed his help.

Oh I missed this! Excellent subliminal post!!! Hopefully my backstory did it some justice

Assuming you aren’t just trolling:

He wasn’t paying out of the winnings after the bets were completed, he was freerolling Fubs the whole time. He made up a fake bookie to take the bets. He was hoping Fubs would never be in the black or at least wouldn’t ask for payment while he was in the black.

Unfortunately, Fubs turned out to be a winning sports bettor and asked for payment. Nima had spent / gambled away all of Fubs’ money so he had no way to pay him. Nima’s response was to pretend the bookie had disappeared (and openly surmised he might have died in the wild fires).

He would have gotten away with it too, if not for jmakin suddenly remembering that Nima had used “Sterling Korb” to threaten him on Facebook. Babs eventually admitted to the whole scam after being confronted with all of the facts and probably being worried about being sent to jail for fraud.

Nima’s father agreed to pay $10k of the total debt to get Nima out of trouble. Nima agreed to pay the rest of the debt. Now Nima is trying to weasel out of paying his portion.

Keep in mind that Fubs would have gotten *nothing* had jmakin not put two and two together to cause the scam to unravel.

OK, so he's demanding money in excess of what he's economically owed, threatening to turn him in to the police if he doesn't pay this "penalty" which he himself has imposed. Sounds a lot like extortion to me.

Well good thing PenelopeCruz has no say in the matter

I think she makes a strong case. Babs should reconsider taking fubster to court.

It's funny how babs equates truth with trolling.

https://www.google.com/search?q=exto...hrome&ie=UTF-8

Ya. I don't know who admo is or what he does but from context I know I wouldn't want to cross him.

PenelopeCruz,

Genuinely interested in your answer to these questions, as I don't think this issue is black/white.

If I take a bet from you planning to not pay you back if you win, and only collect from you if you lose, is it a valid bet?

If you lose the bet and are about to pay me, but I tell someone in a recorded conversation that I was not going to pay you if you won, and that I didn't have the money to pay you, and that I was free-rolling you, are you still obligated to pay?

First link says

Gregorio,

It also goes on to discuss the grey area when your claim is something other than what would be considered a legal, equitable restitution

No to both, but i think this situation is more complicated given that it's a series of bets and things progressed quite a bit further.

Using the same example, if it were 10 bets ($100, pk) I win 6, you win 4 am I supposed to demand $200 or $600?

He's paying back money that was submitted to him in order to place bets with "Sterling," right? He's not just being charged for money that was promised in a wager?

Someone mod me for five minutes and I'll take care of this.

If I sold you something on eBay, but failed to deliver, would you demand the product and a refund?