5 ms·

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 be

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.

Udik 10y ago
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.
- Artoemius 10y ago
  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.)
- ryguytilidie 10y ago
  "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..."?
  - Udik 10y ago
    > "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.
  - tzakrajs 10y ago
    We should try not to devolve further into Redditness.

Udik 10y ago

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.

Artoemius 10y ago
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.)
ryguytilidie 10y ago
"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..."?
- Udik 10y ago
  > "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.
- tzakrajs 10y ago
  We should try not to devolve further into Redditness.