Tattoos. He's got a point.

By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics and access other forums reserved for members. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today by clicking here.

Posted: Fri Jul 29, 2011 12:29 pm

I was having a chat with a friend about scammers vs baiters, and I mentioned tattoos. I've never requested one myself but I know lots of baiters who have and been very successful. My friend posed this question. If the scammers are criminals and often members of intimidating gangs, how do you know that the person getting the tattoo isn't an innocent victim forced into it by threats?

He's got a point.

How does one know that the person with " I heart Goat

" on their back isn't some poor random sap co-erced into it?

Not quite a Newb Joined: 29 Jul 2011 Posts: 21

You could avoid this kind of disturbing idea by asking a picture of the scammer before introducing your tatto request. I'm sure he won't think in involving someone else in what he thinks to be an easy business...

Posted: Fri Jul 29, 2011 1:48 pm

Well, if its somebody not scammer related than the person got most likely paid. And for tattoo, most likely a lot. But, odds are, if it is not the scammer himself, then it is most likely member of his gang, or somebody somehow involved with him. In other words - is helping the scammer to scam.

If you told me, "Hey, Mortal, tattoo yourself, so I can scam this 60 year old widow" and I'd do it, I wouldn't be innocent, now would I?

Elite Baiter Joined: 01 Oct 2008 Posts: 1192

When it comes to getting the tattoo for big money one thing always happens when the person is part of a gang. They change email accounts. Why? So they can get the correspondence away from the gang because they don't want to share the big payday. They are not telling other members of the gang. They aren't telling anybody they will have to share the money with. They all want to be an oga. Let's say they collect $100,000, how much do you think they would have to pay up? I've gotten enough lads to get tattoos. Trust me, they get it themselves.

Posted: Fri Jul 29, 2011 2:10 pm

As the scammer wants to avoid getting known in real life, he is bound to use a stand-in in all pictures, paid or not.
Now for a tattoo, to mark someone permanently that's a big step in my eyes, you'll never be able to prove it's your lad and in a country so poor, people are willing to do anything for a meal. That's a rough trade I'm not willing to participate in.

Elite Baiter Joined: 01 Oct 2008 Posts: 1192

But if you tell him you coming to give him the money in person he will have to have the tattoo himself.

I respect your stance...everybody has different limits.

Posted: Fri Jul 29, 2011 3:07 pm

Interesting replies.

Morally I have no qualms at the thought of scammers being marked for life either lowly mugus on the oga tree or the boss himself. As bobjohnson says if there is previous photo evidence that your target is involved in the scam then all's fair in lads vs baiters but equally as bill2 says what if it is just some guy who was offered an attractive price? Or worse what if it's some guy who is "told" you have to get this done or we kill your goat?

Not quite a Newb Joined: 29 Jul 2011 Posts: 21

Phil Yerboots wrote:

what if it is just some guy who was offered an attractive price?

Well then you even created an opportunity for him to earn money...

Phil Yerboots wrote:

Or worse what if it's some guy who is "told" you have to get this done or we kill your goat?

well with my tip above: ask a picture of the scammer first, with something written on it. If he thinks that this will be enough to get the cash he obviously won't involve someone else in his business...

Posted: Fri Jul 29, 2011 6:02 pm

It's a good question and a possibility I have sometimes worried a little about.

Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2011 9:47 am

BKroj said

Quote:

he won't think in involving someone else in what he thinks to be an easy business...

Oh I'm sure that with the prospect of a big payout he would definitely keep it to himself. Doesn't mean that he isn't capable of getting some other guy to be tattooed though for a relatively small amount of money - or no money at all.

I guess as long as all the evidence stacks up that the person being inked is the same person as the scammer then it's all good.

I agree with The Monsignor though, it would worry me. I'd have to be 100% risky free in the knowledge that I had the right man.

Not quite a Newb Joined: 29 Jul 2011 Posts: 21

@Phil Yerboots:

I think you didn't get my point.
In order to be sure that you are getting the scammer tattoed, you could do this:

1. Say that you just want a picture of him before sending the cash.
--> Here he won't even think about involving another guy in his business for such an easy request. If you ask him to put a loaf of bread on his head you're quite 100% sure that this will be a genuine picture (and not an Internet one).

2. Then you ask him the tattoo: as you already have a picture of him, he will have to get himself tattooed...

Got my point ?

Hello I'm New here! Joined: 29 Jul 2011 Posts: 15

You may want to try to convince the guy that the tattoo is key to receive the money in a face-to-face meeting, and if the person attending doesn't have the tattoo, there will be no money.

He would have two choices: Get the tattoo himself, or have someone else get it for him. If he chooses the latter, he would have to either bribe that person to also go get the money (and depending on the ammount risking that person running away with the money) or force him to do it by threats. Personally, if you offer the guy to get the tattoo in a relatively discreet spot, he might actually consider saving himself the trouble of having to look for someone else to do it for him.

Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2011 12:33 pm

@Starwolf08 - Oh I'm not going for a tattoo. This is just a hypothetical question. A friend raised it and I thought it was a valid one. I was interested to know whether other baiters had considered it. Some obviously have.

@BKroj - I wasn't interested in the mechanics of getting a tattoo but the ethics if there was even a slim chance that an innocent third party was involved. In this unlikely, but as you acknowledge, possible event the justification that

Quote:

Well then you even created an opportunity for him to earn money...

just wouldn't sit well with me.

That's my point.

Hello I'm New here! Joined: 29 Jul 2011 Posts: 15

I know, it kinda turned into a debate about how to push a lad to get his own tattoo without the option of making someone else get it for him Razz

Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2011 1:01 pm

We haven't had one of these discussions in ages. Smile

http://forum.419eater.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=116596
http://forum.419eater.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=105297
http://forum.419eater.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=81910
http://forum.419eater.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=94530
http://forum.419eater.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=99480
http://forum.419eater.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=92714

Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2011 5:42 pm

^^ Thanks Jose!! Very Happy

I hereby request my own thread to be locked! Smile

Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2011 9:20 pm

FWIW, I wasn't complaining about the question or the thread, it actually made me a bit nostalgic. Long ago, one could count on a heated ethics debate on nearly a weekly basis.

Ahhh the good old days... Laughing

Locked at your request. Smile

Tattoos. He's got a point.	View next topic View previous topic