No, it’s entirely different. You’re picking things that are clearly fraudulent and asserting an equivalency, without basis or examination. Reddit’s practice wa

No, it’s entirely different. You’re picking things that are clearly fraudulent and asserting an equivalency, without basis or examination. Reddit’s practice was a simulation of activity to see what kind of activity was engaging. Nobody was defrauded or harmed and no legal or moral rules were breached. This comment commits the beg-the-question fallacy of assuming the conclusion (fraud/moral breach) in its argumentation. I understand that people have a need to believe that behind every fortune lies a great crime [1], but this is not the smoking gun people are looking for. [1] https://quoteinvestigator.com/2013/09/09/fortune-crime/?amp=1 https://quoteinvestigator.com/2013/09/09/fortune-crime/?amp=...