If it was fully disclosed that this was "gambling", then I might agree. But it seems that it was more positioned as "a safe investment with okay returns and a

If it was fully disclosed that this was "gambling", then I might agree. But it seems that it was more positioned as "a safe investment with okay returns and a lottery chance at winning above average returns". Gamblers don't need to know about FDIC insurance and the like. There was shady goings on that wasn't clear to depositors -- what isn't clear is WHERE that shadiness was happening, but that doesn't mean they "got what was coming to them".