How many chances should a scammer get? (2 Viewers)

[ekricket]

I dunno. I’ve gotten cynical.

It’s a symptom of hanging out with hypocrites

it’s funny the cheering that happens when someone tricks paulson or some unsuspecting person that doesn’t know the value of their chips, but then outrage at this. Pretty sure the mantra is “anything goes as long as you get chips”.

 

[trigs]

Can someone please explain how "tricking" Paulson to sell chips to the normal consumer instead of just casinos is the same as this situation? I'm dumb I guess because it seems very different to me.

 

[Northman]

Can someone please explain how "tricking" Paulson to sell chips to the normal consumer instead of just casinos is the same as this situation? I'm dumb I guess because it seems very different to me.

You are not alone - I think this is completely different.

 

[Ben8257]

I don't know. Good question. It does seem to be "a dishonest scheme" to win the chips imho.

That's just networking and I have participated in those activities to help friends, and I am a pretty damn honest dude!

Also efforts to Network and order with other chippers is absolutely fine. Each person is getting 2,000 chips max, what they do with those afterwards is their business. You have to work within the rules of the sale, that doesn't always work out for some people's plans... say building a tourney set but have to buy cash denoms to get them. If it was frowned upon to work with others to fill orders I don't think that many orders would be made. Who the hell makes a set that uses $1 chips and $25k chips at the same time? Not very many... unless you are overlapping your cash/tourney set which is not the greatest plan and frowned upon in the community for the most part. Networking to help others reach their goals and dreams? Is that not what this hobby is about?

Making 2 accounts and 2 addresses is wrong and breaking the rules! The rules were set before the sale took place. One and done is my vote! Obviously not banned from the community but back of the line for future sales... BUT!

Next question is, have the penalties for these activities been posted? I don't think so... therefore just like my feelings about the bid retraction on auctions rules. The penalties were not posted at the time, and a few people were "made examples of" and put in time out...personally I think the penalties should be posted, yes do the right thing and you have nothing to worry about! I get it... but finding a loop hole and taking advantage of it without knowing what you are up against if caught seems lax to me... so as much as I hate to say it and would love to say drop the hammer! I would give a slap on the wrist as Jim has, he publicly acknowledged the wrong doing, hats off to him again for showing class and saying "don't do it again!" Did not make a huge deal. And move on about normal business. Justice served IMO

 

[arch3r]

.

 

[Highli99]

Maybe it's not the "entire point" of TCR sales, but the percentage limits in place are there for that exact reason. If Jim was just out to make as much money as possible, he'd charge more per chip and have no limitations at all.

I think the current structure is optimized to ensure Jim sells all his chips in a reasonably fast timeframe. The percentages ensure that folks have to buy a large quantity of chips in order to get any of the highly desireable chips. If he let one buyer bogart all the desireable chips, even at a high price, then others might not be able to complete sets and thus might not buy any. Using HSI as an example, if you wanted a rack of fracs you had to buy a ton of ones and fives to make it work. No one needs that many ones or fives so I decided to make a limit set. If I could not have gotten fracs I might have bought 600 chips as opposed to the 2000+i ended up with. Jim sold me at least 1400 extra chips because I wanted a rack of fracs and was able to get one.

The fact that people are able to build sets is not a charitable act, it's smart business to increase sales and avoid huge inventory holding costs. Businesses like Jim who serve customers well are well rewarded, which is what makes capitalism pretty great imho.

 

[softchewy]

Can someone please explain how "tricking" Paulson to sell chips to the normal consumer instead of just casinos is the same as this situation?

it's not..
I don't recall Paulson/GPI being a part of this community

What constitutes a household? If you have your brother, uncle, cousin, and friend who all live at different addresses to purchase chips using their own PayPal, would that be offside?

I think we all understand the spirit of what Jim is trying to do, so if the chips are ultimately going to the same person, you are going against Jim's request/policy. If someone wants to skirt around it, that's up to them, but they can't claim, "look, I did it right".

 

[ekricket]

Can someone please explain how "tricking" Paulson to sell chips to the normal consumer instead of just casinos is the same as this situation? I'm dumb I guess because it seems very different to me.

Both of the companies have policies in place to protect and serve their business interests. In both of these situations those policy’s were bypassed by deliberate deceit.
If you can’t see that, or don’t want to, then yes, you are being hypocritical.

 

[arch3r]

I think the current structure is optimized to ensure Jim sells all his chips in a reasonably fast timeframe. The percentages ensure that folks have to buy a large quantity of chips in order to get any of the highly desireable chips. If he let one buyer bogart all the desireable chips, even at a high price, then others might not be able to complete sets and thus might not buy any. Using HSI as an example, if you wanted a rack of fracs you had to buy a ton of ones and fives to make it work. No one needs that many ones or fives so I decided to make a limit set. If I could not have gotten fracs I might have bought 600 chips as opposed to the 2000+i ended up with. Jim sold me at least 1400 extra chips because I wanted a rack of fracs and was able to get one.

^^This 1000%

 

[trigs]

Both of the companies have policies in place to protect and serve their business interests. In both of these situations those policy’s were bypassed by deliberate deceit.
If you can’t see that, or don’t want to, then yes, you are being hypocritical.

If that's the only connection, then I still don't see it as the same situation. That is a pretty general point.

 

[TheDuke]

I think the current structure is optimized to ensure Jim sells all his chips in a reasonably fast timeframe. The percentages ensure that folks have to buy a large quantity of chips in order to get any of the highly desireable chips. If he let one buyer bogart all the desireable chips, even at a high price, then others might not be able to complete sets and thus might not buy any. Using HSI as an example, if you wanted a rack of fracs you had to buy a ton of ones and fives to make it work. No one needs that many ones or fives so I decided to make a limit set. If I could not have gotten fracs I might have bought 600 chips as opposed to the 2000+i ended up with. Jim sold me at least 1400 extra chips because I wanted a rack of fracs and was able to get one.

The fact that people are able to build sets is not a charitable act, it's smart business to increase sales and avoid huge inventory holding costs. Businesses like Jim who serve customers well are well rewarded, which is what makes capitalism pretty great imho.

Back in the day, during the first TCR sales there were no quantity limits for denoms.

So some jackholes would just order all the sought after denoms. And then no one else could build playable sets.

 

[ekricket]

If that's the only connection, then I still don't see it as the same situation. That is a pretty general point.

Yes. Scamming is scamming

 

[trigs]

That's just networking and I have participated in those activities to help friends, and I am a pretty damn honest dude!

Also efforts to Network and order with other chippers is absolutely fine. Each person is getting 2,000 chips max, what they do with those afterwards is their business. You have to work within the rules of the sale, that doesn't always work out for some people's plans... say building a tourney set but have to buy cash denoms to get them. If it was frowned upon to work with others to fill orders I don't think that many orders would be made. Who the hell makes a set that uses $1 chips and $25k chips at the same time? Not very many... unless you are overlapping your cash/tourney set which is not the greatest plan and frowned upon in the community for the most part. Networking to help others reach their goals and dreams? Is that not what this hobby is about?

Making 2 accounts and 2 addresses is wrong and breaking the rules! The rules were set before the sale took place. One and done is my vote! Obviously not banned from the community but back of the line for future sales... BUT!

Next question is, have the penalties for these activities been posted? I don't think so... therefore just like my feelings about the bid retraction on auctions rules. The penalties were not posted at the time, and a few people were "made examples of" and put in time out...personally I think the penalties should be posted, yes do the right thing and you have nothing to worry about! I get it... but finding a loop hole and taking advantage of it without knowing what you are up against if caught seems lax to me... so as much as I hate to say it and would love to say drop the hammer! I would give a slap on the wrist as Jim has, he publicly acknowledged the wrong doing, hats off to him again for showing class and saying "don't do it again!" Did not make a huge deal. And move on about normal business. Justice served IMO

I agree that for TCR sales, there should be penalties posted for those who don't follow the rules.

For the lottery point, I don't know much about them, but if it is written in the rules that one person can only purchase one slot (or x amount of slots only), then I'd say the networking is scamming. If one person can purchase as many slots as they want, then I don't see anything wrong with getting a bunch of buddies and purchasing as many slots as possible.

(I wrote auction, but I meant lottery.)

 

[softchewy]

Both of the companies have policies in place to protect and serve their business interests. In both of these situations those policy’s were bypassed by deliberate deceit.
If you can’t see that, or don’t want to, then yes, you are being hypocritical.

Hopefully you can see that this is not an apples to apples comparison

Yes. Scamming is scamming

Scamming your friend out of a jelly bean is different than scamming an old woman out of her life savings..
Scamming is not scamming

 

[trigs]

Yes. Scamming is scamming

Okay, you are just referring to the general. Then yes I agree. But if you look at the specifics, there are major differences. I was considering the specific situations and I see you are not.

 

[upNdown]

it's not..
I don't recall Paulson/GPI being a part of this community

Are you implying that Jim IS a part of this community? Sure, he’s a vendor here, so he is technically part of the community. But when’s the last time he commented on one of your pron posts? Or gave his opinion on a strategy thread? Or posted anywhere outside one of his sale threads?
I’m not bashing the guy at all, but let’s be realistic - he sells us chips literally millions of chips, and he occasionally tosses Tommy some giveaways for the community, and that’s it.

 

[ekricket]

Hopefully you can see that this is not an apples to apples comparison


Scamming your friend out of a jelly bean is different than scamming an old woman out of her life savings..
Scamming is not scamming

Ahh degrees of scamming with some of them being acceptable and some not. Moral flexibility, it’s convenient for sure.

 

[Silver_Fiend]

Banned and get them stoned by the whole community

No fair, I want to get stoned too. Why should the "scammers" be the only ones having fun?

 

[TheDuke]

Hopefully you can see that this is not an apples to apples comparison


Scamming your friend out of a jelly bean is different than scamming an old woman out of her life savings..
Scamming is not scamming

I think they are different scenarios.

But both involve some level of dishonesty to achieve a goal. Whether or not these are completely black or white scenarios or fall within a spectrum between honesty and complete deceit is up to the individual. What are your morals and what rules are you willing to bend/break to obtain your desires.

 

[trigs]

No fair, I want to get stoned too. Why should the "scammers" be the only ones having fun?

Lol, yeah I thought that too. It's "stone them" not "get them stoned". The latter is much more fun

 

[TheDuke]

Are you implying that Jim IS a part of this community? Sure, he’s a vendor here, so he is technically part of the community. But when’s the last time he commented on one of your pron posts? Or gave his opinion on a strategy thread? Or posted anywhere outside one of his sale threads?
I’m not bashing the guy at all, but let’s be realistic - he sells us chips literally millions of chips, and he occasionally tosses Tommy some giveaways for the community, and that’s it.

I agree 100%.

Jim is here to sell things. He's not part of the community as everyone likes to assume. 99% of his posts are just sales related.

Not knocking the guy - he's single handed brought the community millions of chips that would otherwise been destroyed. Full credit. But he's not a chipper.

 

[jpietrella]

Good lord.

 

[trigs]

Good lord.

View attachment 663532

Does this thread have a lot of drama in it? Doesn't seem that bad to me at all (well, yet anyway).

 

[trigs]

Yes. Scamming is scamming

Lol, just saw this on the PCF ad banner

 

[Josh Kifer]

Oh cool. Now we're fighting about this. Neat.

 

[softchewy]

Are you implying that Jim IS a part of this community? Sure, he’s a vendor here, so he is technically part of the community. But when’s the last time he commented on one of your pron posts? Or gave his opinion on a strategy thread? Or posted anywhere outside one of his sale threads?
I’m not bashing the guy at all, but let’s be realistic - he sells us chips literally millions of chips, and he occasionally tosses Tommy some giveaways for the community, and that’s it.

There are a bunch of people here who post less / do less or maybe even "detract" from the site (depending on your view).. they can still be part of the community (communities have assholes too ).
I have been amused by some of Jim's posts and have gotten some sweet chips from him at reasonable prices...
Don't recall GPI coming here commenting or offering anything..

 

[trigs]

Oh cool. Now we're fighting about this. Neat.

Disagreeing and discussing differences of opinion is not necessarily fighting imho. How else are we going to learn and progress if we never disagree? I'm personally not the type of person who is going to go through life pretending everything is peaches and rainbows. Debating is one good way for learning to occur.

 

[ReallyGoodUsername]

There are a bunch of people here who post less / do less or maybe even "detract" from the site (depending on your view).. they can still be part of the community (communities have assholes too ).
I have been amused by some of Jim's posts and have gotten some sweet chips from him at reasonable prices...
Don't recall GPI coming here commenting or offering anything..

Nows your chance @GPI!!!

 

[dmoney]

I voted for two chances, with the caveat that if it can be verified someone has done this more than once, I would support the immediate ban from TCR sales.

It seems highly unlikely that this is the first time someone would have done this, but unless Jim were to go back through and verify, I'd be inclined to give one warning and move them to the bottom of the priority list for filling their order if they got anything affected by the PayPal fiasco.

 

[Josh Kifer]

Disagreeing and discussing differences of opinion is not necessarily fighting imho. How else are we going to learn and progress if we never disagree? I'm personally not the type of person who is going to go through life pretending everything is peaches and rainbows. Debating is one good way for learning to occur.

"Debating and disagreeing" has become the new thing here. I thought this place was to enjoy chips, but I have been proven wrong before.....