Heffernan wrote:yes but the initial bet wasnt about any insanity just about being on.
Clearly then, you did not read my post, as that was precisely the point I was addressing. Go back and do so. If it was too much text for you, let me quote the core of the argument:
loftar wrote:It's completely impossible to read this exchange other than as a discussion of whether it's possible for a character to be counted as being "online" for the purpose of accruing insanity even though there's no interactive session actively attached to that character. Since that, then, was the context in which the bet was made, you can't just come around and argue that "nah man, I was actually betting about some other definition of online". That is what you call sophistry.