Thieving? Well! I simply cannot permit such an allegation to go unchallenged. Section 1 of the Theft Act 1968 states that: a person is guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it. Yes indeedy. Was there dishonesty? Nope. We are talking about a pursuit created by the elusive Master Quids. I, for once, abided by the rules. You could have played, but failed to do so in time. In other words, you lack the necessary speed and proficiency for the game. Was there appropriation? Well, I guess it could be argued that there was. BUT...as dishonesty is manifestly absent from your most ungracious charge, then the appropriation becomes irrelevant. Was there property? Again yes, but without the element of dishonesty you don't have a toe to stand on. Not a carpal. Did it involve property belonging to another? Nope. The 6000 was available for all to play. Though for the avoidance of doubt, I should state that the 6,000 now firmly belongs to the highly skilled moi. Oooooh yes. Was there an intention to permanently deprive? Of course there was! That's the point of the game. You had your chance, but you blew it. *thinks: AMATEUR*