Flawed Logic is flawed.Of course I uderstand this. This is the problem of the business owners, not mine. They have all the means to bring scammers to justice, nobody could deny this, and they will be in their rights when they do so. Still that's their problem and in no way I would help them in this or label the one who scammed them as 'bad' person. Anyone who scammed his friends or partners with $10, or who, for example, sells 'get rich cheap' ebooks to noobs, or sells something like 'penguin proof' backlinks is in order of magnitude worse than the man this thread is about.
That's the problem of Facebook, and let them handle it. They wouldn't care about my problems, I don't about their.
I wonder if he'll turn on everyone involved with the cloaking and the aff networks too... you know, to avoid further prosecution or as "leverage"...
Should we take bets on whether or not he'll sign a plea deal first or just give it to them prior to signing anything thereby digging himself deeper into the shit filled hole he's currently in? It's only been two years now since a network has done something stupid like that.. I think we're due for more lulz on the legal front.
The logic is fine. It's all perfectly fine even if they go bust or, say, die all together with their employees, a holy place is never empty, the throne is never vacant. They are not from my circle of people, I didn't promise them anyhing, don't have any obligations to them and didn't make any deals with them. Their success or failure won't affect me in any way. So their problems is their problems, and, while we are at, Martin's problems are Martin ones.Flawed Logic is flawed.
If a FB employee lost their job and their lively hood over extending the credit lines, you're okay with that? But if he scams someone for $10, you're not okay with that?
At what size does a company need to be where it's not a big deal to scam them? 150k/yr, 1m, 5m, 20m, 100m?
On a plus note, feds and all sorta LE will be all over this forum.
HI feds and FB security! dont taze me bros
Probably about 24-48 hours after the next gimmedat post.when do the criminal charges come?
That logic is sound....but it doesn't not coincide with your previous writing "Anyone who scammed his friends or partners with $10, or who, for example, sells 'get rich cheap' ebooks to noobs, or sells something like 'penguin proof' backlinks is in order of magnitude worse than the man this thread is about."The logic is fine. It's all perfectly fine even if they go bust or, say, die all together with their employees, a holy place is never empty, the throne is never vacant. They are not from my circle of people, I didn't promise them anyhing, don't have any obligations to them and didn't make any deals with them. Their success or failure won't affect me in any way. So their problems is their problems, and, while we are at, Martin's problems are Martin ones.
There is coincidence. When someone does scams among people who are more or less similar to me this makes me a next possible victim. So I'm not going to have any deals with such people. If a person scams his clients or partners - it is bad to be his next client or partner. When he does this against big corporations only, especially in a foreign country - I'll care when I become a head of such corp (probably never). Until this that's the problem of the corporation and in no way I will care about this.That logic is sound....but it doesn't not coincide with your previous writing "Anyone who scammed his friends or partners with $10, or who, for example, sells 'get rich cheap' ebooks to noobs, or sells something like 'penguin proof' backlinks is in order of magnitude worse than the man this thread is about."
I'm not debating the ethics because like you, I don't care either way if it doesn't effect me. However, grandstanding on the ethics of a company vs. an individual is a gray area.