On 6/22/2012 2:23 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
It's certainly interesting but it's a hard document to swallow. They
purposefully try and make their pool lower by making the scam so
stupid that anyone who falls for it is clearly a good mark?
My anecdotal research combines more with low-paid labor who simply
follow what has worked combined with massive inequities in scales of
economy that I don't see well reflected in this research.
There is at least some logic to the underlying concept, although I doubt
they sat down and thought about it, I suspect that they threw 100 types
of poop at the wall, picked the 3 that stuck best and kept flinging them.
Put another way, the ones that figure it out half way through probably
cost the actual scammer far more than throwing out 10x-100x attempts
targetting only the dumbest of the dumb.
--
Dave Warren
http://www.hireahit.com/
http://ca.linkedin.com/in/davejwarren
