4 ms·

If you see nothing wrong with what they did, I have some really hot stocks to tell you about.

• jessedhillon 14y ago
  I'm sorry, perhaps you are unaware of this fact: the term "Ponzi scheme" has a specific meaning, which an activity either conforms to or it does not. If it does conform to that definition, then you should be able to present material facts about the activity which would cause a reasonable person to reach that conclusion. Likewise, when a person makes statements about the mental states of another, such as what those people did or did not know, that is a statement of fact. If you assert those facts, then you should have evidence to demonstrate that such things are true. Unfortunately, all you have are poorly formed, emotionally charged opinions informed by a couple of articles you read on TechCrunch. Or maybe the WSJ if you're a little more rigorous. What you don't have are sufficient facts to warrant the conclusions you're defending, unless -- and this is my point -- you have such a low standard for truth that practically any statement can be considered substantiated, so long as it agrees with your prejudices about who deserves wealth and what constitutes success.
  • heretohelp 14y ago
    Where did I say ponzi scheme?
    • jessedhillon 14y ago
      Oh jeez, seriously? STFU dude. I was responding to the inane comment which called Groupon and Facebook a Ponzi scheme. I don't know why you're responding if it's not to defend/agree with that comment. Do you actually have anything to say, or are you compelled to react whenever you see someone not rabidly and mindlessly denouncing Groupon?