@WatChe   - Should I be speculating that we have resolved all of our bet terms and that we don't really have any ambiguities to resolve?  including that we may well be choosing between transacting on lightning network in the event that Bitcoin onchain fees might not be reasonable at the time that our bet ends up closing?  Do we need to write the terms of our bet in one little blob and then say we agree or not?  Maybe I should try to write it out?

Here it is:

The bet would close out in WatChe's favor (with JJG paying WatChe 0.00003 BTC 3,000 satoshis) on two possible conditions: 1) the BTC price goes above $333,333 on Bitstamp or 2) the time goes beyond 23:59 UTC December 31, 2026, and the BTC price had not gone below $90k on Bitstamp.

The bet would close in JJG's favor (with WatChe paying JJG 0.0003 BTC 30,000 satoshis ) if the BTC price touches any price below $90,000 on Bitstamp before 23:59 UTC December 31, 2026.

Once the bet closes, the winning person will send the losing person a bitcoin address and/or a lightning network address that is reasonably feasible for the losing person to be able to send the amount of bitcoin (satoshis) to resolve the payment of the bet in a reasonably timely manner and to be able to transact in mutually agreeable ways that facilitates the receiving of the above mentioned quantity of satoshis to the winning person accounting for reasonable fees and also accounting for ability of the winner to be able to reasonably use the amount received (without it being dust).. which given the relatively small bet size, likely means that the lightning network would be most likely to be feasible way of transacting the bet.

If for some reason JJG & WatChe disagree about the resolution of the bet (such as in who's favor the bet is resolved, or if the bet has closed), or about the resolution of the means of payment for the bet, then hissleness hisslyness willl be the third vote that would be used to resolve any such dispute.

Agree or not?