Bommando

That is close to one of the most ridiculous things I have ever heard.

There is a distinct difference between stupid people buying stupid things and people actively seeking to scam others. The former is a factor of life. People make silly purchases all the time. The latter, when a vendor actively seeks to mislead the buyer, is another matter entirely and claiming that the economy is based on scammers is a stretch to say the least.

sordavie

First, that an action is legal does not mean it is morally permissible.

Capitalizing on stupidity can't be permissible in every case. Consider Timmy from South Park. Suppose Timmy were real person with a lot of money. If I con Timmy into giving me his money because he's not smart enough to realize that I'm conning him, I would be doing something bad even if my con was perfectly legal.

Take another case, suppose you've got this homeless man who knows little to nothing about legal contracts. He finds a winning $100,000 lotto ticket one day, and you get him to sign a contract trading it for your timeshare. In fine print, the contract states that he does not own your timeshare, he just gets to use it once a month for two months, if you aren't there, and cannot rent it out or anything like that. The homeless man doesn't realize this, he thinks that he's getting a condo out in Hawaii or something. In fact, you've written the contract to make it look like that's what's going on if one merely glances at it. But, in fact, the contract states otherwise. Is it okay for you to do this? Suppose the homeless guy is so excited that he will get a nice place to live that he just doesn't look things over carefully. Just because he signed the thing and makes the trade legally binding, does it mean you've done something that's not morally objectionable?

Now, you may reply that Timmy can't help that he's in his condition. Fate played him a crappy hand. He turned out retarded. And, you may reply that the people who fall for cases such as the one we're discussing now are disanalogous because these people have a choice between being stupid or not, so it's okay to take advantage of their choice to be stupid. But, this can't be right. Nobody chooses to be put in a situation where they can be conned. They may happen to be careless. But, to be careless doesn't seem to me a choice to make. I don't choose to be careless. Carelessness looks to be a character flaw. But, one doesn't choose their traits and flaws. One may choose to do certain actions which reflect these traits and flaws, but I don't think someone can choose to be careless, or choose to be a jerk.

This really just shows, I think, the deeper point that choice is something made between alternate actions. Stupidity and carelessness are not actions. They are character traits.

Is it okay to take advantage of someone's character traits? Sure, in some cases. Is it okay to take advantage of someone's stupidity and con them out of their money? Is it okay in every case to do this? I gave an example where we should think it's not okay. Is it okay in some cases? I don't know. But, it doesn't appear to me that anyone deserves to be conned out of their money due to stupidity. And, even if they did deserve it, I still don't see how any particular person could be justified in doing the conning. It's not as if they deserve to benefit from other people's stupidity.

__________________

CingularDuality

Not much of a stretch, IMO. Marketing is all about persuading people to believe that they need or want a product. Sure, in most cases, it's a bit more mild than we're seeing here, but there's still deception, half truths, exaggerations and omissions involved in most modern marketing campaigns.

__________________

Become a supporting member! -- Shop at the Tactical Market!

Take the world's smallest political quiz! "I was touched by His Noodly Appendage."
TacticalGamer TX LAN/BBQ Veteran:

sordavie

But, the important question is whether that's okay to do. The fact that modern marketing campaign does so, doesn't mean it's okay to do it. Similarly, the fact that it's legal to do X doesn't mean it's okay to do X.

A scammer, we take it, does something morally objectionable. It's not as clear that modern marketing is morally objectionable; but is it unclear to us because they're so subtle as to have fooled us? Where's the line? I take it Bommando thinks there is a line, and it's a line which divides scammers from marketers on moral grounds. Even if the line is fuzzy or hard for us to determine just where it is, I think the prevading intuition is that there is such a line.

Selling three PSones for $900 at this time with descriptions that could be easily misread seems to cross the line.

__________________

SmokingTarpan

I always get a laugh at the blatantly stupid. Like a contract, you should always read all the way through before signing or spending your money. For ebay, that means drop down to the line where it tells you what you're actually bidding on. In this case:

"You're bidding on Sony Playstations, 3 of them."

Nowhere in the auction does it come close to saying that this guy is selling a PS3. The one questionable line would be, "THERE IS NOWHERE TO FIND EVEN THE 20GB SYSTEMS THIS CHEAP....BUY THESE INSTEAD!" That's probably the simply truth; at the time of the auction, there probably were no PS3 systems on ebay that were as cheap as $900. And "buy these instead" should have raised a warning flag.

I'm the annoying guy that will take 20min to sit there at the doc's office and read entirely through every form before signing my name while everyone else simply gets it, signs it and hands it back as fast as possible. And if I don't understand something on the form, I don't sign it until I get clarification and approve. Given the absence of an extreme circumstance (such as taking advantage of an obviously mentally handicapped person), I feel no pity for people who aren't as careful- especially where money is involved.

__________________

[squadl]
"I am the prettiest african-american, vietnamese..cong..person." -SugarNCamo

DudeMan

Sordavie, i dont think anyone would dispute taking money, although perfectly legally from someone who is dumb enough, or mentally incapable as you have described, to transact to their full potential is a morally permissable thing to do.

but the fact is, this guy does not legally have to care whether stephen hawkin is sitting opn the other side of the computer mathmatically calculating every transactions worths. Ebay is comprised of people selling crap to rip other people off. just some people think the crap is good, and they buy it.

the fact is, if you cant be trusted with your own accounts then you shouldnt be, and there is one sure way to learn that you are financially stupid... being ripped off. if the buyer paid through paypal, he/she can get their cash back. if they didnt, well they are dumber than people here give them credit for.

its not up to me to vet the transactions i make on Ebay, and whilst it may not be moral, its buisness, and like it or not buisness is never truely moral, the only way to become rich, is to make someone else poorer...

not saying i agree with this, but its buyer beware, if you cant handle your accounts, dont pay for things on ebay. go to reputable dealers.

and its ebay, the same trading standards that shops have dont apply, if you sell a second hand car that is a rustheap... you dont advertise it as a rust heap. that is the same line, an advert for my last car would look something like this,

buy my ford fiesta its crap the seats are ripped and broken, the springs are shot, the tyres are bald, the head gasket is blown although if i warm the engine up before you arive you wont hear it. and the clutch is a temporary one fitted by the aa which needs imidiate repaire... will someone by that car no... so i sold it as a reliable machine that has just become too small for my needs, and its an excelent fuel efficient first time car. and as a result sold it... i dont feel guilty about that. same rules apply as far as i see it.

__________________


The Queen
"Those who perpetrate these brutal acts against innocent people should know that they will not change our way of life,"
Atrocities such as these simply reinforce our sense of community

TheFeniX
"Guns don't kill people: effeminate men in green tunics do"

Icsist

Once a month for two months? that doesnt make sense.. do you mean once a year for two months?

__________________
QUOTE : "Icsist has a little shameless behavior in the past"
Nice remark guys.

CingularDuality

Some very good points.

I'm not sure where the line is. For me, it's big and blurry. I don't have a problem with this auction. Like Dudeman, I don't see how someone can be expected to hold people's hands while, at the same time, hurting your business by explaining all of the marketing techniques used in advertisement. This auction accurately described what was being auctioned, correct? It was worded in a way that, at first glance, might have made it seem better than it actually was, though, right? I don't have a problem with that.

__________________

Become a supporting member! -- Shop at the Tactical Market!

Take the world's smallest political quiz! "I was touched by His Noodly Appendage."
TacticalGamer TX LAN/BBQ Veteran:

Kerostasis

My (blurry) line of reasoning:

--A sale like this is unethical
--Unethical sales procedures like this are pretty much SOP in most sales businesses
--Any salesman that actually conducts himself ethically, has a very difficult time competing with the unethical salesmen, at least until he establishes a customer base that admires his honesty (not impossible, but difficult enough to discourage most businesses from trying it). This maintains the status quo of having most salesmen be snakes.
--I refuse to conduct sales myself, for that reason---I've held several sales jobs for short periods of time, but never sold much because I didn't like manipulating my customers
--Given that unethical sales practices like this are normal in our society, the only thing surprising or shocking about this particular sale is how easy it should have been to recognize it as a scam
--Given that, I have trouble feeling sympathy for someone dumb enough to fall for it. They need to learn to be more careful with their money, and losing $900 of it is a good way to start.

__________________

thebleakaffinity

Or, perhaps seeing that the way the free market functions is totally unethical, we come up with a better system .

Kerostasis

"Better systems" have been tried, and don't work. The Free Market is the best system known to mankind.

__________________

Barracuda_Magoo

"Custom PS3":
http://cgi.ebay.ca/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?...m=300051023981

__________________

Kerostasis

Already fried by E-bay. =)

__________________

sordavie

Once a month for two months means at most you can use it twice, ever. It makes sense. You just have to parse the sentence correctly.

I'll let you use my computer once a week, till the semester ends (which is in 3 weeks). That would be like saying, I'll let you use my computer once a week for three weeks.

__________________

Barracuda_Magoo

The "custom PS3" was a PS1 duct-taped to a PS2. PS1 + PS2 = PS3, apparently.

__________________