I understand that, but I seriously doubt these people are losing essential money. If you can afford to buy Hawk Tuah coins for the ‘community aspect’ then they probably aren’t at risk of losing their life saving.
There’s a big gap between what’s happening here and telescammers robbing grannies for example.
you’re free to believe that, without proof there’s no argument either way, and in any case it’s my personal belief this kind of manipulation of assets should be illegal no matter the target audience
Idk if you have ever looked at or downloaded a retail trading app, something like Robinhood. All of them have a prominent “education” section which distills down to “don’t take our word for it; know what you are buying before you do.”
You are correct that people have a personal responsibility to be informed about the risks. However ALSO, marketers of the risky assets also have a responsibility to inform traders of their own investments and that risks are even possible when giving financial advice—this obviously is happening nowhere because no regulating body requires it.
This is why I don’t hold it against anyone in this situation for not informing themselves. They can’t inform themselves if they aren’t even told it might be necessary, and especially not when that “personal responsibility” you speak of is actively hidden from them.
Hope this makes sense :) appreciate the discussion
‘ooh you said something i slightly disagree with!, instead of discussing about it like i would in real life im going to make a slapfight like a little toddler about it’
I understand that, but I seriously doubt these people are losing essential money. If you can afford to buy Hawk Tuah coins for the ‘community aspect’ then they probably aren’t at risk of losing their life saving.
There’s a big gap between what’s happening here and telescammers robbing grannies for example.
you’re free to believe that, without proof there’s no argument either way, and in any case it’s my personal belief this kind of manipulation of assets should be illegal no matter the target audience
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not claiming this isn’t insider manipulation, or that it should be legal.
What I’m saying is people have a personal responsibility to be informed about the risks associated with cryptocurrency.
At this point, if you lose money on a pump-n-dumps, that’s all on you.
The same could not be said five years ago, when influencer coins were unheard of.
Idk if you have ever looked at or downloaded a retail trading app, something like Robinhood. All of them have a prominent “education” section which distills down to “don’t take our word for it; know what you are buying before you do.”
You are correct that people have a personal responsibility to be informed about the risks. However ALSO, marketers of the risky assets also have a responsibility to inform traders of their own investments and that risks are even possible when giving financial advice—this obviously is happening nowhere because no regulating body requires it.
This is why I don’t hold it against anyone in this situation for not informing themselves. They can’t inform themselves if they aren’t even told it might be necessary, and especially not when that “personal responsibility” you speak of is actively hidden from them.
Hope this makes sense :) appreciate the discussion
deleted by creator
none, and blocked for boring 6 year old on playground behavior
Based
‘ooh you said something i slightly disagree with!, instead of discussing about it like i would in real life im going to make a slapfight like a little toddler about it’
—99% of this site for some reason
Actually it’s more like 95% slaps you
aw man :(
… :(
deleted by creator