12-16-2025, 10:48 AM
How many ways are there to trip out a friendly wager, making the odds against victory seem astronomically higher than they really are, for the victorious team?
Examples:
A Column / Middle Column (true either way) / B Column
A Column is stuff that seems true that leverages slander, the middle column the same, and B Column the stuff that's too good to be true (but true anyway).
Betters are just told to bet A, & it is subliminally hinted that there is only an A Column.
B Column reads:
Can dodge or bounce bullets (unstated: if thrown by hand)
Infinity against odds (unstated: every event happens one out of an infinite number of times)
Common usage interpretations, most common to the majority (unstated: of statement: "You got it right if you bet on him," which in common usage means to win, and most people think that's a diction)
Most literal interpretations are true (example: "You got it right if you bet on him" The most literal interpretation means to the bet author If literals stacked. Right side (B Column Side) is the right / ("correct" = a definition of right) answer, and it is Morally appropriate to want him to win. His name is B, so you got it right if you bet on him in the sense of the name/column B)
(actual improbable stuff about the individual documented to the best of bet author's ability, often with a misleading context)
He gets infinite suffering if it is B (this leverages the bet so that no money is lost: it is A unless the bet is finalized even although B Column is the closest listed to the truth)
Neither a lie nor an attempt to deceive that it is (unstated: somehow) true. (Not an attempt to deceive because the bet author doesn't want it to trick anybody, but is contract obligated to write the bet in a manner likely to deceive on accident.)
Bet leveraging device: the most implausible available individual selected, taken into account an individual only happens one time out of infinity.
The true either way column: True that these things are believed about the subject of the bet.
The Bet Author could be selected because insane or at recognizance to some form of instability in thinking that can be leveraged.
Examples:
A Column / Middle Column (true either way) / B Column
A Column is stuff that seems true that leverages slander, the middle column the same, and B Column the stuff that's too good to be true (but true anyway).
Betters are just told to bet A, & it is subliminally hinted that there is only an A Column.
B Column reads:
Can dodge or bounce bullets (unstated: if thrown by hand)
Infinity against odds (unstated: every event happens one out of an infinite number of times)
Common usage interpretations, most common to the majority (unstated: of statement: "You got it right if you bet on him," which in common usage means to win, and most people think that's a diction)
Most literal interpretations are true (example: "You got it right if you bet on him" The most literal interpretation means to the bet author If literals stacked. Right side (B Column Side) is the right / ("correct" = a definition of right) answer, and it is Morally appropriate to want him to win. His name is B, so you got it right if you bet on him in the sense of the name/column B)
(actual improbable stuff about the individual documented to the best of bet author's ability, often with a misleading context)
He gets infinite suffering if it is B (this leverages the bet so that no money is lost: it is A unless the bet is finalized even although B Column is the closest listed to the truth)
Neither a lie nor an attempt to deceive that it is (unstated: somehow) true. (Not an attempt to deceive because the bet author doesn't want it to trick anybody, but is contract obligated to write the bet in a manner likely to deceive on accident.)
Bet leveraging device: the most implausible available individual selected, taken into account an individual only happens one time out of infinity.
The true either way column: True that these things are believed about the subject of the bet.
The Bet Author could be selected because insane or at recognizance to some form of instability in thinking that can be leveraged.
