Baiting on behalf of a client?

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: Sun May 06, 2007 7:21 pm

4ehgfrsmul wrote:

The basic ethical principle is that everybody should only do what they feel is right.

Most 419ers feel that what they do is right. People have a way of convincing themselves of the righteousness of their actions.

Posted: Sun May 06, 2007 7:29 pm

4ehgfrsmul wrote:

The basic ethical principle is that everybody should only do what they feel is right.

That's not an ethical principle, that's the lack of an ethical principle.

I don't think baiting is for you but since you're an analytical mind you might want to tackle a few moral dilemmas which unfortunately are still left unresolved: http://www.friesian.com/valley/dilemmas.htm

Posted: Sun May 06, 2007 7:50 pm

My favourite is:

"Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law." -Kant

But this is heading wayyyyyyy off topic......

Posted: Sun May 06, 2007 7:55 pm

Quote:

The basic ethical principle is that everybody should only do what they feel is right.

@Don- I agree. Some confusion, I think, between 'moral' and 'ethical' - not the same thing and often subject to conflict!

In any case, there is a Forum that explains 419eaters rules on 'The Ethics of Scambaiting'. I certainly wouldn't be involved if that went against my personal moral judgement in any way!

Posted: Sun May 06, 2007 9:02 pm

Dear 4ehgfrsmul, please do not bother trying your luck over at aa419. We want the knuckle heads, not the fluffy huggy-huggy types. Seriously, we get death threats and threats of serious law-suits every friggin day. We don't do the tea-drinking business. I think that you'd be wasting your time.

*** BANNED *** Joined: 19 Jul 2004 Posts: 140

Asking for morality advice on this board is like asking Joe Schmoe about politics. Everyone has an opinion- some people believe whatever "everyone else" believes, others believe on the basis of their own feelings, and no one is interested in the facts.

Morality is a more delicate topic than lawyering. If you don't allow yourself to make suggestions on the latter, then don't give suggestions on the former. Leave it to each individual's conscience, and stop bullying other people when they don't agree with the addle-headed groupthink of this board.

If there's anything we DON'T need, it's more politics. There's already enough in the real world, don't you friggin' think?

Posted: Mon May 07, 2007 8:07 am

Franc28 wrote:

Leave it to each individual's conscience, and stop bullying other people when they don't agree with the addle-headed groupthink of this board.

Thanks for re-stating the board policy, Franc. It is always up to each baiter how he/she decides to interact with scammers, as said in innumerable previous ethics threads. That said, it was the proposed method which raised understandable questions. I saw no bullying, simply questions and answers.

As an aside, I'm rather curious as to why you continue to participate on a board whose members you obviously regard with quite a bit of contempt. Confused

The fact that you recently referred to baiting as "your own hobby" simply illustrates my point.

Posted: Mon May 07, 2007 8:38 am

I would say that the simple answer is that if a person has qualms about baiting, then 'baiting by proxy' is a simplistic and bogus way to lay their guilt on someone else.

If you don't want to bait, don't bait. Rolling Eyes

Not quite a Newb Joined: 04 May 2007 Posts: 22

Thanks for the advice and thoughts.

Yes, mr fife seems to understand what I'm saying. Part of my approach would be "May I use your information, Ms. Abacha, to gain untold wealth - but don't tell me if it's false information" (which mr fife just did). Sure, that might cause an ethical dilemma since I suspect it's false (some ethicists might agree with GomerPyle), but I can honestly say that the client gave me the information. I'm talking about reusing information from lads, but if I offered to check out rumors for anybody else, I would warn them about the dangers of sending real information, but ask them not to tell me if it is or not.

LordVader, I think you misunderstand me. People have given their lives for the sake of these principles. That's not what I call fluffy-huggy-huggy.

Can't aa419 use the help of researchers, in addition to bandwidth hogs? The site isn't clear. It looks like the only thing they want to let a normal Internet user to do is run Lad Vampire. How about searching for copycat sites, running WHOIS queries, etc.?

Baiting Guru Joined: 08 Jul 2004 Posts: 11857 Location: UK

Oh, you still here Rolling Eyes

Posted: Mon May 07, 2007 1:15 pm

4ehgfrsmul wrote:

Can't aa419 use the help of researchers, in addition to bandwidth hogs? The site isn't clear. It looks like the only thing they want to let a normal Internet user to do is run Lad Vampire. How about searching for copycat sites, running WHOIS queries, etc.?

The site is very clear. And all the good people over there are perfectly "normal internet users" doing exactly what you described.

http://wiki.aa419.org/index.php/FAQ_and_Support

Quote:

Why don't you report these sites?

We do! Every site reported to us is investigated, and if it is proven false, we add it to our database, and report it to the current Web site host, the police, and to other official bodies. The Artists want to stop Internet crime, and willingly cooperate with anyone who will help the fight. Over 95% of the fake sites that we find and report are taken down by the hosts without incident.

Baiting Guru Joined: 08 Jul 2004 Posts: 11857 Location: UK

I don't know why you bother, Don, I was going to post what you posted, then I thought, why bother Rolling Eyes

Posted: Mon May 07, 2007 1:29 pm

You can be my assistant. I'm tired of keeping track of all of my baits.

Wanting to be a baiter, but not wanting to tell lies is like wanting to be a chef, without wanting to cook.

Posted: Mon May 07, 2007 2:09 pm

Quote:

You see, if I can get someone to let me serve as their agent, I won't have to lie. (I don't like lying). I can honestly say, "Sorry, this is the information or the documents they gave me" or "I'm still waiting for my client to answer my request."

Breaking this down on a PAINFUL level... you would have to then get at least two people to give you documents or information that you hand your mugu to make that statement true.

You seem to have no problem with misleading the mugu, yet lying is wrong? Hmmmm. You will strain a gnat and swallow a camel, as they say. Not to be trite, but I think your distinction between lying and deception is quite ridiculous.

Not quite a Newb Joined: 14 Jul 2005 Posts: 41

I'm of the opinon that this thread is pointless.

4ehgfrsmul, bait or don't bait, but a three page, navel gazing thread devoted to helping you rationalize it is pretty unnecessary.

The only reason I'm not locking it now is that I can't wait for Franc28's next insightful post.

Posted: Mon May 07, 2007 2:12 pm

Franc28 wrote:

If there's anything we DON'T need, it's more politics. There's already enough in the real world, don't you friggin' think?

I would agree... HOWEVER, the one thing this board doesn't need more than politics, is more ethics threads. There are already enough on the board, don't ya think?

I hope this post got in before Snerd locked it!

Posted: Mon May 07, 2007 2:14 pm

Quote:

The basic ethical principle is that everybody should only do what they feel is right.

I would most respectfully suggest that you probably haven't had a lot of exposure to philosophy or studied ethics in in any deliberate fashion. Nothing wrong with that; lots of people focus their attentions elsewhere. But baiting involves some fairly nuanced ethical concepts, and so you might want to pull back the throttle on passing judgment of baiters' ethics if you haven't a solid foundation to do so.

Posted: Mon May 07, 2007 2:15 pm

jojobean wrote:

I hope this post got in before Snerd locked it!

Nah, we cannot lock it, Franc28 would call Amnesty International because we deprived him of his undeniable right to post his opinion in this thread. Rolling Eyes

Not quite a Newb Joined: 04 May 2007 Posts: 22

I appreciate what everybody is saying about ethics/morality/gloating/. Most of these issues came up during my university and graduate philosophy and ethics courses, but not all. Nuff said.

Now, try looking at me from yet a different perspective.

The fact is, I get paid as a consultant to help websites communicate more clearly. So, if you don't agree with my rather unusual ethical stance, would you please consider that if I don't understand something basic about a website after reading it for a few hours, maybe others don't either? That's why I posted as a newbie. You can't have the perspective about this forum that I do.

To you, it all makes sense because you're immersed in it. But when you leave out certain explanations from the FAQs, a new visitor may not understand everything you do. For example, when aa419.com says "Every site reported to us is investigated" without immediately saying "and here's how you can help us <link>," they're missing an opportunity to communicate.

Posted: Mon May 07, 2007 9:17 pm

4ehgfrsmul wrote:

... I get paid as a consultant to help websites communicate more clearly. ...

Posted: Mon May 07, 2007 9:29 pm

Ready, fire, aim!

Master Baiter Joined: 10 Aug 2006 Posts: 143

You mean......I just wasted precious time reading........SPAM?

Like a freakin religious group at my door...misdirection....then when you least expect it......the sales pitch.

I'll say the same thing as I say to them: Piss Off!!

Posted: Mon May 07, 2007 10:30 pm

I have real degree in philosophy, from a real university. What you write does not appear to reflect a post secondary level of understanding of philosophy or ethics, let alone post graduate study thereof. I can't think of any contemporary philosophical position that would mesh with what you have said so far - some interpretations of Kant are very prescriptive with respect to lying - a point that is often cited by critics of Kantian thought involves the supposed inability of an adherent thereof to lie even if it were to mean saving someone's life. But no Kantian would suggest, as you did, that "The basic ethical principle is that everybody should only do what they feel is right". So that isn't where you are coming from. And although there are certainly those that take a relavistic approach to ethics, they generally aren't the sort (like a Kantian might) to oppose lying categorically but allow for a legalistic loophole. Please feel free to enlighten me on this.

**Sorry Mods, I know I should know better**

Posted: Mon May 07, 2007 11:52 pm

I give up! - I think this individual is just a 'flamer'!

Not quite a Newb Joined: 14 Jul 2005 Posts: 41

Wrong word, Septic. Wink

@numberlotsofletters- If it is your job to help others communicate more clearly, I truly hope that you offer some type of money back guarantee. Rolling Eyes

@Gen. A- your post is fine.

Baiting on behalf of a client?	View next topic View previous topic