3 ms·
I'm still not understanding what part of the article you think is incorrect, and/or what information you wanted it to contain that it didn't. All this meta stu
by ajross 4y ago
I'm still not understanding what part of the article you think is incorrect, and/or what information you wanted it to contain that it didn't. All this meta stuff about "what the article is for" is just confusing me.
Again, I read it and liked it. If you don't want me to read this piece, what summary should I be reading?
- keneda7 4y agoI'm not the OP but to me the article did everything in its power to muddy the waters. It seems to try get me to feel bad for or even like someone who appears to have committed major crimes and lost billions of peoples money. If you didn't know anything about the situation and read this article you would think Sam did nothing wrong, is blameless, and just had some bad luck. Not once did the article tackle the question of where did the money go or why is it okay for this persons company to misplace billion of dollars of customer money?