Reply #74: Nobody has been talking about that

[Tactical Progressive]

as you are well aware. We've been talking about the generic case of a guy who missed a lottery feed. Those other conditions weren't in the original post, in fact the original post said this specifically: "In his lawsuit, he claims he had always been a part of the group when they bought lottery tickets before, but that he was off work the day they bought the winning ticket."

Can we assume that you and Lizzy changing the debate with these conditions means that you are conceding the debate on the general conditions we've been working from?

Then if you want we can debate the revised conditions you're now adding.