4 ms·

"Exploitative of people willing to cough up real money and sign up for questionable offers in order to earn completely intangible goods? Sure, but I don't know

"Exploitative of people willing to cough up real money and sign up for questionable offers in order to earn completely intangible goods? Sure, but I don't know if that qualifies as a scam." HUGE cognitive dissonance between sentences one and two there, man. When the only accurate way to describe something is "exploitative," step back and realize that something's rotten.

gloob 17y ago
For what it's worth, he didn't say nothing was wrong with it. He just said he doesn't really consider it to be a scam. Similarly, I doubt he would consider it to be murder (even though murder is presumably also wrong). If something isn't quite a scam, it's not a scam. That said, there's definitely room to contest the notion that this isn't one.
- JCThoughtscream 17y ago
  Fair point, though I suppose I've made it clear what side of the definitional fence I'm on for this issue. If looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and there's hidden hooks in the contract designed specifically to unwittingly lighten a person's metaphorical wallet, it's a duck with a bright, neon "SCAM" sign.
  - WesleyJohnson 17y ago
    Exploit: - take advantage of somebody: to take selfish or unfair advantage of a person or situation, usually for personal gain - use something for benefit: to use or develop something in order to gain a benefit Scam: - dishonest scheme: a scheme for making money by dishonest means - trick somebody: to obtain money or other goods from somebody by dishonest means I was contending that I felt like the tactics being used in these games were shady and questionable? Yes. Dishonest? No. However, as I pointed out above, I've changed my tune a little bit after delving deeper into the article and the HN comments. Without question, I should've done that before commenting in the first place.

4 ms·

"Exploitative of people willing to cough up real money and sign up for questionable offers in order to earn completely intangible goods? Sure, but I don't know

by JCThoughtscream 17y ago

gloob 17y ago
For what it's worth, he didn't say nothing was wrong with it. He just said he doesn't really consider it to be a scam. Similarly, I doubt he would consider it to be murder (even though murder is presumably also wrong). If something isn't quite a scam, it's not a scam. That said, there's definitely room to contest the notion that this isn't one.
- JCThoughtscream 17y ago
  Fair point, though I suppose I've made it clear what side of the definitional fence I'm on for this issue. If looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and there's hidden hooks in the contract designed specifically to unwittingly lighten a person's metaphorical wallet, it's a duck with a bright, neon "SCAM" sign.
  - WesleyJohnson 17y ago
    Exploit: - take advantage of somebody: to take selfish or unfair advantage of a person or situation, usually for personal gain - use something for benefit: to use or develop something in order to gain a benefit Scam: - dishonest scheme: a scheme for making money by dishonest means - trick somebody: to obtain money or other goods from somebody by dishonest means I was contending that I felt like the tactics being used in these games were shady and questionable? Yes. Dishonest? No. However, as I pointed out above, I've changed my tune a little bit after delving deeper into the article and the HN comments. Without question, I should've done that before commenting in the first place.