When is a "scam" a scam?
Now obviously the most apparent scam would be if you hired someone for a service (copywriting, article writing, design....ect.) and they didn't fulfill their part of the bargain.
But other than that, what qualifies in your mind as a "scammer"?
- When a product is delivered but the ad copy is misleading? (a secret that really isn't much of a secret....ect)- If so, a lot of warriors could be considered at fault here.
- When you take a method, try to make it work and it doesn't work as described?
- When clickbank/ebay/cpa/traffic stats are inflated for the purpose of selling (fake it till you make it)?
- When the author's picture is not the author at all but a picture yanked from a stock photo catalog?
- When the author uses a pen name/persona as their online "entity"?
- When you promote a product that you can't attest to b/c you haven't seen it?
- When you review a product in the hopes for a sale that you haven't used?
- When you take an ezine article, change it up a bit and then resubmit it with your link in the hopes of a sale/backlink/content for your site?
- When you misrepresent yourself as an authority in the niche that you are in because keyword research shows that their is a potential for money?
- When you offer something for "$1" but in fine fine print at the bottom of the page, they are really signing up for a monthly service?
- When your headline reads "high school dropout makes a fortune from a secret he found under a rock" when in actuality, you have a master's degree in business?
- When you get your sister/friend/wife/husband/2nd cousin to write up a "review" for your product?
- When you buy a fleshed out product and place your name on it (which makes you an instant authority in the eyes of the consumer) although you have no idea what is what?
And there have been a lot of witch hunts that I have seen going on in here (although they may or may not be justified) very recently with people patting each other on the back for "outing" a person (once again, it could be justified or could not).
From my perspective, I think that most warriors have a very dim view on what self-regulated actually means. To many, it bothers them that they can't come outright and say that so and so is scamming, ect. But the implications and what is implied can be equally damaging if they are wrong, even if it is merely implied.
I haven't bought any high dollar products via the warrior forum so aside from getting some rather shoddy >$37 products, I can't say that I have ever been scammed...at least from my definition of what I think a scam is.
And if I was going to purchase a "service", I would probably want to have a little information on them (with a downloadable product, who cares? After all, the delivery in most cases in either instantaneous or within a couple hours).
But aside from that, it would seem to me that the easiest way to self-regulate would be to actually do a review on the product that you felt didn't deliver on the WSO forum itself. After all, isn't the warrior forum a social site? Wouldn't it be easy for the first person who never recieved the product/service simply just write it up in the WSO itself? Or is that breaking a rule as well?
Once again, I am not an "advanced" or "veteran" warrior but I think that this scammer witch hunt is ridiculous because most warriors have a different definition of what a scam actually is.
And to accuse someone of being a scammer without solid proof is walking on very dangerous ground because aside from not actually recieving a product the definitions vary from person to person.