Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
Allan from Fallbrook
ParticipantTrojan: Using your scenario as an example, it would appear that the blogger might potentially be guilty of inducement to fraud as well as collusion. The problem with that is this: Unlike a “pump and dump” scheme, the homeowners in question are under no obligation to accept the lowball offers and, even presupposing that the blogger in question commands that sort of vast readership, there would have to be enough individuals in that area willing to go and make offers.
On the face of it, it appears like a conspiracy of sorts, but it falls apart when you pay closer attention. However, and here you make a good point, if there was a third party who was aware of the conspiracy, well, that changes the calculus somewhat. It would certainly be unethical and immoral, but it’s doubtful that it would actually be illegal and, therefore, where is the threat to this blogger? He wouldn’t really be facing criminal and/or civil charges, so why worry?
ParticipantTrojan: Using your scenario as an example, it would appear that the blogger might potentially be guilty of inducement to fraud as well as collusion. The problem with that is this: Unlike a “pump and dump” scheme, the homeowners in question are under no obligation to accept the lowball offers and, even presupposing that the blogger in question commands that sort of vast readership, there would have to be enough individuals in that area willing to go and make offers.
On the face of it, it appears like a conspiracy of sorts, but it falls apart when you pay closer attention. However, and here you make a good point, if there was a third party who was aware of the conspiracy, well, that changes the calculus somewhat. It would certainly be unethical and immoral, but it’s doubtful that it would actually be illegal and, therefore, where is the threat to this blogger? He wouldn’t really be facing criminal and/or civil charges, so why worry?
ParticipantTrojan: Using your scenario as an example, it would appear that the blogger might potentially be guilty of inducement to fraud as well as collusion. The problem with that is this: Unlike a “pump and dump” scheme, the homeowners in question are under no obligation to accept the lowball offers and, even presupposing that the blogger in question commands that sort of vast readership, there would have to be enough individuals in that area willing to go and make offers.
On the face of it, it appears like a conspiracy of sorts, but it falls apart when you pay closer attention. However, and here you make a good point, if there was a third party who was aware of the conspiracy, well, that changes the calculus somewhat. It would certainly be unethical and immoral, but it’s doubtful that it would actually be illegal and, therefore, where is the threat to this blogger? He wouldn’t really be facing criminal and/or civil charges, so why worry?
ParticipantTrojan: Using your scenario as an example, it would appear that the blogger might potentially be guilty of inducement to fraud as well as collusion. The problem with that is this: Unlike a “pump and dump” scheme, the homeowners in question are under no obligation to accept the lowball offers and, even presupposing that the blogger in question commands that sort of vast readership, there would have to be enough individuals in that area willing to go and make offers.
On the face of it, it appears like a conspiracy of sorts, but it falls apart when you pay closer attention. However, and here you make a good point, if there was a third party who was aware of the conspiracy, well, that changes the calculus somewhat. It would certainly be unethical and immoral, but it’s doubtful that it would actually be illegal and, therefore, where is the threat to this blogger? He wouldn’t really be facing criminal and/or civil charges, so why worry?
ParticipantTrojan: Using your scenario as an example, it would appear that the blogger might potentially be guilty of inducement to fraud as well as collusion. The problem with that is this: Unlike a “pump and dump” scheme, the homeowners in question are under no obligation to accept the lowball offers and, even presupposing that the blogger in question commands that sort of vast readership, there would have to be enough individuals in that area willing to go and make offers.
On the face of it, it appears like a conspiracy of sorts, but it falls apart when you pay closer attention. However, and here you make a good point, if there was a third party who was aware of the conspiracy, well, that changes the calculus somewhat. It would certainly be unethical and immoral, but it’s doubtful that it would actually be illegal and, therefore, where is the threat to this blogger? He wouldn’t really be facing criminal and/or civil charges, so why worry?
ParticipantRus: Now, that’s scary! I did play catcher. Hated the position, but it was better than outfielder.
I’d be careful, though. It sounds as though CardiffBaseball has some “chin music” ready to play!
I’ll make it easy for you. I’ll just send the Old Number One signal every single time. Give ’em the heat, baby, give ’em the heat!
ParticipantRus: Now, that’s scary! I did play catcher. Hated the position, but it was better than outfielder.
I’d be careful, though. It sounds as though CardiffBaseball has some “chin music” ready to play!
I’ll make it easy for you. I’ll just send the Old Number One signal every single time. Give ’em the heat, baby, give ’em the heat!
ParticipantRus: Now, that’s scary! I did play catcher. Hated the position, but it was better than outfielder.
I’d be careful, though. It sounds as though CardiffBaseball has some “chin music” ready to play!
I’ll make it easy for you. I’ll just send the Old Number One signal every single time. Give ’em the heat, baby, give ’em the heat!
ParticipantRus: Now, that’s scary! I did play catcher. Hated the position, but it was better than outfielder.
I’d be careful, though. It sounds as though CardiffBaseball has some “chin music” ready to play!
I’ll make it easy for you. I’ll just send the Old Number One signal every single time. Give ’em the heat, baby, give ’em the heat!
ParticipantRus: Now, that’s scary! I did play catcher. Hated the position, but it was better than outfielder.
I’d be careful, though. It sounds as though CardiffBaseball has some “chin music” ready to play!
I’ll make it easy for you. I’ll just send the Old Number One signal every single time. Give ’em the heat, baby, give ’em the heat!
ParticipantRus: I think there are other considerations here as well. Given the relative newness of blogging and the widespread reach of the ‘net, you can create invasion of privacy issues without the intent of doing so.
If the information that OCR relayed was in the public domain, the person in question really didn’t have an expectation of privacy, legally speaking. But the larger issue now is that, prior to this, no one really contemplated how far and wide that information would be spread and what sort of damage it might potentially do.
OCR mentions that his post on Trojan4Life was written in anger and deleted some five minutes later. But in those five minutes it was picked up by others and went God knows where. So after feeling bad about penning it, he took it down, but it was arguably too late as evidenced by it’s reappearance here and now. On top of that, it also appears that we haven’t gotten the whole story, as Trojan asserts the complete post was not shown and thus we don’t have the complete or proper context.
So you have something of a mess, but without the apparent intention of creating one. We lose an excellent resource in BMIT’s closure, OCR’s privacy (and potential family safety) is compromised and the threat of litigation now hovers over him and through no fault of his own.
ParticipantRus: I think there are other considerations here as well. Given the relative newness of blogging and the widespread reach of the ‘net, you can create invasion of privacy issues without the intent of doing so.
If the information that OCR relayed was in the public domain, the person in question really didn’t have an expectation of privacy, legally speaking. But the larger issue now is that, prior to this, no one really contemplated how far and wide that information would be spread and what sort of damage it might potentially do.
OCR mentions that his post on Trojan4Life was written in anger and deleted some five minutes later. But in those five minutes it was picked up by others and went God knows where. So after feeling bad about penning it, he took it down, but it was arguably too late as evidenced by it’s reappearance here and now. On top of that, it also appears that we haven’t gotten the whole story, as Trojan asserts the complete post was not shown and thus we don’t have the complete or proper context.
So you have something of a mess, but without the apparent intention of creating one. We lose an excellent resource in BMIT’s closure, OCR’s privacy (and potential family safety) is compromised and the threat of litigation now hovers over him and through no fault of his own.
ParticipantRus: I think there are other considerations here as well. Given the relative newness of blogging and the widespread reach of the ‘net, you can create invasion of privacy issues without the intent of doing so.
If the information that OCR relayed was in the public domain, the person in question really didn’t have an expectation of privacy, legally speaking. But the larger issue now is that, prior to this, no one really contemplated how far and wide that information would be spread and what sort of damage it might potentially do.
OCR mentions that his post on Trojan4Life was written in anger and deleted some five minutes later. But in those five minutes it was picked up by others and went God knows where. So after feeling bad about penning it, he took it down, but it was arguably too late as evidenced by it’s reappearance here and now. On top of that, it also appears that we haven’t gotten the whole story, as Trojan asserts the complete post was not shown and thus we don’t have the complete or proper context.
So you have something of a mess, but without the apparent intention of creating one. We lose an excellent resource in BMIT’s closure, OCR’s privacy (and potential family safety) is compromised and the threat of litigation now hovers over him and through no fault of his own.
ParticipantRus: I think there are other considerations here as well. Given the relative newness of blogging and the widespread reach of the ‘net, you can create invasion of privacy issues without the intent of doing so.
If the information that OCR relayed was in the public domain, the person in question really didn’t have an expectation of privacy, legally speaking. But the larger issue now is that, prior to this, no one really contemplated how far and wide that information would be spread and what sort of damage it might potentially do.
OCR mentions that his post on Trojan4Life was written in anger and deleted some five minutes later. But in those five minutes it was picked up by others and went God knows where. So after feeling bad about penning it, he took it down, but it was arguably too late as evidenced by it’s reappearance here and now. On top of that, it also appears that we haven’t gotten the whole story, as Trojan asserts the complete post was not shown and thus we don’t have the complete or proper context.
So you have something of a mess, but without the apparent intention of creating one. We lose an excellent resource in BMIT’s closure, OCR’s privacy (and potential family safety) is compromised and the threat of litigation now hovers over him and through no fault of his own.
-
AuthorPosts
