Lord Flashearts Rogue Traders and Watchdog Thread

[DionysusToast]

What bugs me is that in all these pages mainly two posters have been held under the microscope for inspection..and its a lose - lose scenario for both if they come on to defend themselves....thing is that their postings have easily been among the best stuff on the forum which should be clear to most reasonable / unbiased readers....

Even more annoying is that other well known vendors have not been called out to prove themselves, those with past links to certain contributers on this thread perhaps......

Feel free to do the calling then

 

[4xpipcounter]

Hunterscreed won't be here defending himself. He is indefenseable. Read his posts, and you will know what I am talking about. The mods are also on to him.
Actually, this is a very good forum to expose the crooks. There is no pleasure in talking about such negativity, but sometimes it just has to be brought out.

What bugs me is that in all these pages mainly two posters have been held under the microscope for inspection..and its a lose - lose scenario for both if they come on to defend themselves....thing is that their postings have easily been among the best stuff on the forum which should be clear to most reasonable / unbiased readers....

Even more annoying is that other well known vendors have not been called out to prove themselves, those with past links to certain contributers on this thread perhaps......

 

[JahDave]

It is the responsibility of the individual as to what action he/she takes. Vendors don’t put a gun to someone’s head, we are all free to choose to participate or not, its just a trade like anything else.


Choose wisely.[/QUOTE]

I think that sums things up nicely. Trading is a competitive business and only those that work the hardest will be the most successful. And some people will not have the capability to ever be successful and those individuals should do something else to make money. There is no magic formula that makes trading easy, but if you work hard then you probably can succeed. I have never paid anything to learn to trade other than buying books in the book store and It took three years of hard work to start making money consistently, but now I am there and getting better at it every month. I think that as a general rule, if you see a system that promises something to good to be true without hard work then it is probably a scam.

Regards,
Dave

 

[4xpipcounter]

Yikes! Now, our brains are sewed together. I couldn't have said it better myself.

It is the responsibility of the individual as to what action he/she takes. Vendors don’t put a gun to someone’s head, we are all free to choose to participate or not, its just a trade like anything else.


Choose wisely.

I think that sums things up nicely. Trading is a competitive business and only those that work the hardest will be the most successful. And some people will not have the capability to ever be successful and those individuals should do something else to make money. There is no magic formula that makes trading easy, but if you work hard then you probably can succeed. I have never paid anything to learn to trade other than buying books in the book store and It took three years of hard work to start making money consistently, but now I am there and getting better at it every month. I think that as a general rule, if you see a system that promises something to good to be true without hard work then it is probably a scam.

Regards,
Dave[/QUOTE]

 

[JahDave]

Yikes! Now, our brains are sewed together. I couldn't have said it better myself.




I think that sums things up nicely. Trading is a competitive business and only those that work the hardest will be the most successful. And some people will not have the capability to ever be successful and those individuals should do something else to make money. There is no magic formula that makes trading easy, but if you work hard then you probably can succeed. I have never paid anything to learn to trade other than buying books in the book store and It took three years of hard work to start making money consistently, but now I am there and getting better at it every month. I think that as a general rule, if you see a system that promises something to good to be true without hard work then it is probably a scam.

Regards,
Dave

[/QUOTE]

LOL, Judging by our threads and everything I have seen in the last 3 of 4 months, then I think we must be brothers with different mothers.........

 

[4xpipcounter]

I know. Our daddy has been misbehaving--LOL.



LOL, Judging by our threads and everything I have seen in the last 3 of 4 months, then I think we must be brothers with different mothers.........[/QUOTE]

 

[DionysusToast]

It is the responsibility of the individual as to what action he/she takes. Vendors don’t put a gun to someone’s head, we are all free to choose to participate or not, its just a trade like anything else.


Choose wisely.

I think that sums things up nicely. Trading is a competitive business and only those that work the hardest will be the most successful. And some people will not have the capability to ever be successful and those individuals should do something else to make money. There is no magic formula that makes trading easy, but if you work hard then you probably can succeed. I have never paid anything to learn to trade other than buying books in the book store and It took three years of hard work to start making money consistently, but now I am there and getting better at it every month. I think that as a general rule, if you see a system that promises something to good to be true without hard work then it is probably a scam.

Regards,
Dave

Dave - I agree with a lot of what you say, although anyone new in any arena is an easy target unless they are a total cynic.

Where we diverge - is that you are seeing this from the victims stance. You say they should look after themselves.

This is a tad like saying women shouldn't go around in short skirts or they deserve to be raped.

Don't we have any animosity towards the rapists here ?

 

[wallstreetwarrior87]

Dave - I agree with a lot of what you say, although anyone new in any arena is an easy target unless they are a total cynic.

Where we diverge - is that you are seeing this from the victims stance. You say they should look after themselves.

This is a tad like saying women shouldn't go around in short skirts or they deserve to be raped.

Don't we have any animosity towards the rapists here ?

But you try telling a girl (or sister in my case) not to wear that skirt because its too short and it will only cause trouble and see what they say!

Its unlikely that they will respond to you in a manner such as "thank you for your concern bro,i will go upstairs and change into something a little less revealing"

You are probably going to think once again im defending rapists etc but im not. Evil people are everywhere, always have been and always will be.

Im am simply saying dont put yourself in position where you know the outcome may not be what you desire.

This thread has diverged from what the opening poster probably intended. But discussions lead to other avenues and this is good. Maybe could even be split into 3 categories:

1. The definition of a scam - What is it and what evidence is needed to prove it.

2. A list of scammers that have been proven without doubt to be so, as defined in point 1

3. A discussion as to why there are "victims" in the 1st place.

The above should cover all the bases.

Even more importantly, it is very very relevant to trading. It happens every day in the markets.

You can either be scammed by small fry, such as the ones mentioned here, or large fry who participate in the market. The only difference is that one tries to take £97 off you the other tries to clear your whole trading account

 

[4xpipcounter]

DT, the nice thing about a forum like this is that it makes the newbies aware of what is going on, which is the main reason I'm glad LordF got this thread started
Your analogy is incorrect, because women that walk around in short skirts and look like 2-bit cheap street whores is a volitional act. Gullibilty or the nature of our construction is not a volitional act.

Dave - I agree with a lot of what you say, although anyone new in any arena is an easy target unless they are a total cynic.

Where we diverge - is that you are seeing this from the victims stance. You say they should look after themselves.

This is a tad like saying women shouldn't go around in short skirts or they deserve to be raped.

Don't we have any animosity towards the rapists here ?

 

[Prawnsandwich]

Hunterscreed won't be here defending himself. He is indefenseable. Read his posts, and you will know what I am talking about. The mods are also on to him.
Actually, this is a very good forum to expose the crooks. There is no pleasure in talking about such negativity, but sometimes it just has to be brought out.

I wasnt referring to Hunterscreed, and from the various references to him on this thread he wouldn't exactly fit into the category of posting some of the best stuff on the forum that I referred to...

The intent is great in principle, as long as its equally and fairly done...

A possible unintended consequence is that it might push quality posters away from the forum , if they're continually having to defend themselves ....the real cons will have no problem with posting ongoing bluff responses or just ignoring any calls to defend themselves

 

[Splitlink]

But you try telling a girl (or sister in my case) not to wear that skirt because its too short and it will only cause trouble and see what they say!

Its unlikely that they will respond to you in a manner such as "thank you for your concern bro,i will go upstairs and change into something a little less revealing"

You are probably going to think once again im defending rapists etc but im not. Evil people are everywhere, always have been and always will be.

Im am simply saying dont put yourself in position where you know the outcome may not be what you desire.

This thread has diverged from what the opening poster probably intended. But discussions lead to other avenues and this is good. Maybe could even be split into 3 categories:

1. The definition of a scam - What is it and what evidence is needed to prove it.

2. A list of scammers that have been proven without doubt to be so, as defined in point 1

3. A discussion as to why there are "victims" in the 1st place.

The above should cover all the bases.

Even more importantly, it is very very relevant to trading. It happens every day in the markets.

You can either be scammed by small fry, such as the ones mentioned here, or large fry who participate in the market. The only difference is that one tries to take £97 off you the other tries to clear your whole trading account

A fool and his money are soon parted. We can't do anything for them other than warn them. I should say that they get plenty of warnings. Apart from that, I don't see the point in making a big thing out of it. All of the governmental employees of watchdog institutions get paid for what they do. Out of taxpayers money, BTW, We don't, so, let's warn them and move on, we've got our own things to do.

The same goes for girls in short skirts. Don't tell me that they don't know the risks. Feel sorry for them, yes. When they get murdered or raped we get horrified. For a short while. Until the press gets a new story. If it's bad enough, the law gets changed. That's what we pay politicians for, but we have to get on with our own thing.

 

[4xpipcounter]

I see. He was the most prominent one I knew of, which is why I referred to him often.

I wasnt referring to Hunterscreed, and from the various references to him on this thread he wouldn't exactly fit into the category of posting some of the best stuff on the forum that I referred to...

The intent is great in principle, as long as its equally and fairly done...

A possible unintended consequence is that it might push quality posters away from the forum , if they're continually having to defend themselves ....the real cons will have no problem with posting ongoing bluff responses or just ignoring any calls to defend themselves

 

[Shakone]

I find this a horrible example. To compare losing some money to someone being raped is pretty sick. I realise Dionysus Toast was just using the example to make a point, but it failed because it is not a good comparison.

Girls are not raped because they wear short skirts. I don't see any evidence of that anywhere. I don't know where you get that impression from. And I'm surprised at splitlink too, "don't tell me they don't know the risks"?! Whether they wear short skirts or not, they know the risks. And short skirted or not, they are at risk from sick individuals. Do you seriously think that wearing jeans is going to prevent a sick predatory individual? Most rapes aren't even done by strangers. Wearing a short skirt isn't a risk, it is fashion. There is no excuse for this attitude.

When someone hands over their money to another, they have consented to put their money in that person's trust. If they are ripped off, then they trusted the wrong person. Probably they were naive, gullible or stupid. They should learn their lesson, report it to the authorities if it is criminal and become less naive and gullible. If they can't learn that lesson, then how will they ever survive in trading anyway?

 

[4xpipcounter]

I know we are getting away from the purpose of this thread. My point was that I thought the analogy was incorrect byt Dionysus, because of one being a volitional act and the otehr non-volitional.
You and I differ, because I still believe that women bring trouble on themselves by dressing in a way to reveal or bring attention to themselves. A women that dresses as to not bring attention to herself is less likely to be raped than a woman who dresses like she came out of a whorehouse.
I don't even see anything sick about this. Also, and as mentioned before, I don't really believe we have a proper comparison, because of the difference described. I also understand most guys like seeing women run around exposed like that, which is why they want to defend their dress.

I find this a horrible example. To compare losing some money to someone being raped is pretty sick. I realise Dionysus Toast was just using the example to make a point, but it failed because it is not a good comparison.

Girls are not raped because they wear short skirts. I don't see any evidence of that anywhere. I don't know where you get that impression from. And I'm surprised at splitlink too, "don't tell me they don't know the risks"?! Whether they wear short skirts or not, they know the risks. And short skirted or not, they are at risk from sick individuals. Do you seriously think that wearing jeans is going to prevent a sick predatory individual? Most rapes aren't even done by strangers. Wearing a short skirt isn't a risk, it is fashion. There is no excuse for this attitude.

When someone hands over their money to another, they have consented to put their money in that person's trust. If they are ripped off, then they trusted the wrong person. Probably they were naive, gullible or stupid. They should learn their lesson and become less naive and gullible. If they can't learn that lesson, then how will they ever survive in trading anyway?

 

[Shakone]

But you've got it completely the wrong way around. You're suggesting that the rape is volitional, and the handing over the money willingly is non-volitional. If you can't see how wrong-headed that is, then yes I find it sick.

You're saying a girl who attracts attention is more likely to be raped? So then a friendly girl with a bubbly personality qualifies under that. A girl who is very attractive draws attention to herself. A girl who is confident or a show off. A girl who is on television or radio draws attention to herself.

So now girls can't wear short skirts, can't bet attractive, can't be friendly or bubbly or confident, can't work in the public eye, without some moron suggesting that they 'choosing' (volitional) to be raped. What a load of crap.

 

[4xpipcounter]

Responses below

But you've got it completely the wrong way around. You're suggesting that the rape is volitional, and the handing over the money willingly is non-volitional. If you can't see how wrong-headed that is, then yes I find it sick.
Rape is volitional and still wrong, just like a woman dressing like a whore is wrong. The part of handing over the money is volitional. What is non-volitional, and I mentioned this before, is the internalized makeup or construction we have. It is human nature to want to make big money quickly, without really paying the price. This is how these con men are able to make it. They cater to people's gullibility. It is a safe guess that everyone in this thread has fallen prey to some con show that came along in their life. The reason is not because of the voliitonal part of handing over the money, but the non-volitional part of the internal makeup of our nature.

You're saying a girl who attracts attention is more likely to be raped? So then a friendly girl with a bubbly personality qualifies under that. A girl who is very attractive draws attention to herself. A girl who is confident or a show off. A girl who is on television or radio draws attention to herself.
In one way or another, we all bring attention to oursleves. Good traders bring attention to themselves, because the attraction is people wanting to learn from them. An outstnading outgoing personality brings attention, because that is a natural attraction.
Attraction and whoredom are two different things. A girl that dresses modestly and has the same character, that can even encompass a charasmatic charater is attractive. That is true confidence, because she is content with who she is. When a girl dreesses like a whore mini-skirts, low cut blouses, unseemly splits, et al, the attention she gets is more than personality. That is the attention that causes rape, because the atention is no longer on the outgoing personality or the woman's true inner self. You know I'm right. If you like seeing women dress like that, you already know the part of you it feeds. This is, in part, why 1/6 of all internet revenue is pornography. Now that is sickening.

So now girls can't wear short skirts, can't bet attractive, can't be friendly or bubbly or confident, can't work in the public eye, without some moron suggesting that they 'choosing' (volitional) to be raped. What a load of crap.

Again, friendly, bubbly and confidence has nothing to do with exposing parts of her body that should be kept in the bedroom. OTT, I made my point.

 

[episteme]

Where I live right now all the women walk around in bikinis most of the time. I have no desire to rape them. Any one who thinks that women should modify their behaviour and not wear the clothes they want so that we accommodate potential rapists is wrong headed and probably a bit misogynistic themselves.

 

[4xpipcounter]

I don't know what happened in that post, but almost all of it did not show up in the post.

Responses below


Again, friendly, bubbly and confidence has nothing to do with exposing parts of her body that should be kept in the bedroom. OTT, I made my point.

 

[Trader333]

They are not full of people who WISHED they owned those cars

How do you know ? Is there an independent verification of all members to prove that they do own the cars they claim to own ?


Paul

 

[N Rothschild]

yes ? there ? is ? actualy ? you ? have ? to ? provide ? your ? chasis ? numbers ? and ? proof ? of ? ownership