KalshiYeah
Yeah
Mitchieboi参与话题 47消息总数 4572
该用户的聊天记录定位。
聊天记录
共 4572 条，显示第 2151-2200 条That was so aura
That was so aura
And then insta resolve
And then insta resolve
Eating that wall was really fun
Eating that wall was really fun
I really don't think kalshi rule writers are going that deep in the logic difference between if and only if
I really don't think kalshi rule writers are going that deep in the logic difference between if and only if
It's either: 1. Kalshi is reading the "only if" as "if" or 2. They consider any involvement in the song as a feature, then read only if
It's either: 1. Kalshi is reading the "only if" as "if" or 2. They consider any involvement in the song as a feature, then read only if
But to me
But to me
He's outmatched
He's outmatched
Bro tried betting against the guy with the Olivia Rodrigo pfp <:icant:1504905705696657568>
Bro tried betting against the guy with the Olivia Rodrigo pfp <:icant:1504905705696657568>
The N argument hinges on: 1. The artist must be featured in reality 2. After confirmation of (1), they must ALSO meet one of the three criteria to confirm it. Then argue that (1) wasn't met
The N argument hinges on: 1. The artist must be featured in reality 2. After confirmation of (1), they must ALSO meet one of the three criteria to confirm it. Then argue that (1) wasn't met
He was featured in the definitional sense
He was featured in the definitional sense
Yeah but even so he's wrong lmfao
Yeah but even so he's wrong lmfao
I'm not sure that's how kalshi meant it
I'm not sure that's how kalshi meant it
He's making a niche argument that "only if" is different from if
He's making a niche argument that "only if" is different from if
So producers should count too in theory
So producers should count too in theory
Even instrumental
Even instrumental
Like a feature is literally just ANY involvement
Like a feature is literally just ANY involvement
Yeah
Yeah
It would be better to ask what a feature is in music
It would be better to ask what a feature is in music
You're applying a dictionary def for no reason
You're applying a dictionary def for no reason
I disagree
I disagree
Thus Y
Thus Y
I clearly notice Conan gray's background vocals
I clearly notice Conan gray's background vocals
Good point
Good point
There's "standard" musical definition of what a feature is and then there's a literal definition where literally any part in the song would be a "feature"
There's "standard" musical definition of what a feature is and then there's a literal definition where literally any part in the song would be a "feature"
Yeah like
Yeah like
Weren't you
Weren't you
He was on N and flipped to Y
He was on N and flipped to Y
Am I being baited
Am I being baited
You sending the dictionary definition of feature doesn't say anything
You sending the dictionary definition of feature doesn't say anything
Bro
Bro
Lmao
Lmao
Literally why wouldn't he
Literally why wouldn't he
Before it was more about having feat: X in the song
Before it was more about having feat: X in the song
This wouldn't have counted before
This wouldn't have counted before
It's a new ruleset
It's a new ruleset
And involved artists were previously going N
And involved artists were previously going N
They changed the rules because the intent was to capture artist involvement
They changed the rules because the intent was to capture artist involvement
In the credits
In the credits
He's listed as a performer - background vocals
He's listed as a performer - background vocals
https://tenor.com/view/ec74-gif-6358814967327437496
https://tenor.com/view/ec74-gif-6358814967327437496
So the bar is: 1. Be on the song in some capacity in reality 2. Satisfy the rules
So the bar is: 1. Be on the song in some capacity in reality 2. Satisfy the rules
In a literal sense, you are "featured" on a song if you're in the song in any capacity
In a literal sense, you are "featured" on a song if you're in the song in any capacity
Like
Like
Even if you apply awndrei's "only if" argument (that I'm not sure is how kalshi intended it anyway), Conan gray was unequivocally featured in the song because he was in the song
Even if you apply awndrei's "only if" argument (that I'm not sure is how kalshi intended it anyway), Conan gray was unequivocally featured in the song because he was in the song
If they're in the title or listed as a performer
If they're in the title or listed as a performer
It's literally not lmfao
It's literally not lmfao
Many won't understand this
Many won't understand this
Scary for you should be ambiguous rules, not clear ones
Scary for you should be ambiguous rules, not clear ones
It shouldn't be scary because it's clear
It shouldn't be scary because it's clear