Template talk:Scams and confidence tricks

Swoopo as Confidence Tricks
An anonymous user added the online auction site Swoopo to this template. Swoopo is certainly controversial, possibly illegal in some jurisdictions, and I personally believe that their business model is questionable, but I'm not sure it even qualifies as a confidence trick (it's more akin to gambling). It is certainly not what I would consider a notable confidence trick, and therefore should not be in this template. I am going to remove it. RandyKaelber (talk) 20:36, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Is the user's anonymous status relevant? 129.81.90.56 (talk) 03:52, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Agreed. For the same reason, I've removed Bidding fee auction (aka "bidding fee scheme") from the list. White 720 (talk) 16:15, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Sathya Sai Baba note
There is a discussion at Talk:Sathya Sai Baba about having Sathya Sai Baba in this template (and a related category). --Closeapple (talk) 03:37, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
 * On those grounds I've removed Sathya Sai Baba from here again: if consensus is that he belongs in the Confidence tricksters category then this can be revisited. In the meantime, it seems that listing him here as a notable con artist without such consensus is a BLP concern. - Bilby (talk) 04:36, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Notable Con Artists
I think it should be a separate template. To tie with this, "con artist" should be a separate article from confidence trick.--Penbat (talk) 10:47, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Groupon as Ponzi scheme
Added Groupon as a Ponzi or pyramid scheme, based on article at http://www.minyanville.com/businessmarkets/articles/groupon-groupon-ipo-tech-stocks-linked/6/3/2011/id/34936. The article explains that, according to IPO financial disclosure requirements, the finances of the company resemble a ponzi scheme. However, the company publicly discloses the relevant facts, which may or may not make it an actual ponzi scheme. Does disclosure make it not a ponzi scheme? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.207.34.229 (talk) 04:41, 5 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Reverted. You can open a discussion about adding it to the Groupon article, but it's not widely considered a scam and confidence trick and does not merit a place on the template until it does. Jokestress (talk) 04:56, 5 June 2011 (UTC)