Baiting ethics - is there a line that shouldn't be crossed?

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: Wed Dec 14, 2005 5:01 am

I'm pretty much along with what Betelgeuse said. If you can make a complete fool out of a lad (failed airport meet, wasted WU/MG trips) and this causes the lad's OGA to put a beating on him, so be it. I guess that's an occupational hazard for that type of "job". Twisted Evil

I think the odds of getting a lad to put himself in a potentially life threatening situation for...say.... a $5000 WU payment though is extremely remote. If anything, in the case of the poisonous snake, if a lad was going to take a picture with one, it would either be dead or a rubber fake one.

Posted: Wed Dec 14, 2005 6:17 am

If I had proof, beyond the shadow of a doubt, that the injured or deceased was a scammer, and had it within my power to do so, I would gladly send him to his doom and still be able to sleep at night.

Conversely, if I had sent an innocent third party into certain death, I doubt I could live with myself.

Confused

Posted: Wed Dec 14, 2005 7:48 am

If there is a limit...

NO!

Posted: Wed Dec 14, 2005 10:11 am

Quote:

I cannot support any physical punishment what so ever. Chopping off hands, capital punishment, whipping, branding - call it what you like - I am against it. I specifically do not think, there should be death penalty for scamming, which at the end of the day is far from the worst crime one can indulge in

have you ever thought why the scamming community is growing so fast? maybe its because none, or very few of them, ever get punished! let alone get the death penalty or a good thrashing....

as far as i'm concearned, if scammers are called human beings its only because we all share the same biology, but ethicaly, they dont qualify as humans, so then why should human rights apply to them? i would't mind seeing them get the needle or a bullet.

the problem is colateral damage, innocent people that scammers use. they dont deserve it: that is the real obstacle macking sure you get the right guys

Posted: Wed Dec 14, 2005 10:27 am

Well, that is a little extreme, as sometimes people are forced into scamming, from what I understand. However, if a scammer makes a death threat or is otherwise attempting to be extremely intimidating, well, then, I should only respond in kind, shouldn't I? Out of common courtesy, if nothing else.

Death threats are not mandatory things that scammers have to do as part of a scam, so I take them very seriously because, quite often, I believe they really mean it. I've had scammers visit the places in London where my characters pretend to live, so I know they are serious. (It's OK - I don't use real residential addresses - just premises of warehouses and factories.)

Posted: Wed Dec 14, 2005 12:10 pm

CommanderKiller wrote:

If anything, in the case of the poisonous snake, if a lad was going to take a picture with one, it would either be dead or a rubber fake one.

Or a very foolish lad (or third party he "hired") with a live one...

As a bank tripper I have not yet had the pleasure of baiting somebody for a trophy or ( Embarassed

) even in general. But, as a whole, scammers themselves are fair game. People they employ I consider to be in cohorts with the scammer, so if a guy poses with a live poisoned snake, regardless whether it is the scammer or not, I won't feel sorry if he's bitten.

Posted: Wed Dec 14, 2005 11:13 pm

Since there is so much scamming going on in different countries, I am really surprised that places like Nigeria haven't used flogging as punishment like Singapore does. Everything that I have read on this type of punishment indicates that flogging and time spent in solitary confinement is harsh, but is also a pretty good crime deterrent.

Posted: Sat Dec 17, 2005 7:14 am

...so is chopping the extremities off (appropriately)

Posted: Sat Dec 17, 2005 7:22 am

True, but that is mutilation, and there is always the chance that the wrong person could be convicted and lose an extremity over a cirme that he didn't commit.

Posted: Sat Dec 17, 2005 1:56 pm

I think there is a certain line in general that one ought not to cross even with criminals. But in the case of the scammers, they're doing it themselves! One can't kill someone with an email--if a scammer were to die "because" of a baiting, I don't think it would even be remotely the baiters fault. The scammer would have killed themselves in a misguided attempt to steal something. Its kind of like a burglar falling through a skylight and impaling himself on a kitchen knife left there for that purpose. If the burglar falls through the skylight, well, no one made him get up there in the first place. Bye bye, burglar!

Master of Master Baiters Joined: 15 Feb 2005 Posts: 732

I find that a bit flawed. When you're baiting you would actually have to talk a scammer into harming himself, as if you had talked the burglar into falling through the skylight. If a baiter talks a scammer into for example holding a poisonous snake and hoping he will be dumb enough to harm himself, and he actually does harm himself, the baiter is of course responsible for that.

Whether that is a bad thing or not is up to you to decide Smile

Posted: Sat Dec 17, 2005 2:16 pm

a man was negotiating for the use of a camel at Abdul's Desert Rent a Wreck and was trying to determine how far he could get with limited water.

"when the camel is at the waterhole wait until he has almost finished drinking, you will know this because he will slow down and start to lose interest. Just then you must sneak behind him with these two bricks I will provide at slight extra charge and you must slam them together with camel's testicles in between. The camel will gulp down water enoiugh for another two days"

"Oh my God that sounds painful"

"It can be... for $10 more I will show you how to keep your fingers from getting caught between the brinks.""

Not quite a Newb Joined: 22 Sep 2005 Posts: 46

Reading this again and looking at the trophy room, I am kind of worried. Getting scammers to tattoo/brand themselves may look harmless enough, but it goes beyond the scammer. I am sure, knowing Nigeria like I do; there is a chance of scammers getting infected with diseases like STDs - HIV/Aids. Now this in the long term will be transmitted to innocent parties. This is not something I am comfortable with. Plus there could be legal implications.

Personally, I won't do it. Not if there is the like hood of third party getting infected with HIV.

Posted: Wed Dec 28, 2005 1:25 am

@Doe:

In the last few weeks, this has been discussed in great length. Please use the search function to view the other threads.

Enough opinions, including the one you have stated, have been offered. Perhaps we can put this discussion to rest for a few months.

Posted: Thu Dec 29, 2005 4:09 am

steve_brimley wrote:

Personally, if I was one-hundred percent sure it was a lad who had been scamming for some time and I had my pick of trophies, I would demand a photo of him blindfolded and riding a unicycle the wrong way down a four lane highway in the middle of rush hour.

This e-mail may come as a surprise to you. I am the lawyer for the late Fred Flintstone who was killed while riding a unicycle blindfolded the wrong way down the Subgama highway in the middle of rush hour ....

Posted: Thu Dec 29, 2005 8:45 am

I'm his widow! Wink

Contact my barrister.

Posted: Wed Jan 04, 2006 3:13 am

Is it ethical to trick a scmmer into hurting "himself" ... I wouldn't recommend it because the scammers may probably pay really poor people to do those silly or dangerous stunts. We often think that the persons in the trophies are the "scammers", but I really think they are only the people that have been paid/bribed to do this. But in some cases it may also be the scammer or his accomplices doing it themselves. When getting trophies, I'd say that we shouldn't go into the extreme part. Keep it simple and hilarious. Smile

Posted: Thu Jan 05, 2006 1:38 pm

@Eight,

This brings to mind another variant of scambaiting I've stumbled across on the internet recently - the infamous <A HREF="http://www.baitcar.com">Vancouver BaitCar</A>. Nothing like watching the instant transformation from excited thief to repentant arrestee on video.

These sort of people likely feel no true remorse; they are without conscience or feeling. In short, they are sociopaths. That said, it is very likely that not one of these people would think twice about subjecting someone else to the harm you may feel entirely justified inflicting upon them.

Quote:

I would much rather get the lad severely beaten by his OGA. This way I am sure the one getting punished is the lad I am after.

I'm uber-new here; can someone point me to a list of definitions for terms like "oga"? I assume it means his mob boss, but hey, I'd like to know what I'm referring to instead of talking out of my ass. Very Happy

Hello I'm New here! Joined: 06 Feb 2004 Posts: 5

chrisd234 wrote:

I have yet to convince a scammer to put a hot iron to his face but there is hope.

Just phone him while he's ironing. Smile

Posted: Mon Jan 16, 2006 8:18 pm

@BBB: "Oga" means "chairman." Sort of a mob boss, yes...but not like the Godfather or anything. Some only act big. Smile

Posted: Mon Jan 16, 2006 8:32 pm

If the lad is alive, then you have not crossed the line.

If the lad is not alive, but you were not looking him in the eye while squeezing the trigger on the gun, you have not crossed the line. If you MAY have caused the lad's demise because you got someone so mad at him and the other person pulled the trigger, you have not crossed the line.

Posted: Mon Jan 16, 2006 8:36 pm

Finally decided to actually join the site. Story.

It would probably take a lot less than $5000 for a lad to do something desparate to get his hands on the cash, and I reckon there is no doubt that a lad has had a beating as a result of being slapped but theres a fair chance theyve seen the pidgeon version of "Casino" or "Goodfellas" so fair game.

Also on Cash baiting-when did mods here decide to effectively condemn this-what I mean is that one day I was reading Shivers cash baits on the letters page and the next they were gone-i guess this was around3-4 months ago or something...

419Eater Admin Joined: 30 Sep 2003 Posts: 7469

The cash baits are still on the letters page. They have never moved. However there is now a warning at the end of each of them, and of course requests for info on cash baiting is now a big no-no here.

Posted: Mon Jan 16, 2006 8:44 pm

The decision against cash-baiting was made shortly after Shiver published those baits. Upon reflection, it became the common concensus that, while one or two baits by Shiver might be viewed as funny, multiple attempts my multiple users would actually be seen as illegal activity, something with which this site cannot identify itself.

Posted: Mon Jan 16, 2006 8:47 pm

Since its your party n all I'll take your word for it Smile

They were deffo advertised as cash baits in red i.e got $80 out of so and so...that text was removed at some stage though, i just never re -read them since i guess.

So has this always been the case with cash baits or why was this decided apart from the obvious reason that its still stealing albeit from a no good scummer...

Baiting ethics - is there a line that shouldn't be crossed?	View next topic View previous topic