Tell his parents is precisely what you should do. That's what would lead to possible behavior change. Letting him get away with it validates the behavior and teaches that it's OK and he will be able to talk his way out of such things again.
It does everyone a disservice to not tell his parents.
The author got manipulated twice. First convinced to hand over his money and then convinced not to tell the parents.
The scammer player the author like a guitar. Right there is the psychopath's first big lesson - "people listen when I cry".
The genius of the scammer/budding psychopath being that the blogger thinks he "won".
Police involvement is unlikely to make anything better. For every person who is scared straight, how many end up getting chewed up by the system, and coming out worse then they came in?
Telling the parents would probably be more impactful - especially given that he really wanted to prevent that from happening.
very possible. I checked the mothers account later and I couldn't find it (even though I had the link. He or his brother blocked me on her FB but I think it was his brother because this was before he begged me to delete my message to his mother
Plus he's been educated about the dangers of scamming from interlinked accounts. If he does try this again it won't be as easy for the next victim to get their stuff back.
Downvoted you. It's a big jump from "somebody, 22 yo, scammed somebody else online at least once" to "psychopath".
To be frank, I think I wish the word "psychopath" was deleted from the dictionary altogether. It's just a handy label to apply to all sorts of baddies, effectively dehumanizing them (he's a psychopath- he would do anything to you, so you're justified in doing anything to him).
I disagree. It would never have entered my mind to do such a thing at age 22.
These people rarely change; if you don't punish them severely, you're giving them an unfair advantage over honest people. We don't want to live in a society dominated by crooks.
How do you know? What's for sure is that a regime of severe punishment guarantees that they won't, whereas an opportunity to reform (a carrot appropriately seasoned by a stick if necessary) at least allows that they might.
(Also, who are "these people"? People who do something wrong? Have you never? Your misdeeds have been more minor, assuredly, but what if one of 'us' finds them offensive enough that you suddenly become one of 'them'?)
Respectfully, I cannot see that what "would have entered your mind at the age of 22" has any bearing on your argument. The experience of one person (yourself) is not a valid basis for extrapolating blanket judgements of others, whether they're positive or negative. I'm not making a comment on your attitude towards severe punishment, more on your stated reasons for holding that attitude.
I'm sure there is a reason why people behave like this: Childhood trauma, poverty, bad parenting, etc...
I can sympathize to some extent - But in a broader context, if you don't severely punish this behaviour (when caught), it becomes a beneficial attribute for people to have... Fast forward a few generations and society would be filled with such people.
Although calling someone a psychopath without access to their medical history is not literally correct, I don't agree with the spirit of your comment.
After being caught, this scammer was actively trying to be seen as a human being. That is exactly the tactics he chose and this is exactly the tactics that helped him escape any punishment so far. I would advise against humanizing scammers too much.
So you're saying that after being caught, he should have sent to the victim of his scam a picture of himself putting live cats in a blender? Just to avoid being seen like somebody that tries to look human, you know.
In other words, in your view, if he doesn't look human then he's a psychopath; if he does, this proves again that he's a psychopath. Confirmation bias?
Ah, by the way and just FYI, psychopaths and scammers are human beings.
Yes, it's entirely possible to be both human and a piece of shit at the same time. It's the scammer's job to convince everyone that he is more human than a piece of shit, and it's our job not to fall for that. The factual validity of whatever bad names we might call him is irrelevant.
(No, I don't think that calling scammers bad names is a viable anti-scammer strategy. I just don't agree with the opposing effort, which should only be expected from the scammer.)
"So you're saying that after being caught, he should have sent to the victim of his scam a picture of himself putting live cats in a blender? Just to avoid being seen like somebody that tries to look human, you know."
Why would you even bother making this post? I can't imagine there is even like .0000001% of your being that believes that this is remotely close to what the person you're responding to thinks, so what exactly is this meant to accomplish? "haha, look at me mocking a point you never came close to making..."?
> "After being caught, this scammer was actively trying to be seen as a human being."
This is what the GP posted. He was very clearly saying that the scammer was "actively trying to be seen as a human being", something that apparently in the mind of the GP he's not- or at least not completely.
Well, maybe I misinterpreted, but I read it as "the fact that he tries to look scared and repentant is a further proof that he's a psychopath" - which would be a circular reasoning, since he's assumed that he's trying on the base that he's supposedly a psychopath. In any case I don't see any hint to the possibility that he might have been genuinely scared.
So to answer your question, mine was a reductio ad absurdum: given the GP's premises, the only way not to look as a psychopath would have been to look as a psychopath.
The assumption is that the scammers parents would react in a way that would make a meaningful difference and the very fact that the scammer is a scammer to me calls this into question.
Best way to express your opinion about something with someone is directly, not by asking their parents to do so for you.
Do you have kids? My experience of kids is that they are greatly influenced by how their parents see their behaviour.
Unless of course the parents have not built good relationship with their children, in which case the kids might not care a hoot what the parents think.
>> "My experience of kids is that they are greatly influenced by how their parents see their behavior."
Exactly, which is why it's very possible that the scammer behavior was learned from by the kid from their parents.
I actively engage people around me. I've tried the whole talking to parents way, and if you don't know them it's not uncommon for the response to be to mind your own business or worse, "Fuck you, I know how to raise my kids."
Beyond that, I've found that a number of parents with "good relationships" over estimate that the relationship is based on authority, not respect. This becomes obvious when the parent no longer has any authority over their children.
The parent "caring" and making a meaningful positive difference are not the same things.
Allowing the parent to fail might be super negative for the scammer too. For example, parents withdrawal of financial support for his education, kicking them out, reporting them to the police, or worse, the kid commits suicide; if you read the kids responses, it's very clear they're not stable.
Fine with you disagreeing with my experiences of helping people, but please be careful in how you apply your approach in the real world.
Exactly this.
Kid? At 22?
I left home at 17, and knew full well when I was doing wrong before that.
He is an adult, and the sooner he is treated as one, the sooner he might straighten out. Definitely tell the parents.
If the parents come back with, "Mind your own @$!%ng business!" then I would inform the police.
Anecdotally, at 23, I don't have (and have never had) a father and my mother lives in another country, whenever I consider any decision and the morality of it, I ask myself "do I want to be the kind of person who does this? Can I look at myself in the mirror if I do?"
Idea that the police would help is what it is. I personally don't know anyone in law enforcement or criminal law that would ever agree that turning their own kid over to the police was something they'd do.
Sure, "call the police" works if there's not another answer or you live a sheltered life, but to me, this is the very reason that communities are failing.
I'm not sure of your point, without tone it doesn't come across at all.
People can become even more concerned to win their parents approval as they grow through adulthood.
When I think of the things I've done as an adult that I'm least proud of then I wouldn't want to tell my parents about them.
As a child with no experience you've got an excuse for your mistakes. As an adult choosing to scam people the only places you've got to hide seem to be anonymity and sociopathy.
This is FELONY theft in some states. This man is an absolute idiot for not calling the police on those who set out elaborate schemes to defraud others.
Yeah, I'm not buying that apology for a second. Probably the first thing any con artist learns is how to fake being really sorry as well as they faked being legitimate anytime somebody manages to turn the tables on them. I bet you can get your money back and then report him to the police too. He's way beyond being corrected by his parents, and he probably threw that in just to make you think there's an option besides the police, assuming that you're too nice to put him in jail, where he belongs. Maybe some jail time will lead him to reevaluate his choices. Or at least keep him from stealing from anybody else for a little while.
I agree. Begging is a skill, and this scammer is already a professional in that respect.
If he was 16 or 17, it probably wouldn't be too late to tell his parents, although that depends on the family. 22 is way too old for that.
In addition, I think the author should at least release the details of the eBay account to the public to make them googleable in connection with the scam. Since it was the eBay account that convinced the author to go first, it can convince other people too.
Scream 'doxx' if you want, but the right thing to do here would be to educate the public about this guy so the rest of us can steer clear. The rest is up to the wronged here.
Yeah, the idea that half the thread is essentially saying "leave him alone, he's learned his lesson", when he is making responses like, "Please leave me alone after this I won't do anything like this anymore I am having panic of attacks just thinking about this." is just crazy. This kid STOLE from someone and makes himself sound like the victim in almost everything he says. How on earth are people so gullible?
I see it as half this thread is all like "Yeah, tell his parents! That'll show him! Haha, we're all both fair and appropriately nasty and putting a poor misunderstood kid back on track."
This sounds like exactly what the scammer wanted to manipulate everybody into thinking.
To me, the scammer's message stinks to high heaven. I translate "Oh noes, I'm just a poor college kid, I'm so totally having panic attacks over this, pretty please don't ever tell my parents!" to "These guys aren't hardcore enough to want to get me in real trouble. If I just beg a little, pretend to panic, and pretend to be afraid of my parents, they'll exercise their sense of justice by telling them, and I'll slide for this one too."
IMO, a lot of people here are very sheltered and have never had to deal in an extended way with somebody who was a serious con man. It can be hard to comprehend people who have no respect at all for people and social conventions. You can be sure they won't stop until they face real consequences. People like him are why the admittedly flawed criminal justice system exists. Speaking of which, many would do well to keep in mind that at least some of the people in jail are very, very good at convincing naive people that they are just innocent victims of bad circumstances, have found Jesus, or whatever else will get them out of jail the fastest, and free to run more and better cons.
Gave you an upvote there. I have gotten taken advantage of - and embarrassingly, a bit too late in my life to use my age as an explanation... All the clients I've had before this first bad one were generally decent; the obvious idiots were obvious.
The second time around, for this nonprofit, I grokked he was a full blown psychopath (although not quickly enough) - the people who had been working with him for the previous 5 years had kept giving him the benefit of the doubt wrt his horrible interpersonal style and behaviour. They got me sucked into the mess because I trusted them over my gut.
In the dust-up over matters this summer, this clown kept claiming he was the victim to an outrageous extent despite the fact it was his actions that instigated the blow up of the organization. People with anti-social personality disorders are very good at social manipulation / PR / etc and it's difficult to get bystanders to really understand the whole thing w/o a lot of explanation, which bystanders are not terribly interested in listening to - e.g. "which person is the real victim?" I think a key factor in these sorts of events is that the scammer etc sets the situation up (or makes plans to) to be able to successfully play the victim from the outset when needed.
The police should have been contacted. "Poor me" talk from a 22 year old ... it all sounded really fake. There is something in the way language is "used" that triggers my warning bells. Then again, I am biased as I have been through this myself first hand in dealing with a 57 year old. I can now see how twisty his use of language was and how glossing over details and omitting facts can guide the reader into believing what is being said - not outright lies, but manipulation of the reader's emotions.
> he probably threw that in just to make you think there's an option besides the police
That's what I thought, too. For some reason, scammers often have high social intelligence. Maybe it's like with any other domain: if you understand how computers work, you are compelled to use computers a lot. If you understand how people work, you must be compelled to use people?
I find like 22 is already fairly old to do something stupid like that and call it a day with a "sorry". You are fully responsible legally and you should know better. I agree that going all out to make sure that person gets the worst punishment possible for it would be over the top. But I'd definitely at least tell the parents.
Sounds a lot like a kid who attempted to scam me out of a GPU.
He sent me a bogus Bitcoin transfer email from a well known escrow service.
I stupidly did not check header information, as I was in a rush at the time, and shipped without confirming it.
All was well, until he sends me a picture of the card, with essentially a HAHAHAHA, various derogatory remarks, name calling, you name it. I was calm, and collective, tried various bargaining options to recover it. His arrogance was overwhelming.
He posts all over forums, showing how clever he was. This is where he made his fatal mistake.
Investigation begins. I sift through tons, and tons of forum posts, all over the internet. Come up with a handful of names, and various aliases he uses. Was able to confirm that his current location, was around the area where the package was sent(to a home).
Got in contact with the feds regarding online scams, no response.
Got in contact with local police, they tell me nothing can be done, contact feds.
Got in contact with the local news of where the package was shipped, who gets me in contact with the local police that they are friends with.
Police contacts me, and I send over all my logs and information. Police make some visits to the destination address, and it turns out they are actually the friend of the kid.
The kid finally breaks, and furiously emails me scared that the cops are coming for him, and he demands that I send him my return address so he can give me back the card. Apparently he threw out the box. He wants to know how I could do this to him, and that it was all just a big joke. I refuse, and ignore future pleas.
I speak with the cops, who now have tracked down the kid, and they speak with him and his parents. They said I can press charges, which I did.
His father emails me, and starts tearing into ME, questioning how I could possibly sell to a minor, without parents authorization. Over, and over, and over. I tell him this isn't my problem anymore, either the card is paid for, or I'll see them in court.
A couple days go by, his mother emails me, apologizing profusely, we set up a Paypal transaction for far more than the card is worth(I initially listed it at an inflated value). Done.
Speak with the cop, give the OK, case closed.
Feds email me a month or two later, saying nothing they can do, contact local police. :)
This the correct way to deal with criminals - it's not your call to decide if they're a minor, a psychopath etc.. This way society can deal with criminals, hopefully his parents will make an effort now. Had you not done all this work we'd be guaranteed to have one more criminal to incarcerate in the future.
It may be the correct way to deal with criminals in some situations, and it sounds like in this case it was.
However, as individuals we can still decide that our code of ethics precludes us from involving the state in matters of petty crime, if we think the state's response may be disproportionately harsh.
If we think the state is incorrect to classify marijuana was a class I drug, the same as heroine, for example, we have every right to make our own judgement about whether to report every pot smoker to the police.
Sometimes, depending on the alleged crime, people may have very real fears that bringing in the state may have lethal consequences. In America, many black people are more hesitant to call the cops, because of excessive risks to the petty criminal, or even to themselves. Here's a homeowner who decided to call the cops who ended up shot, because the cops appeared to assume that any black man emerging from the house must be the criminal: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2016/08/2...
The point is, we could all be robots and always trust the state to deal with every issue correctly, or we could decide occasionally to trust our own morals and code of ethics, and use our own discretionary powers when deciding what to report.
The state is more consistent than our personal ethics and we should regularly exercise the system so that if unfair convictions start happening we can change the law or vote in new judges and district attorneys.
except that the state is manifestly _not_ more consistent than our personal ethics. See how each state varies in its treatment of punishment? See how in each state, some groups (often black, or minority, or hackers) get a lot worse treatment?
Because I listed the card for an inflated price to begin with. Since they had no intention of actually paying for it, they "bought" it. Which in the end, backfired on them.
Ah, that makes a lot more sense. Without that detail, it sounded like you were effectively blackmailing the scammer's parents rather than just getting paid the agreed amount.
I'm a cynic, I know, but the I'm sorry sounds like a prepared cut and paste for when it goes bad. He had other Apple giftcards in large amounts laying around that he could use to appease the author??? This is a well worn machine.
"I'm broke and don't have the BTC otherwise I would have given it to you already, here's an Apple gift card for $477 and the remainder is still on this other card here." -- something like what the scammer said.
"He wanted to give my my cards back but I tried for years to get rid of them so I say he can sell them and give me the BTC. Which he did and our deal was finally forfilled."
So he had no money, but he had an apple card for $477 and your $250 card with the balance? Sounds like evidence that he's scammed other people with this scam. Sounds like there are already other victims out there, sans justice.
Yes, but the story said the scammer wanted to repay Haschek with 1 card worth $477 (note that $477 is greater than $250, this will be important in the next sentence) and another card worth the difference. You can't add money to an Apple gift card after the initialization of the card.
Therefore, the $477 card wasn't one of the 2 cards that the scammer scammed from Haschek. It was separate, and evidence of another crime. Hence my post.
You know, I'd be surprised if this is his first scam. I hope it is, but I probably would still tell his parents because apparently they still have a lot of influence. They guy is 22 but he's acting like he's 14. Time to grow up and start seeing consequences for bad decisions.
Yeah, maybe. You can never really tell. He got away with this one really, by just returning the cards. It might convince him he was the skills to keep going.
Agree with the others: You were scammed twice. That "apology" was 100% fake and in no time he'll be back to scamming others who aren't that skilled at doxing. Seriously. What 22 year old grown adult is afraid about what mommy thinks? Totally unbelievable.
You should report to his family and his details should be publicized should their response not be sufficient. Even then it's likely he won't stop. Only take back what he stole as anything else is likely stolen goods. The point here is to provide assistance for any other victims in locating who scammed them as well as making the scammer painfully aware of the damage he will cause himself by continuing with this behavior.
Why am I deprioritizing police? Police really don't handle this sort of thing well. They'll likely consider it a civil matter or just won't make the stretch to pursue. It doesn't help the victim is not in the US (lower that priority some more) Sure you can log the complaint, but unless he's brazen and lots come forward about him, they likely will not bring charges. (go read up on bitscotty scamming bitcoin-otc'ers, he did it for years even after being doxxed and reported to police) I'm not saying not to report though. Make sure his details are accessible so others can follow your report.
If you want another fast track, he said he's in college so report to their administration. Without rights or due process in the way they'll probably sanction his ass immediately. Did he scam from the school's network? If so it is now a school issue and they don't like looking bad. :)
You should note that he's from austria (based on his domain name), I would assume it would be quite a feat to go to visit US police from Austria and not worth his $500.
I don't do these sort of trades but if I did I'd try:
Buyer sends 1/4 of the BTC
Sellers sends 1st card
Buyer sends 1/2 of the BTC
Seller sends 2nd card
Buyer sends 1/4 of BTC
That way the risk is shared, and both parties stand to lose at most 1/4 of the value (if seller defects after receiving the first payment, or buyer defects and fails to make the last payment).
Or use an escrow service / middleman that people trust.
Bitcoin transfers aren't the problem here. Its transferring money to a trusted 3rd party, and then that 3rd party transferring the money forward (or back) once the items are confirmed to be transferred.
The problem then becomes dispute resolution. Even priority mail can be faked. Close the envelope with fake cards or whatever... so no matter what, dispute resolution becomes the limiting factor.
But a trusted middleman using a protocol that is hard to fake with harsh penalties on the scammers that do break the protocol is the answer.
"Forum: Carding Mafia Escrow Service:
Do you need to buy in safe way And Not To Get Ripped From some kid ? Come here and use CM Escrow Service Its Free.. Warning Not allowed To reply in threads .. who allowed to reply in thread just seller and buyer and escrow man anyone else will got banned for 7 days"
Pulsating banner ads: $0.00
PHPNuke discussion board: $0.00
Blinking animated emoticons: $0.00
Mafia run escrow service: $0.00
Knowing the little bastard will end up with a decapitated horse head in his bed if he doesn't pay up: priceless.
You (or, at 18, your parents) probably have one or two friends who are notaries. Most banks have some on staff and they're usually willing to notarize other, non-bank-related stuff for account-holders too.
I meant those as helpful suggestions but...ummm...thanks for the reminder. Also, you'd be surprised who is a notary. It's not all high-end finance people. I know one who works as a receptionist at a car dealership.
Earlier this year I needed to get something notarized. Went to the UPS store 3 blocks from my work, paid $5 per signature (=$10), walked out 5 minutes later. It's a hassle, but for a $500 transaction it really isn't such a big deal.
We had someone scam us on eBay for a laptop YEARS ago (like, 15 years ago) before they had the full buyer protections they have now. There wasn't really any recourse, but he had used his real phone number on his account. Or, I should say, his mother's real phone number, since he lived at home. We ended up calling, and reaching her, and when we told her what had happened she lost her shit, forced him to refund the order and, I presume, ensured that never happened again.
People still get EBay scammed for laptops today. Buy laptop. You ship it. They claim it doesn't work. EBay forces a refund when they ship it back. They ship back a brick. You are out a laptop.
What the scammer did is wrong, and the plight of the victim is easy to relate to here. It's easy to have a sense of personal outrage after reading this story. But let's keep a sense of proportion in mind: it is $500 worth of gift cards that the victim couldn't use and had been trying to get rid of for 4 years. I suspect that anyone trying to get free gift cards off of Reddit is pretty small-time.
I think telling the parents and leaving it at that is probably the right thing to do. We should reserve our energy, outrage, and enforcement for the scammers who do the greatest damage. Scammers that have made millions, hired armies of lawyers, even made friends in power who have rewritten the law to favor them. The petty criminal deserves a petty punishment.
As a seller never ever send something first before payment. Never send samples and never accept partial payment. Scammers know all the tricks and have the upper hand.
A while back I was trying to buy a macbook online and while searching for cheap macbooks, I went down the rabbit hole that is Alibaba (here's an example of what I was talking about[1]).
The seller claimed to be based in USA, had warehouses in Brazil and demanded that I pay via Western Union. After confirming all the details (via email). I decided to give it a shot. After sending him about $250 CAD (of the $500) he sent me a shipping code which had a description of a GTX 970. After complaining to him about it, he claimed that there was some mistake and his wearhouse in London would have it fixed and sent me another tracking number.
After a day of shipping, he emailed me claiming that he had a talk with the shipping company and they had decided to keep the laptop in escrow till I paid the entire amount (and sent him the confirmation numbers). At this point, I realized I was getting duped (if it's too good to be true, it's generally false), and canceled my payment.
A year later, both those shipping numbers still work and claim that the items are on the way.
I did try to follow up on his "company" and the shipping company, but there had been some serious work put into it (they had good SEO, support accounts, forums etc - all of which were fake btw).
I wanted to contact the local authorities, but in all honesty, no action would be taken - the scammer was located in a different country and I had nothing but an email and a name to go ahead on.
The reason I felt bad after this was not because I got scammed, but because "I" got scammed. (I was always proud that I could not get duped or fall into such scams but I had)
I noticed they intentionally remove a "p" from Apple to avoid getting Apple after them. I wonder if it would be smart to report these listings to Apple directly since they have a far better bankroll to tackle those problems. Although I'm sure it is difficult even for Apple to address them.
The guy is 22, telling mum and dad shouldn't come into it, he got off very lightly, it's the police he needs to talk to.
I've met one or two he reminds me off and they have no shame. Doing a cry-baby act like he did at the end took nothing out of him. His true nature was revealed in his previous actions.
The buyer assumed ebay feedback was good enough, but even veteran ebay buyers with good feedback will try to scam sellers by transacting outside of the site to save the transaction fees... and of course that's how you get scammed. The transaction fees are partially insurance for these things: if you buy and get scammed, ebay will eat the cost of it, much like credit card companies do in cases of fraud.
> if you buy and get scammed, ebay will eat the cost of it, much like credit card companies do in cases of fraud.
This is not true unless things have changed in the last few years. eBay will try to get the money back by flagging the fraudster's account. But if that account has been emptied there's nothing they can do and eBay does not refund your money from their pocket.
For the credit card comment. I don't think this is true either since I worked in retail before (family owned). Credit card companies are really quick to credit the account in case of fraud (I deal with this with my own CC every year). Thinking through this it makes sense since it doesn't come from the CC's pockets, they freeze assets in the merchant's account and forcefully refund the money from merchant's account if it was determined to be a fraudulent charge (in some cases merchant still pays the transaction fee for the CC charge).
The eBay workflow in a fraud case is this:
1) if the money can be regained from the seller in any way (e.g. charging the card they use for the seller account or pulling back the Paypal proceeds from account balance or bank account(s)), they will do so and refund the buyer.
2) if not, they will throw up every possible barrier to the buyer, including (I have experienced) giving you phony tracking data to "prove" you got the item, etc.
I've never been refunded from eBay/Paypal no matter how obvious the fraud -- I've always had to do credit card chargebacks.
Never, ever fund a Paypal payment with anything but a credit card unless it's for something you can't possibly need refunded ever.
My anecdotal experience: as much as I despise eBay and Paypal (various reasons going back to 2001) I have had only positive experiences with refunds from eBay.
Recently I had a $20 IP camera(that price was too cheap but I was not doing my research) not arrive from China from a seemingly reputable seller with 500+ selling feedback over 2 years.
I filed a complaint with eBay and seller claimed a fake tracking number.
More interestingly, the seller had gone rogue, turning feedback private and acquiring about 100 negatives in a month.
So either the seller was hacked or had just pulled a long con.
My payment had come from Paypal balance and I got a very quick refund once I informed eBay that I wanted a refund.
I am amazed that many still assume CC companies eat fraud charges. That is not the case, they always yank it from the merchant where the money was spent. cited as a so-called cost of doing business if you ask around.
I can tell you haven't been scammed before. I've been fobbed off with that same "I'm sorry" message before. They do it just to buy time, since you eventually lose interest in them.
He's not sorry, and is just manipulating you into going away.
You are really naive if you buy his claims that he's never gonna do it again. You weren't his first victim and probably weren't even the first refund he gave.
100% sure he will do this again. He's not some sort of teenage delinquent going through a phase, he's an adult and this is a police matter. The apologies and excuses are all well rehearsed.
Doxing at its finest. I've had to do this too. For this type of cards, you can use sythe.org and an official middle man (escrow), most likely free :) (Hit me up if you need one, I have over 1200 feedbacks -> Nick: The Black Tux)
> As I prepared the cards to ship them to him I sent him photos I uploaded via my open source image hosting service: PictShare. This fact is very important later on.
I think I must have missed something. I read the whole story and I still don't see why the photos of the cards mattered.
Great detective work, well done! Like some others say I would have told the parents too. I've met scammers and some of these people will say anything to get away but then be scamming someone else the next day with a new account.
> Your privacy settings on facebook are only as good as your friends'
This. I can reverse search anyone in seconds just by typing in any scrap of information I have about them into the Facebook search bar. 90% of the time there's a result. They might think they're careful with their own page, but most of them have a friend who isn't.
I only sell stuff face to face for the reasons mentioned here.
eBay/PayPal is flakey as they side with the buyer and lost a couple of times there. I then lost as a buyer buying services using Paypal as they only help the buyer if it is a physical product. Fortunately in aggregate lost a lot less than this dude. Let alone sending stuff to some random address on the promise of some bitcoin.
My mistake, I reversed the payment direction. I'm obviously a scum-of-the-earth shill and not someone who's deeply interested in the space commenting lazily.
Go through my profile and tell me I'm not a contributor.
Regardless, bitcoin had nothing to do with it. It's the fact that he sent the item before being payed that allowed him to be scammed. Method of payment was irrelevant. I have to agree with the parent that this seems like self promotion without bothering to more than skim the article.
I've copped to making a mistake, and reread the article for good measure. What else do you propose I do to make you happy? We use paid acquisition to promote the site, and an HN comment certainly won't make a difference to our monthly numbers- I brought it up because I thought it was relevant, and don't think I need to apologize any further for that.
> Method of payment was irrelevant.
As someone who does trades like this all the time- of course the way the exchange went down is relevant. In fact,the most salient thing when exchanging digital goods wrt fraud is the difference in settlement time between the two. In this case, since the author sent Apple gift cards, he could've just called Apple, said he was scammed, and had the cards zeroed and replaced by the merchant.
Obviously what the kid did was illegal and morally wrong, and contacting his family was certainly effective. But I believe that contacting his family probably violated most state and federal debt collection laws. After all, essentially what happened is that he was late on a $380 debt payment.
Imagine if you were a few days late on a credit card payment, and they started calling your relatives telling them that if they weren't paid, they would be going to the cops. That is very illegal, and in that scenario the credit card company could be sued for damages. These two scenarios have some legal equivalence - someone that is owed a debt contacts family and uses embarrassment as leverage to collect. There have been many cases where criminals have successfully sued their victims and this may be a good candidate. This blog post, which this kid's lawyer would paint as a public celebration of the damage done to his client's life, doesn't help matters.
So what he did in this case was logical, and probably even cut the kid a break, but it probably exposed him to legal liability. He should have just gone to the cops and let it play out if that was his actual intention after not being paid.
> After all, essentially what happened is that he was late on a $500 debt payment.
That is far too nice way to describe the issue and I would assume that even in US these are two separate issues (being late from mutually agreed payment and trying to scam someone)
The problem is that legally, unless and until the kid is found guilty of fraud or theft (or he pleads guilty to such a crime), the money owed is nothing more than a debt that this guy attempted to collect in illegal ways.
This is like trying to collect a debt and the other person wilfully denying there was ever a transaction. I doubt this is legally the same as being late on a debt. IANAL
Any good lawyer would say that the two weren't necessarily connected. All the author knew when he contacted this kid's family was that he was owed $380. He was attempting to collect on that debt by using embarrassment and threats of police involvement.
I still don't see how this is a debt. A debt is something you willingly take and make your best to pay it back. If you can't, you stay in contact with the other party. You don't just delete your account and play dead. Playing devil's advocate is sometimes a good thing, but that 22 yo dude was just being plain shady. He clearly never intended to pay.
No. What I'm saying is that until it has been declared as theft/stealing by a court of law, the author here is probably taking on some liability by notifying his family and publicly relishing in the aftermath via this blog post.
There's a little concept that you may have heard of: innocent until proven guilty. No crime has been committed until a court of competent jurisdiction says it has.
It does everyone a disservice to not tell his parents.
The author got manipulated twice. First convinced to hand over his money and then convinced not to tell the parents.
The scammer player the author like a guitar. Right there is the psychopath's first big lesson - "people listen when I cry".
The genius of the scammer/budding psychopath being that the blogger thinks he "won".