6 ms·

There’s a big jump from committing fraud for your own benefit and committing fraud because it might mess your competitor up. I think you’d deal with a much smal

There’s a big jump from committing fraud for your own benefit and committing fraud because it might mess your competitor up. I think you’d deal with a much smaller problem, and, presumably one that companies would be on the lookout for and aligned with Amazon on.

dylan604 6y ago
committing fraud is committing fraud. if i'm on a jury, you get no less of a sentence than if you bought the negative reviews.
- awinder 6y ago
  I’m talking number of cases (how many people relatively would commit the 2 categories of crimes), not necessarily the severity of the crime. But I am now kinda interested in flushing this out lol, Bernie Madoff and Martha Stewart both committed securities fraud, yet served different sentences, but was this ok in your world view?
  - dylan604 6y ago
    I don't know the particulars, so hard to say. You're probably wanting me to say intent has bearing. Madoff intended to scam anybody as long as it helped his situation along. Don't know what Stewart's intent was. You buying positive reviews is intended to make more money for yourself by getting as many sales as possible including if it means another seller doesn't get that sale. The person buying negative reviews is intending to take sales from others so they get the sales instead. Either way, the intent in both situations is to increase one's own position at the expense of others in a fraudulent manner. You're both just as guilty.
    - awinder 6y ago
      For the record, I don’t want you to say anything, I’m just trying to understand where you’re coming from. No agenda with that particular choice, just the first scenario that came to mind of same crime, different sentence. I don’t understand why you need particulars if fraud is fraud though. They both got difference sentences and did the same underlying crime. Why do we sentence people differently, or is the view that we shouldnt be doing that?
      - dylan604 6y ago
        I don't have information on what Stewart did. It's as simple as that. I honestly don't even know what Stewart did. I read up on Madoff. I care so little about what Stewart does, I didn't follow it. Madoff was more interesting to me, so I read more details on it.
bobthepanda 6y ago
Is it a huge jump? Seems to me like it might be a slightly different manifestation of the cobra effect: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cobra_effect https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cobra_effect
jjeaff 6y ago
I don't think it is a huge jump. In the past, I was a high volume seller on Amazon and competitors frequently purchased our products and left unwarranted negative reviews or just left a negative review without ever having purchased it. We knew this because in several cases, we matched the shipment address of our shipment with the return address of a competitors product (this was before FBA was huge). Plus, sellers wash their hands of this by paying a company to boost their listings. It's don't ask, don't tell on how they accomplish that.

dylan604 6y ago

committing fraud is committing fraud. if i'm on a jury, you get no less of a sentence than if you bought the negative reviews.

awinder 6y ago
I’m talking number of cases (how many people relatively would commit the 2 categories of crimes), not necessarily the severity of the crime. But I am now kinda interested in flushing this out lol, Bernie Madoff and Martha Stewart both committed securities fraud, yet served different sentences, but was this ok in your world view?
- dylan604 6y ago
  I don't know the particulars, so hard to say. You're probably wanting me to say intent has bearing. Madoff intended to scam anybody as long as it helped his situation along. Don't know what Stewart's intent was. You buying positive reviews is intended to make more money for yourself by getting as many sales as possible including if it means another seller doesn't get that sale. The person buying negative reviews is intending to take sales from others so they get the sales instead. Either way, the intent in both situations is to increase one's own position at the expense of others in a fraudulent manner. You're both just as guilty.
  - awinder 6y ago
    For the record, I don’t want you to say anything, I’m just trying to understand where you’re coming from. No agenda with that particular choice, just the first scenario that came to mind of same crime, different sentence. I don’t understand why you need particulars if fraud is fraud though. They both got difference sentences and did the same underlying crime. Why do we sentence people differently, or is the view that we shouldnt be doing that?
    - dylan604 6y ago
      I don't have information on what Stewart did. It's as simple as that. I honestly don't even know what Stewart did. I read up on Madoff. I care so little about what Stewart does, I didn't follow it. Madoff was more interesting to me, so I read more details on it.

bobthepanda 6y ago

Is it a huge jump? Seems to me like it might be a slightly different manifestation of the cobra effect: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cobra_effect https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cobra_effect

jjeaff 6y ago

I don't think it is a huge jump. In the past, I was a high volume seller on Amazon and competitors frequently purchased our products and left unwarranted negative reviews or just left a negative review without ever having purchased it. We knew this because in several cases, we matched the shipment address of our shipment with the return address of a competitors product (this was before FBA was huge). Plus, sellers wash their hands of this by paying a company to boost their listings. It's don't ask, don't tell on how they accomplish that.