Family ITP ethics (split from Tattooed Lad goes from Lagos t

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: Mon Jun 28, 2010 10:35 am

Running off like what?

Telling you that you're bang out of order? And who gives a shit about being a moderator? Rover can un-mod me right this second and I'd still tell you, you're being an asshole. Hell, for the purposes of this conversation, I'll PM him and tell him to un-mod me if you like.

See, the thing is, it doesn't matter if I'm a mod or not. What matters here is that there is a difference between us and the lads. When you deliberately fuck an ITP, that difference is going out of the window.

It doesn't matter how many times I use the word "fuck". It doesn't matter if I'm a mod or not. All that matters is that we stay on our side and the lads stay on theirs.

It's as simple as that.

Posted: Mon Jun 28, 2010 10:42 am

Slightlyoutofit wrote:

All that matters is that we stay on our side and the lads stay on theirs.

It's as simple as that.

Okay... No worries

Master Baiter Joined: 23 Apr 2010 Posts: 160

Ah, but what if - theoretically - a lad goes on his safari and brings his wife, kid, brother, uncle? (Not likely, but imagine the situation). Who would drop the lad, who would carry on with the bait ?

Posted: Mon Jun 28, 2010 10:51 am

^^ This isn't an ethics thread.

Let it get back on topic please. Wink

Posted: Mon Jun 28, 2010 10:54 am

Popiejopie wrote:

Ah, but what if - theoretically - a lad goes on his safari and brings his wife, kid, brother, uncle? (Not likely, but imagine the situation). Who would drop the lad, who would carry on with the bait ?

Oh shit... Not here please Shocked

Master Baiter Joined: 23 Apr 2010 Posts: 160

.. my humble apologies Smile

I was reading this and thinking of a question while you guys were arguing (?) along and I posted before I noticed the discussion would be closed Wink

In any case, carry on Smile

don't mind the newbie Wink

Posted: Mon Jun 28, 2010 11:10 am

@Popiejopie: No harm done. I elaborated beautifully on that idea in the opening of my earlier post. Give that a read.

Oh, and enjoy these noob moments while you can. I get angry PMs from Slightly for poor sentence structure and word usage.

Master Baiter Joined: 11 Feb 2010 Posts: 164 Location: UK

Gents, and ladies, I don't want to rock the boat but i feel i wanted to say something,
Some comments here are correct and some aren't, i myself agree that ITP should not be involved, but we didn't really intend to safari his whole family that was just to get him moving............

I am no proffessional except in my line of busness, and am basically a Noob, but i know what lads do, because here in Nigeria the scam other Nigerians as well as others, i'm a noob on eater but not in life...........

I have been in Nigeria a long time and some of the comments made are obviously from people that know where Nigeria is on the map and thats it.........

If anyone feels things we did wrong, why can't this be done on pm or by other means rather than flexing the muscles and putting it on the thread...........if it was that bad, why am i still posting on the thread and it hasn't been removed yet?

I do enjoy eater............but if my comments offend and i am to be removed then fine......

Posted: Mon Jun 28, 2010 12:21 pm

Quote:

If anyone feels things we did wrong, why can't this be done on pm or by other means rather than flexing the muscles and putting it on the thread...........if it was that bad, why am i still posting on the thread and it hasn't been removed yet?

Because it sparks a discussion among members. Having such a discussion about certain topics now and then helps us draw the line between right and wrong. It's not bad to re-evaluate such decisions once in a while.

As for the safari... This whole discussion about whether it's right or wrong to safari a lad's family (wrong, as far as I'm concerned), doesn't detract from the greatness of the safari itself. Great job!

Posted: Mon Jun 28, 2010 12:32 pm

I hoped that this issue would be put to bed, but as you've posted some questions and some statements that I disagree with, I've no choice but to answer them.

Rev Who wrote:

but we didn't really intend to safari his whole family that was just to get him moving............

Not from the quote I posted. Having a "red hot go" to make the lad's family travel looks like intent to any onlooker.

Quote:

I have been in Nigeria a long time and some of the comments made are obviously from people that know where Nigeria is on the map and thats it.........

Although I've only visited Africa and not lived there, I've dealt with lads long enough to know how they operate. The argument that, because someone doesn't live in a certain area, they have no idea about it, is a poor one. One could counter argue that if a person lives in an expensive part of his country and has no contact with the citizens of the poorer parts, they are unable to comment on their own country. Both comments are incorrect. "Live" experience helps but it most certainly isn't the be-all and end-all.
I don't live in the US and have only visited, but I know enough to make valid judgements. Equally, with Nigeria, I've been involved in anti-AFF for long enough and from different aspects to make valid judgement calls.
But either way, this topic does not concern wether anyone knows anything about Nigeria or not. It concerns doing what's right.

Quote:

If anyone feels things we did wrong, why can't this be done on pm or by other means rather than flexing the muscles and putting it on the thread...........

For the same reason that I'm addressing you now, here on the forum. When a statement is made in public it should be addressed in public. Especially when that statement is one which crosses over boundaries.
When experienced baiters post something that is just plain wrong, it is our duty to point that out. If it's left hanging in the air, then the misconception that it's Eater policy or something to be condoned by our members, it's a very dangerous game to play. We have enough people who want to shoot us down in flames and they would delight in an un-challenged comment that we take pleasure in going after women and children. There are also plenty of new-comers who will take an unaddressed comment and think "Well if that's OK, I'll run with it too".
We have a responsibility to our new members and our established members to point out that there are lines which should not be crossed. If those lines are illustrated and the member transgressing them still disagrees publicly, then taking it to PM is counter productive. There is no closure. Only the invalid viewpoint is left as the full stop.

Quote:

if it was that bad, why am i still posting on the thread and it hasn't been removed yet?

Because, apart from advertising the fact that we don't condone baiting ITPs, removing it would almost certainly leave the impression of jack-booting.

Quote:

I do enjoy eater............but if my comments offend and i am to be removed then fine......

Nobody is talking about offending anyone else. All that needs to be recognised is that there are ethical boundaries that we have to keep in sight. Accept those boundaries and everything is fine. Everyone is happy. Cross them and then argue in public that you're correct and you can't expect anything other than to be put straight.

Now. Up to you if you want to turn this into an ethics debate. Like I said: I was rather hoping it would come back on topic.

Posted: Mon Jun 28, 2010 2:05 pm

Being who I am, if one can prove, beyond any doubt (they lie y'know), the family is involved, then they are possibly as guilty. Without mens rea you really can't lay blame.

Children should be exempt on the basis they rarely know right form wrong. I would default the definition of child to the legally acceptable age in the particular country as we can guess some of the "smallbois" are very young no doubt or are runners for the lads. Kids, unfortunately, are badguys favorite means of moving things around in most criminal circles. Again, I would have to be completely and with great certainty sure they were involved.

We walk a fine line here.

Not quite a Newb Joined: 22 Jun 2010 Posts: 42

I think families are ITP and should be presumed innocent unltil proven guilty.

Posted: Mon Jun 28, 2010 5:18 pm

I'm going to put 2 cents into the vending machine:

I personally think that a lad's family is an ITP (Innocent Third Party) because I have experience something like this with a real famiy member (My Aunt) and I must say that it enrages me everytime I think about her. She was a smart woman but for some reason she felt that she could make money but stealing her mother (my grandma's) credit/debit card and spend well beyond her means and buy useless shit and not even once think about her poor kids (which are very young). She not only took money from her but she made credit/debit card account for her kids (who are toddlers basically). She's been to jail once but apparently she hasn't learned her lesson and did it again. It has gotten so bad that she literally cut-off the phone line in my grandma's house because of all the debt-collectors who kept calling. Yet at the same time my grandma had no idea what was really going on. She thought she was going to be a doctor (and went to college for it but never paid of the tuition). Now do you really think that it is really fair that we have to suffer because of something incredibly idiotic of my aunt to do? (By the way, she was deported back to Denmark and is serving time there). Honestly? You punish the few who did not the people who were negligent (spelling?) of what a family member was doing.

I know it sucks and I know that you like safari'ng but this is something you have to take into consideration. Make the Lad and ONLY the lad safari as punishment for scamming innocent people out of their life savings. These people are like the mafia/drug addict in a sense that they will keep lying until they get what they want and won't stop until they get it. I would even go as far as saying that lads are in way mentally ill because they have been "brainwashed" into lying to others in other to get what they want.

[/rant]

Posted: Mon Jun 28, 2010 5:55 pm

I thought (and still think) that the original safari was brilliant.

Posted: Mon Jun 28, 2010 10:23 pm

Black Dog, I can only assume, to take a leaf out of your thought process, that you have no children. I of course do not know you and of course I could be wrong. We have all read some amazing safaris on Eater over time and we all know what misery, hardship, discomfort and more can fall upon a lad, this we all agree is ok, however can you honestly say, hand on heart that you would happily put innocent children through any of this torment for the sake of a bait? Have you paused to consider the short, medium and even long term effects any of this could have on a young innocent mind?

The lads are the scammers, not there mums, dads, uncles or kids. They may also be but we dont know that for certain so we follow the rules and bait the scammer and the scammer only.

Posted: Mon Jun 28, 2010 10:34 pm

Slightlyoutofit wrote:

I don't live in the US

Well, duh.

Posted: Mon Jun 28, 2010 11:55 pm

Hopefully my comments will be on topic, if not, I apologize and will scurry back to the fake sites forum and keep my nose out of things. Razz

Here's what stood out for me:

Quote:

I personally think INHO that the children of the lads are just the next generation of scammer... Just as the lad currently being baited was when he was a Ladling more than likely

But you see, that's why warners tirelessly warn and site killers spend many hours researching and filing reports -- so that hopefully not just a victim or potential victim won't have to suffer, but by extension the victim's family won't suffer either. I do not see a victim's children as the next generation of victims. Rather I see them as innocents, and the only potential threat I see is them becoming collateral damage of a victim's suffering. IMHO, the same thing applies to the family of a scammer -- they have the potential to be collateral damage of the scammer's illegal activities, and we should do everything possible to prevent that, rather than set up a scenario where they might be caught up in said illegal activities.

That's just my opinion, and I'm not taking away from great safari-ing (is that a word? LOL) skills that anyone might have. I'm just saying that when it comes to families (and other ITPs as well), we as baiters and warners and killers alike must draw that line and hold firm to it. In my case, just because a victim believed a scam -- even the most intelligent person may fall for a scam if they feel desperate enough -- that doesn't mean one should say, "well, that was stupid" and leave them to their own devices. Same goes for scammers -- just because they are ruthless criminals doesn't mean that their families and other ITP's should be lumped in with them.

Just my way of saying what a few others here have said. I mean no offense.

Posted: Tue Jun 29, 2010 12:26 am

Well I will chime in with my two cents. If a lad chooses to take his family along on a safari, I think that it's the lad decision, and not the baiter's fault. It's not like the baiter was specifically demanding that the lad include his family members or the baiter would never pay the money. Also, I find it extremely hard to believe that the wife doesn't know exactly what her husband is up to. Kids, I agree, are 100% innocent in this. (I also agree with Black Dog that, unfortunately, many of them will probably grow up to follow in Daddy's footsteps. However that is another topic in itself.) The wives of these scammers have to know what is going on, though. Think of it this way...picture a person who makes a living off of dealing drugs in your country. Do you honestly think their wife isn't aware of their activities?

Posted: Tue Jun 29, 2010 1:00 am

Bait It Up wrote:

Think of it this way...picture a person who makes a living off of dealing drugs in your country. Do you honestly think their wife isn't aware of their activities?

There are plenty of instances where family members of drug dealers are unaware of what their relatives get up to. By it's very nature, the drug game requires secrecy and that sometimes means cutting family members out too. There are plenty of news reports regarding the subject. Heck, serial killers have got away with their wives not knowing what they were up to.
But that doesn't matter one bit.

What matters is that there are instances where relatives do not know. As I've already stated: I've come across some of those instances. The one that I've pointed out is where a lad told his wife that he was working in construction in Europe but was actually in the next country along, scamming away. His wife had no clue. She thought that the occasional promise of money (and that's all it was - a promise as the lad was spunking his cash up the wall as soon as he got it, rather than sending it home) was legitimately earned money.

Now, you can say "They know" but this woman definitely did not. When I spoke to her, she went into denial - "My Chidozie is an honest man". She actually thought that I was just some person trying to break up her marriage by lying about her husband.

So there are instances where the wife doesn't know. As if there are instances, how are you going to know which ones are innocent and which ones are guilty? All have to be considered as ITPs unless you can prove otherwise. And just how are you going to prove otherwise? Answer - you almost certainly can't.

Hello I'm New here! Joined: 28 Jun 2010 Posts: 5

Hi. I'm new.

How do you know the lad has a family? Were there photos to prove it?

Posted: Tue Jun 29, 2010 2:07 am

Interesting thread in which to make your first post, poopypants. Be sure to sign up for a mentor and check out Eater U, there are a lot of good threads in there to help you get started baiting.

Welcome to Eater. Smile

Posted: Tue Jun 29, 2010 6:50 am

Bait It Up wrote:

many of them will probably grow up to follow in Daddy's footsteps

Then we'll bait them when we get a format from them. Not before.

By baiting we will invariably involve some third parties. Not all of that involvement is financial, or even affects them very much at all - a lad walking into a WU office to try to cash a fake MTCN* will, at worst, throw some cursewords at the cashier and leave. While that's certainly involving an ITP, I wouldn't think twice about getting a lad to walk into a WU office and try to cash a fake MTCN. The cashier's lifestyle is not significantly impacted by the fact that some moron didn't check the MTCN online before walking into the WU office.

I feel that the two places where we have to make a distinction are whether we are deliberately involving ITPs more than we have to, and whether that involvement will result in a significant change in lifestyle for the ITP. Bringing the lad's family along for a safari is, in my opinion, on the wrong side of both of those lines.

There are, I'll admit, a few rules here that I don't particularly agree with. This isn't one of them. It's there for a good reason and is perhaps the most important rule we have here.

* Yeah, I know, you can check them online. It's an example, go along with it.

Master Baiter Joined: 23 Apr 2010 Posts: 160

Then I still have the same question (now that the discussion has split Smile

). What if a lad decides to bring his wife or kid(s) with him from, say, Lagos to Accra, just to name a random place? Do you drop the bait because of that, or tell him the truth or whatnot??

Posted: Tue Jun 29, 2010 11:51 am

I tend to wander in when most of the party has already got drunk and gone home Smile

This is a real moral dilemma. I think the lads families are going to be affected one way or another by us baiting them. Let us say for instance we got enough info on the guy to contact the local police, they arrested him and he was put behind bars. To us, the perfect scenario. But to the scammers family and unknown ITP they might loose their livelihood. Someone mentioned before that sending a lad on Safari was affecting his family anyways by him being away.
We all know how desperate it is for some people in these countries and poverty is the main cause of corruption. We tend to forget our privileged lives when we start to bait some guy who hardly got an education, and has little hope of a proper job other than digging in the dirt. Yet we wave democracy and monetarism in his face.
Anyways I think that the chap decided 'he' was going to take his whole family on this trip, the baiter didn't ask him to. He is solely responsible for the welfare and safety of his family as am I with my own family. However I would attempt to dissuade the guy from taking his family with him though.

Master Baiter Joined: 23 Apr 2010 Posts: 160

@wowwow : I definately agree on advising the lad against bringing his family, there are numerous excuses you, the baiter, can use to try and persuade your lad not to. ("Hotel cost only covered for 1 person", etc.).

Still, if the lad insists, I'd say there's no boundary for stupidity and he has to care for his family regardless of his situation. If you were a real, genuine victim which required him to safari somewhere, it'd be the same problem. Only now you're not a real victim, but a baiter.

Family ITP ethics (split from Tattooed Lad goes from Lagos t	View next topic View previous topic