Scammer? - Page 15

Baal loves to ban Belgians tho

didnt nadeem keep quiet and not post until someone found his personal details and then he started to defend himself and claim it wasnt a scam?

well yea but all that happened in less then 24 hours so it was just the next day by the time he posted

how does this guy have 1300+ views and only 7 comments on his ptr?

he should have like 100 comments by now..... this is just ridiculous, and regardless of whether or not he gives the money back, everyone should know not to trade with him again

whats the difference between a good poker player and a scammer?

nothing, they both use their mind to steal money from ignorant people.


bad joke sry.

wait so we have his address? Someone should get him kicked out of school and/or if he has a job so that he loses his job. I mean it's very easy to do. Notify his parents and his social scene et cetera

On January 18 2010 17:57 Steal City wrote: wait so we have his address? Someone should get him kicked out of school and/or if he has a job so that he loses his job. I mean it's very easy to do. Notify his parents and his social scene et cetera

This isn't 4chan.

On January 18 2010 13:04 Steal City wrote: it'd be awesome though for him to be honest with us. I'd like to be able to honestly talk to a scammer and see hwo he veiws himself and the world please respond to this post nadeem tell me how you feel about what u've done, what led you to do it. How you feel about the ethics morality. Do you think you are are worse person for having done it? Do you think that you are a significantly worse person than the other people on this forum that aren't scammers? We certainly think that scammers are scum and a lesser class of society et cetera. In a way even less human if they're not scamming out of some need to feed themselves and such. Can you respond to these ideas as I am struggling wiht my own viewpoints on them thank you PS, i may ship you some money if i truly feel you have answered truthfully

Interesting questions and I would like to know the answers to these questions as well. My guess is he probably lacks empathy and a guilty conscience, sees other people as merely objects that he can control to satisfy his own needs, etc. In other words, he might be psychopathic. Or maybe he just really needs the money. Who knows, but scammers make my skin crawl.

On January 18 2010 18:47 Timonga wrote: Show nested quote + On January 18 2010 13:04 Steal City wrote: it'd be awesome though for him to be honest with us. I'd like to be able to honestly talk to a scammer and see hwo he veiws himself and the world please respond to this post nadeem tell me how you feel about what u've done, what led you to do it. How you feel about the ethics morality. Do you think you are are worse person for having done it? Do you think that you are a significantly worse person than the other people on this forum that aren't scammers? We certainly think that scammers are scum and a lesser class of society et cetera. In a way even less human if they're not scamming out of some need to feed themselves and such. Can you respond to these ideas as I am struggling wiht my own viewpoints on them thank you PS, i may ship you some money if i truly feel you have answered truthfully Interesting questions and I would like to know the answers to these questions as well. My guess is he probably lacks empathy and a guilty conscience, sees other people as merely objects that he can control to satisfy his own needs, etc. In other words, he might be psychopathic. Or maybe he just really needs the money. Who knows, but scammers make my skin crawl.

i odn't think anyone can just see people as merely objects because it would seem to make their life meaningless. And there are people who steal to provide for their families, and not just necessities... are you saying they are doing it for themselves because they think their families are nice attributes to have to their imagine in social circles or something. In nature there's also times when animals steal from their own race in order to provide for their family too (although this may be more need driven, and it's not the same complex choices and rationalizing that we do) I hardly think that you can call him psycho/socio pthatic because I mean, luminous, darkXpert and many people I know IRL would then be that way, way more than those detailed by the societal distributions of those conditions as presented by specialists....

not to mention that these people didn't act as scammers from the start

these are tough questions that i hope someday i'll get more insight into before I perish

btw the reason for using the phrase less human is because I think part of the human stuggle is to achieve a level of closeness with another individual. Two people never (that we know of) feel the exact same thing, they can never have the exact same view and understanding of life. Ironically, this may be what causes us to strive for it. There is work done on the evolution of emotions and some are flat out easy to understand without study. It would seem to me though that breaking someone's trust to this degree, whether u know the person or not, or whether anyone in your IRL social circle will ever find out, will severely hurt your ability to feel close to someone, because you will suspect that they are like yourself (in a way there's a catch 22 right there because they have to be like you to have the sort of bond we're talking about). The point is that you can't expect society to be better than you are.... and when you cross lines like these your world view and level of happiness must change a great degree for the worse.

Do you think if nadeem did some robin hood like gesture (let's say in a year donating 2X what he stole from Mudd) that only he knew, it would compensate and totally nullify what he did?... or is it like a politician who abuses his power for the right cause but in abusing his power he establishes a practices corruption which may in turn become abused by those who take on his position after he's gone

On January 18 2010 19:45 Steal City wrote: btw the reason for using the phrase less human is because I think part of the human stuggle is to achieve a level of closeness with another individual. Two people never (that we know of) feel the exact same thing, they can never have the exact same view and understanding of life. Ironically, this may be what causes us to strive for it. There is work done on the evolution of emotions and some are flat out easy to understand without study. It would seem to me though that breaking someone's trust to this degree, whether u know the person or not, or whether anyone in your IRL social circle will ever find out, will severely hurt your ability to feel close to someone, because you will suspect that they are like yourself (in a way there's a catch 22 right there because they have to be like you to have the sort of bond we're talking about). The point is that you can't expect society to be better than you are.... and when you cross lines like these your world view and level of happiness must change a great degree for the worse. Do you think if nadeem did some robin hood like gesture (let's say in a year donating 2X what he stole from Mudd) that only he knew, it would compensate and totally nullify what he did?... or is it like a politician who abuses his power for the right cause but in abusing his power he establishes a practices corruption which may in turn become abused by those who take on his position after he's gone

No such thing as altruism. "Penance" is motivated by an irrational pursuit of self interest. Acting on a need to remove fear, guilt, ect. It is an attempt to remedy emotional pain. If there was any true objective morality in the philosphical sense of the world I would have to say that no, no future action by nadeem could make up for this scamming becouse no future action could be motivated by an unselfish desire. Since there is no true objective morality my answer is simply that it doesn't matter. Nadeem has acted on his own self interest in a very unenlightened manner, aliented himself from our community, and simply ought to rejected, ignored, or destroyed.

On January 18 2010 19:54 Narious wrote: Show nested quote + On January 18 2010 19:45 Steal City wrote: btw the reason for using the phrase less human is because I think part of the human stuggle is to achieve a level of closeness with another individual. Two people never (that we know of) feel the exact same thing, they can never have the exact same view and understanding of life. Ironically, this may be what causes us to strive for it. There is work done on the evolution of emotions and some are flat out easy to understand without study. It would seem to me though that breaking someone's trust to this degree, whether u know the person or not, or whether anyone in your IRL social circle will ever find out, will severely hurt your ability to feel close to someone, because you will suspect that they are like yourself (in a way there's a catch 22 right there because they have to be like you to have the sort of bond we're talking about). The point is that you can't expect society to be better than you are.... and when you cross lines like these your world view and level of happiness must change a great degree for the worse. Do you think if nadeem did some robin hood like gesture (let's say in a year donating 2X what he stole from Mudd) that only he knew, it would compensate and totally nullify what he did?... or is it like a politician who abuses his power for the right cause but in abusing his power he establishes a practices corruption which may in turn become abused by those who take on his position after he's gone No such thing as altruism. "Penance" is motivated by an irrational pursuit of self interest. Acting on a need to remove fear, guilt, ect. It is an attempt to remedy emotional pain. If there was any true objective morality in the philosphical sense of the world I would have to say that no, no future action by nadeem could make up for this scamming becouse no future action could be motivated by an unselfish desire. Since there is no true objective morality my answer is simply that it doesn't matter. Nadeem has acted on his own self interest in a very unenlightened manner, aliented himself from our community, and simply ought to rejected, ignored, or destroyed.

I never said altruism existed in that sense, and if u read what i wrote in the Haiti thread a couple days ago it will show my view point on altruism...

but ur logic is flawed if you consider nadeem to have done something bad. Because by your logic he acted as we all are dictated by our selfish emotions to act. The only difference between you and nadeem then is that it has not yet been in your selfish interest to scam (perhaps because you believe you can get more value by being a continued member of this community) while for him it has...

Do you believe this to be true. If you could not get anything out of LP anymore and there would be no repercussions for scamming an LP member would you do it? According to your reasoning it seems you would.

not trying to be hostile narious, btw, and perhaps we shouldn't have this discussing in this thread. But I like to talk to like minded peopel who are grappling with the same issues i am, in terms of understanding humanity

my contact (for anyone who wants to discuss such silly matters)

AIM - TheDonald1984
MSN - DonNorman@hotmail.com
Skype - TheDonald1984

On January 18 2010 20:11 Steal City wrote: Show nested quote + On January 18 2010 19:54 Narious wrote:   On January 18 2010 19:45 Steal City wrote: btw the reason for using the phrase less human is because I think part of the human stuggle is to achieve a level of closeness with another individual. Two people never (that we know of) feel the exact same thing, they can never have the exact same view and understanding of life. Ironically, this may be what causes us to strive for it. There is work done on the evolution of emotions and some are flat out easy to understand without study. It would seem to me though that breaking someone's trust to this degree, whether u know the person or not, or whether anyone in your IRL social circle will ever find out, will severely hurt your ability to feel close to someone, because you will suspect that they are like yourself (in a way there's a catch 22 right there because they have to be like you to have the sort of bond we're talking about). The point is that you can't expect society to be better than you are.... and when you cross lines like these your world view and level of happiness must change a great degree for the worse. Do you think if nadeem did some robin hood like gesture (let's say in a year donating 2X what he stole from Mudd) that only he knew, it would compensate and totally nullify what he did?... or is it like a politician who abuses his power for the right cause but in abusing his power he establishes a practices corruption which may in turn become abused by those who take on his position after he's gone No such thing as altruism. "Penance" is motivated by an irrational pursuit of self interest. Acting on a need to remove fear, guilt, ect. It is an attempt to remedy emotional pain. If there was any true objective morality in the philosphical sense of the world I would have to say that no, no future action by nadeem could make up for this scamming becouse no future action could be motivated by an unselfish desire. Since there is no true objective morality my answer is simply that it doesn't matter. Nadeem has acted on his own self interest in a very unenlightened manner, aliented himself from our community, and simply ought to rejected, ignored, or destroyed. I never said altruism existed in that sense, and if u read what i wrote in the Haiti thread a couple days ago it will show my view point on altruism... but ur logic is flawed if you consider nadeem to have done something bad. Because by your logic he acted as we all are dictated by our selfish emotions to act. The only difference between you and nadeem then is that it has not yet been in your selfish interest to scam (perhaps because you believe you can get more value by being a continued member of this community) while for him it has... Do you believe this to be true. If you could not get anything out of LP anymore and there would be no repercussions for scamming an LP member would you do it? According to your reasoning it seems you would.

Bad is an interesting word in this case. I think we come back to competing interests. What nadeem has done may not be "evil" or "wrong" in the moral sense. But it's certainly worthy of our condemnation. Think of it this way. For the paltry sum of $500 he's shown that he places no value on loyality, trust, or honesty. Going back to self interest we can consider that we all assign value to things, both physical, and metaphysical. Nadeem has shown that to him a small some of money, or, physical value, is more important to him than the value he places on his loyalty within a group, trust, or honesty.

Becouse of this we may not say thats hes a bad person, but certainly the sort of person it would not benifit us to deal with. Perhaps even the sort of person it would benifit us to remove from our community/society/world.

When I speak of self interest I speak of it under the assumption that more often than not multiple individuals all pursuing there own self interest will actually find that there self interest and that of the others coincide.

If I thought LP offered no further value to me would I scam? No. Loyality, honesty, ect. are more valuable to me than that sort of monetary sum.

If the sum was $50 million thats another hypothetical.

I will add you on MSN.

I agree that he should be removed from our community for the same reasons you do.

But does that make him any lesser of a person or a worse person. What then makes people bad? Is it simply when their self interest clashes with someone else's or societies to the extent that they break a law (ofc u can do things widely understood as unethical which are illegal and you can do things widely illegal which are not only ethical but may be seen as self sacrificial and noble)

...............

Why not just ask a thief in real life, I think the answers are rather obvious though.

If you do ban him, there's absolutely no possibility that the situation would possibly get fixed though. :/
Maybe give him a chance to post again.

On January 18 2010 20:51 Svenman87 wrote: Why not just ask a thief in real life, I think the answers are rather obvious though.

i don't know any. And the answers aren't obvious. The categorizations of thiefs breakdown in various ways

those who steal for thrill: these start very small and slowly graduate or don't, they brag about their stealings to anyone who is a friend

I know that's one of them. The one's that don't do it for thrill or out of desperation are the ones i'm curious about and no i don't know any of those people and unless I go to a jail I wouldn't know how to find any.

Give the money backkkk ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.

CMONNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN MANNNNNNN