[This comment is a reply to that relocated comment.]

> Wiktor [has] just offered to turn it over to a third party, and the third party has
> discussed the option of paying the bounty out even though the goal wasn't met

Then pampers could very well pay out the bounty himself, couldn‘t he? It doesn‘t seem to make sense for him to give the bounty to a third party who will simply do what he could do easily himself but clearly doesn‘t want to be done.

>>> you're saying that paying on an incomplete contract [...]

>> ...with someone else‘s money without all the money owners‘ explicit consent...

> Andreas [...] you [...] sound paranoid. [...] Andreas...you [...]
> sound like children discussing the boogie man

I just said that there’s a difference between paying on an incomplete contract with your own money versus doing so with someone else‘s money without all the money owners‘ explicit consent. Do you think pampers sounds paranoid and like a child as well just because he is against paying on an incomplete contract with other people‘s money? I for one can understand his reasoning.

[ Edited by Andreas_Wolf 30.04.2018 - 12:41 ]