I read the 2+2 thread and find Moneymaker's arguments pretty weak. It's taken him 18 months of not paying to now decide he was getting freerolled and therefore doesn't have to pay? Jason was obviously playing fast and loose and has a history of stalling people although eventually paying. His behaviour doesn't seem like that of a typical scammer. I think he was genuinely trying to make money as an agent while obviously cutting a lot of corners. Now it's all collapsed and Jason's debts are doubtless more than what he's owed but that still doesn't seem justification for Moneymaker to avoid paying a losing bet incurred 18 months ago.
Reply With Quote