Discussion on Free Tarot Card Reading

• 

  RockSteady on 24/03/2009 - 22:58

  +1

  EDIT - while typing this in another forum topic, this one went live. I have moved my comments here.

  To Ozpete - I wish to protest against your decision to lock the thread http://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/11135 today.

  Hopefully I can address the argument here with reason and intelligence, and not personal attacks.

  Obviously I have personal beliefs against people who claim to be clairvoyant, psychic, mystics, magicians, mind readers, mediums and sons of former Nigerian Princes. That may have tainted my view of these offers slightly. Well, that and centuries of scientifically proven facts debunking these kind of people, but it is the former that I can be blamed for.

  To use your "lolly water" example I believe is a little misleading. The lolly water is not claiming to do anything that it can not do, like cure cancer or make you jump like Michael Jordan (the legal definition of that connotation is "Advertising Puffery"). But in a similar vein, should we down vote a bargain for say goji berries - which you can find hundreds of scientifically proven tests and studies that they do not do as they claim, and only company propaganda and hearsay on the other side of the argument? I believe yes you should, and I will use your post as reasoning for this - "if you dont like the offering leave it alone - unless its fundamentally flawed.". If I am in the minority on this point then I accept that, albeit with disappointment.

  This offer is fundamentally flawed. We're not talking about opinion, preference or even religion. We're talking about straight up fraud - promising something you have no ability to deliver.

  In essence, voting down a scam should be encouraged, I really do believe that was what was happening.

  The only argument against is the fact that it was free. I stated my point that since it was free, at least you would get a few lines of creative writing in return. But then what happens to your email address is an unknown, and I presumed the worst (which I think is natural for most people, but I may be wrong there). One comment suggested using an site that generates emails for one sole purposes - which would limit the danger for your personal details. Sure it is free, but even if we assume that the people on the other end are 100% genuine in their believe that they can tell the future by dealing cards, then we are encouraging them to propagate their fraud on others in the future. And that is the very best case scenario.

  And finally, even if you reject my arguments above, I have one last point which should have also been obvious since I posted 4 comments on this one bargain. I was really enjoying the post and having some fun making jokes about the tarot reading, and you put a stop to that. Give me back my ball mister!

  I hope the above will be viewed with the required tone and light-heartedness as I intended, even if a little self serving in nature.

• 

  [Deactivated] on 25/03/2009 - 20:25

  This is the correct space to discuss this.

  You are entitled to your opinions on Tarot readings.

  BUT this is a bargain space, for bargains. if I don't like a particular product it doesnt mean its not a bargain for those who do like the product. As you both say you think a Tarot is fraud. To which I say where is your evidence.

  Do you know its email harvesting??? If so give us the link to show where this is the case.

  I dont like Multinationals and I believe they rip off people - so as such you say its ok to vote down the MN product.

  Why I called people idiots is because they are treating this site as their own site to push their own personal views and prejudices.

  If you really look at what you have said its because you dont like Tarot readings and you think they are flawed.

  Frankly I dont like sermons that have come from some book that tells me there is some invisible force controlling me. Hellfire and brimstone. Has anyone proved the existence of a god? So any religious offering can be voted down.

  No thats my opinion and my moral values. So if one religions book is offered here free, then I can vote it down because it isnt a bargain to me.

  Yep the system lets that occur, but now we just open up the whole bargain system to be voted on for other reasons.

  Others will play silly playback games like voting down someone else's post because they voted down theirs. I'll call that as well.

  If you think thats ok I don't. And like you I will call the "ball" as I see it.

  Finally if you really think Tarot is that bad - leave the deal alone, that way it dies on its own - the irony is that the more it gets voted on + and - ve the more people look at it (159 at last look)

  I wont lock this thread because its the appropriate place to discuss this whereas the tarot thread shouldn't be hijacked (BTW I dont think it was intentional) on the morality and appropriateness of readings

  And this isnt some new opinion of mine I have always said negative votes are to be used judiciously, we encourage sharing - people are mature enough to decide whats the bargain for them - we stopped first time negative voting cacbm because

  1. Many were just sockpuppets - that being same person signing up again and posting a negative comment mostly on their beliefs
  2. Like holofernes they just signed up to put their moral view. They have no interest in the site and its offerings otherwise.
  • 

    cacbm on 25/03/2009 - 20:57

    I think you overlooked an obvious fact ozpete. Being a Tarot reading deal doesn't mean it's immune from criticism.

    I'd have less of a problem or even no problem if it was an established company with a bit of reputation that was making this offer. I know people will ask what's an established company and what is reputable. I agree it's hard to determine especially in this field. However, if it's a company that regularly advertises on magazines/newspapers or something, I won't either vote positively or negatively on that deal even though I'm a non-believer.

    However, if today it was some dude with a free email account who claims to do Tarot reading and asks for your name, email, birthday. I'll be very wary. And although I'm a non-believer, it's fair to say that the "accuracy" of the Tarot reading probably wouldn't be as good as a proper company.

    What you're saying essentially, ozpete, is that you will allow a "deal" described below and will not allow criticism on that particular deal.

    1. Some random person. (Not a company or anything)
    2. He registered a free email account. (Not even a website, or even a paid email)
    3. Asks details such as names, birthday, emails from people. (It's allowed because there's no way, or very very hard to prove it's "email harvesting". Why do we have to prove it? ozpete says so.)
    4. By claiming to send you some Tarot reading. (Can't criticise or make negative comments because it's a "moral issue")

    Someone posts a deal that Coca-Cola offers free coke requiring email addresses is different to some dude offers his version of coke by asking email addresses. (And to your point of people joining to comment, I would encourage them to do so if they think it's dodgy.)

    I have to say the more I look at that "deal", the less convinced I am.

    As to your comment about people voting + and - so it got more pageviews. I disagree. It hasn't receive one single positive vote two hours after it's posted and it has been a steady stream of negative votes. People have been voting, but they voted negatively. The pageview it got has nothing to do with people voting. Any deal will have that many people clicking. Not to mention clicking on that link doesn't get you anywhere because you can only email, there's no website.

    I again strongly recommend to re-open commenting on that deal. I won't necessary comment on it (most likely won't) but I don't see any reason to stop people from commenting.

  • 

    RockSteady on 25/03/2009 - 21:31

    Thanks for replying Ozpete, but there are still some holes in what you have presented I feel.

    Firstly, using the example of religion is a little lost on an atheist like me. I would probably agree with you, but wouldn't be so adamant in negative comments because I know how touchy the subject is with people. But I would vote it down, because I thought the idea was to give my opinions on these kind of things. Call me a wuss, but I just try to stay out of it. I can't be bothered entering a theological argument on religion. But fortune telling, well that is just a bit different to me.

    And proof that tarot reading is fake? Um….are there any other fish in your barrel? Since you asked…
    I could use examples like no body has ever been able to cash in the skeptics challenge set by James Randi to claim the million dollar prize (imagine what that could do for charity even if the proposed mystic didn't want to profit from their gift that they charge for all day) - see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Randi_Educational_Foundat…

    More info at http://www.randi.org/site/

    Do a Google search for debunking tarot cards, pick the first one - how about http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/291782/tarot_cards_… .

    Or there is a you tube video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTESWJNDEbY

    Or even better, why don't you name a famous paranormal expert, and I'll go find a report debunking theme? I could post links to debunking psychics all day long, but there should be enough there to keep you amused for a little while, and seriously 2 minutes on google will get you as many as you need.

    These type of activities have been debunked from the days of Houdini, and years before that even. Time and time again they have been proven to be fakes, frauds, charlatans and swindlers. Maybe they have even fooled themselves into believing they have a "gift", but just because you fool yourself doesn't give you the right to profit off of others naivety.

    My point wasn't to debunk this tarot reading specifically - it was ALL tarot reading.

    And as for voting the deal down, I would hope that every Ozbargin member would vote down a scam when they see it.

    Please, you must recognize the difference between opinion - you don't like multinationals - and fact - that those people on the Earth that claim to have magic powers are telling lies or are delusional.

    The fact of the matter is, not one fortune teller in the history of existence has ever been proven to be able to predict better than a guess. Not one. Centuries of debunking on one side, 0 proofs on the other. When is enough to call it game over on them?

    And I still disagree that you call a person an idiot because they felt strongly enough about warning other users about a scam that they wanted to join to vote against it. Like I read Scotty say somewhere, 80% of the users here do not log in, so why was this person not one of that majority?

    Lastly, as you prefer the method of analogy to illustrate a point. If I were to post a bargain that said the son of a former Prince of Nigeria had offered anyone willing to help $25 million dollars - for free! - what would happen to that post and why?

• 

  adam on 25/03/2009 - 22:59

  +1

  Sure some people don't believe in the whole Tarot thing - but surely the vaguery of the freebie contributed to people's skepticism. Things counting against the bargain:

  • It's not even advertised on the Internet, it's just an uploaded image from unknown origin.
  • The email address is in a generic domain name
  • They seem to be requesting not enough information to do an actual reading

  I rather suspect if they had a registered website on their own domain name then people would have a been a little less skeptical.

  So why should we care why someone votes a deal down? If someone wants to vote -ve for any reason whatsoever then surely that is there pejorative? To start putting rules on why anyone can/can't vote +ve or -ve will result in voting that starts to represent less and less the views of the community & more and more the views of the ruleamkers.

  • 

    cacbm on 25/03/2009 - 23:11

    Completely agreed.

    I don't know whether the decision to lock the thread up was solely ozpete's idea or OzBargain's idea. But it is essentially protecting potential dodgy practice by prohibit criticism.

    If I registered a free email address ([email protected]) and came to OzBargain to claim that I give free Tarot card readings in exchange for your name, birthday and email, but I don't have any experience in Tarot reading. Would this be disallowed? Or at the very least open to criticism? If the answer is yes, then I ask what's the difference between my "deal" and this Tarot reading "deal". No, I don't know whether that person is a Tarot expert or not, but judging on the facts, the lack or email and lack of info required, I'll suggest otherwise.

    On the other hand, if my "deal" is allowed and people can't criticise, then I think we need a good hard good at this site, its management in particular.

    • 

      RockSteady on 25/03/2009 - 23:44

      Having said all that, I think reopening the thread now is moot, our points have been made.

      • 

        cacbm on 25/03/2009 - 23:56

        Yes but on principle, why should the thread be locked in the first place? Why stop people commenting? Why force discussion to be moved away?

• 

  [Deactivated] on 26/03/2009 - 08:17

  Adam your comments make sense - its interesting that now other's have latched on to these to justify their original voting.

  The point the others miss is that they voted this down for the wrong reasons. Alleged Fraud - Tarot being a waste of time etc. Only after being challenged do they find "reasons" for their original voting against this - which if they were being honest is because they dont like Tarot readings.

  Totally ironic isnt it - because I dont like them either.

  But because they want to justify their original position.

  The reason the thread was locked was to force the discussion over here as it isn't to do with Tarot its to do with judging bargains on the bargain side of the offering. In your case you make a very valid point - that being that the deal is not a bargain from "normal".

  Thats not to say its not worth for some to post the "bargain". But the opinion is valid.

  I was the one to lock the thread. There was enough discussion there for anyone to decide if the deal was "dodgy". Unfortunately there is no way to lock the voting vs the comments - thats a site limitation

  cacbm - the discussion wasn't stopped it was moved. Because its nothing to do with tarot now as you have stated in your second last post. And as you say its the management you need to look at. The same management that stopped 18+ posts, which others dont like either. So next time Scotty has a shareholders meeting you can put your vote in against the current management

  The forum is the best place to discuss procedural issues by locking the thread it moves the discussion to the right place.

  The others here wont change their mind. Thats ok. Neither will I

  BTW Rocksteady - quoting Randi - he is from the skeptics society and has always been against Tarot etc. His arguments also stand up against religion. So then we ban all religious offerings?? You admit that you voted this down because it was a Tarot reading - which is my original point - this is a bargain site - for those wanting Tarot they can find a Tarot bargain - your personal beliefs are yours and are not under attack. I like PCs but dont vote down Mac bargains, because a Mac is already overpriced. So you try to hide Tarot bargains from others by voting it down - thats the real censorship that is happening here.

  This is what happened with the adult sex site. a 10% deal on some overpriced plastic that got more votes than 50% off chocolate - why??? its wasnt free it wasnt 50% off, it wasnt a below cost pricing mistake it was in a number of cases people voting on their own personal feelings about the right to post this type of bargain. Thats the same nonsense here.

  So I stand by my original premise vote against the "bargainess" of the deal eg is it 10% off a 10% increased price - or its 20% off at another store. Also it's not stopping you making a comment - again dont confuse negative voting with the point of making a comment. eg - I have two of these and both failed within 30 hours

  • 

    cacbm on 26/03/2009 - 10:03

    My point about management is solely directly to you ozpete. Yes you have the power as a mod. But do others agree?

    You still haven't the question that if I posted a "deal", having registered a free email account, and claim that I'll give people free Tarot readings but in actual fact trying to get people's details, would that be allowed? I think by your logic, it will. At least we won't be able to criticise the "deal".

  • 

    RockSteady on 26/03/2009 - 10:09

    +1

    My last comments and then I think I'll leave it, unless asked to comment.

    I still don't think you have grasped the idea that I voted down a scam, and scams should be voted down. Mountains and ountains of proof show that it is a scam, which one dictionary definition has scam as "a fraudulent business scheme ". Claiming to be able to do something you can not do is certainly fraudulent.

    And you say Randi is a skeptic - a proud one at that I beleive - and that his arguments "also stand up" against religion. By your words, does that mean they "stand up" against tarot cards then? If so, why are we having this argument when you agree? I know, I'll get accused of taking your words out of context, but it was an easy get and you can't blame me for that.

    If you go back and read the original post under the bargain, my reasons for dodginess of the deal were apparent from the moment after i voted down. Others I can not vouch for, but mine are there.

    Would the same process be used for the Nigeran example provided above?

    I fail to see the difference. So we agree that scams should be voted down, you only disagree that tarot is a scam. If the mountains of evidence can not convince you, then I think I have to leave it here and agree to disagree.

    But again, it was fun while it lasted.

    • 

      cacbm on 26/03/2009 - 10:22

      "I think I have to leave it here and agree to disagree"

      Which is the exact same thing I said in my first post. And agree to disagree doesn't mean you have to locked the thread up.

• 

  [Deactivated] on 26/03/2009 - 13:31

  -1

  Ok you can make more comments etc

  But going back to the first comments you all made - the rest are part of our fun. You slammed the deal without any of the info you now use to justify the original slamming - You now find research and examples to justify your position - ie you think Tarot is a scam.

  Just because tarot isn't real advice - doesnt mean its a scam. How people take it is up to them To say its the same as a Nigerian scam where you send money away is really stretching your justification.

  But if I use your logic anything someone doesn't like can be voted down, so where does that leave us - just like the 18+ situation are we to have a site destroyed, because the LG, Coke swilling, Bluray PC users dont like Pepsi samsung VHS mac users. - A point made before that you fail to address.

  If you dont like Tarot cards go join Randi and put some money up for his now defunct $1million dollar challenges.

  This thread justifies locking the post. it is appropriate to discuss here because its to do with the way negative voting is used. its nothing to do with the original. So give it away cacbm I got your point I dont agree with you so going on and on isnt worth it.

  Create a new thread to have me removed as a mod if you are that uptight about it. I have consulted my TAROT and it says beware of fleas that bite. Now is this true? Well we'll see.

  • 

    RockSteady on 26/03/2009 - 14:33

    …Randi's challenge is still open, until March 6, 2010. Really makes for some good reading those links above, worth a look.

    And I concede the point, we did down vote and give negative comments on the deal without presenting our evidence. For my part, I thought it was so obvious that I didn't need to present evidence - but all sarcasm aside, it probably was an oversight there. But now that we have provided the evidence, was our "slamming" and down voting justified?

    The Nigeran scam comparison - I know, it is a bit like comparing a minor assult to mass murder, but the point was they are both along the same plane of activity, albeit one at an extreme. "is really stretching your justification" does not refute the point made.

    And this massively verbose discussion on the subject would not have occured, or at least in such a manner, if the thread wasn't locked.

    "How people take it is up to them" doesn't excuse a scam. You don't need to prove the mindset of the victim for a crime to occur.

    "Just because tarot isn't real advice - doesn't mean its a scam" - Um, yes it does. If it claims to be real, and as you say isn't, then that is fraudulent. If you try to run a business of a fraudlent claim, that's a scam.

    I feel the need to point out once again we didn't down vote it because we don't like it, we down voted it because it is a scam. Proven scam. Meets the definition of scam. Even your own words lead to that conclusion, even if you have not realised it yourself.

    Without trying to close out others to the argument, I do thank both Ozpete and Cacbm for the discussion. With both agreing and disagreeing stands, I'm glad the debate went on in the manner it did. EDIT - which upon re-reading, sounds like I have endorsed the closing of the thread myself! Lol - I do enjoy a good argument.

• 

  [Deactivated] on 26/03/2009 - 22:40

  Rocksteady

  Well we agree that we haven't stopped having fun with this and this is the place to play the semantics.

  While not agreeing - as it would really start the cats flying - I do understand your position.

  But I do still question the scam based on what was offered. It was a reading without any data input. So really is ita scam or a bit of fun. Just like the Newspapers do with the stars column. No money changed hands. So it comes down to what we believe is a scam. I think many would see this as just fun and a laugh. Maybe just like most would see this thread - unlike us.

  Like all internet sites a throw away email address could be used. Maybe that would have been better to advise members, rather than just saying its a scam.

  I have enjoyed the banter and the discussion has lead to a better understanding. Better than what's on TV

  BTW congratulations on the prize for Vpower although thats probably a scam as they can make sure the price on unleaded on Sunday stays higher to cover the cost - sorry - that was a little light tongue in cheek.

• 

  cacbm on 27/03/2009 - 16:55

  Not to beat a dead horse, but for a deal that received more negative votes than positive votes and didn't make it to the front page. The heavy-handed approach by ozpete is hard to justify.

  http://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/11221
  This Coles veges deal has made it onto the front page. But there are people commenting on the veges are made in China, which has nothing to do with the actual deal. Yet this deal has not been locked up.

  Is this moderation by choice?