The Multi-level Marketing scheme argument

[Synaptic]

Synaptic's path of logic to how Bitcoin = MLM...

Bitcoin = 8 characters long
MLM = 13-12-13 alphabetic index

Now, if you drop the "1" digit you end up with 3-2-3.  The sum of which is 8.  Therefore BITCOIN IS AN MLM!!!

You are a fucking dumbass.

I, I can't really say much else than that. Sorry Mods, but, someone oughta say it.

[1714062982]

1714062982

[1714062982]

1714062982

[1714062982]

1714062982

[BitcoinPorn]

Didn't Amway "make it"?

Anyways, I am thinking about moving onto this gold mlm stuff after Bitcoin mlm.  You may ask yourself, is this Gold Coin MLM Overrated?

Numis Network is one of those newer companies based on MLM that are creating huge discussions regarding its legitimacy. But when it gets to be researched, it becomes quite clear that this Gold Coin MLM is definitely not overrated rather it is quite true in its validity.



HI MY NAME IS DAVE...
For over a decade, I've generated tons of leads for businesses across the USA through a series of popular websites, blogs and more. With my extensive knowledge of internet marketing and lead generation, I am now ready to personally help you increase both leads and phone calls.

http://davetrosdahl.com/numis-network-is-this-gold-coin-mlm-overrated/

[Mousepotato]

You are a fucking dumbass.

I, I can't really say much else than that. Sorry Mods, but, someone oughta say it.

lol u mad

[Synaptic]

Didn't Amway "make it"?

Anyways, I am thinking about moving onto this gold mlm stuff after Bitcoin mlm.  You may ask yourself, is this Gold Coin MLM Overrated?

Numis Network is one of those newer companies based on MLM that are creating huge discussions regarding its legitimacy. But when it gets to be researched, it becomes quite clear that this Gold Coin MLM is definitely not overrated rather it is quite true in its validity.



HI MY NAME IS DAVE...
For over a decade, I've generated tons of leads for businesses across the USA through a series of popular websites, blogs and more. With my extensive knowledge of internet marketing and lead generation, I am now ready to personally help you increase both leads and phone calls.

http://davetrosdahl.com/numis-network-is-this-gold-coin-mlm-overrated/

lol

[Synaptic]

Synaptic's path of logic to how Bitcoin = MLM...

Bitcoin = 8 characters long
MLM = 13-12-13 alphabetic index

Now, if you drop the "1" digit you end up with 3-2-3.  The sum of which is 8.  Therefore BITCOIN IS AN MLM!!!

You are a fucking dumbass.

I, I can't really say much else than that. Sorry Mods, but, someone oughta say it.

lol u mad

Not in the least.

It actually brings me joy to call you a fucking dumbass.

Please, post something else fucking stupid so I can berate you further.

[Mousepotato]

Not in the least.

It actually brings me joy to call you a fucking dumbass.

Please, post something else fucking stupid so I can berate you further.

Don't really need an argument on /. for this one, as it's obvious and should be apparent to anyone who's ever read:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-level_marketing

From the wiki:


"Criticism has focused on their similarity to illegal pyramid schemes, price-fixing of products (BITCOIN BOTS, "EARLY ADOPTERS," EXCHANGE OPERATORS MANIPULATING MARKET PRICE), high initial start-up costs, emphasis on recruitment of lower-tiered salespeople over actual sales (RAMPANT SPECULATION VS. REAL ECONOMY), encouraging if not requiring salespeople to purchase and use the company's products (BITCOIN "ECONOMY"), potential exploitation of personal relationships which are used as new sales and recruiting targets (DITTO), complex and sometimes exaggerated compensation schemes (DITTO), and cult-like techniques which some groups use to enhance their members' enthusiasm and devotion (NEED I SAY MORE)."

AND:

"Independent, unsalaried salespeople of multi-level marketing, referred to as distributors (or associates, independent business owners, dealers, franchise owners, sales consultants, consultants, independent agents, BITCOIN MINERS, BITCOIN EVANGELISTS, etc.), represent the company (BITCOIN P2P NETWORK) that produces the products or provides the services they sell (ONLINE TRANSACTION PROCESSING, COMMODITY SPECULATION). They are awarded a commission based upon the volume of product sold through their own sales efforts as well as that of their downline organization (USD ENTERING THE MARKETS).

Independent distributors develop their organizations by either building an active customer base (BITCOIN EVANGELIZING), who buy direct from the company (BITCOIN EXCHANGE OPERATORS), or by recruiting a downline of independent distributors who also build a customer base (BITCOIN MINERS, BITCOIN MERCHANTS) thereby expanding the overall organization. Additionally, distributors can also earn a profit by retailing products they purchased from the company at wholesale price (EARLY ADOPTERS, BITCOIN MINERS)."

[whenhowwho]

Well since most people compare it to some sort of pyramid scheme then it must be true is your main premise? I would say that most people barely understand the world around them so it must not exist. People generally do not understand bitcoin at first blush and try to jump to the conclusion that it must be a pyramid scheme or some other form of MLM. They barely understand those either.

It could be argued that the entire monetary system is a pyramid scheme because there is incentive to get people to use it. Children are sent to school in order to learn how to be good drones and also how to be good consumers. They are inundated daily with commercial nonsense in order to partake of this monetary system. The only people who benefit from this are big bankers like rothschilds, rockefellers, jp morgan etc.


And then there is bitcoin. A currency/ commodity  that is owned by nobody and everybody at the same time. There are no big start up costs. My start in this cost me nothing as i already had the equipment. Just about anyone who is floating around the internet has the required equipment. Some equipment is more efficient than others though.

Incidentally your main argument is based upon wikipedia which is inherently weak. Anyone can make a wiki page which other less than intelligent people can quote for truth.

I think bitcoin has alot of inherent problems but i also think it could solve many problems facing the living souls on this plane today.

[Bitcoin Swami]

Synaptic's path of logic to how Bitcoin = MLM...

Bitcoin = 8 characters long
MLM = 13-12-13 alphabetic index

Now, if you drop the "1" digit you end up with 3-2-3.  The sum of which is 8.  Therefore BITCOIN IS AN MLM!!!

lol

[Synaptic]

Not in the least.

It actually brings me joy to call you a fucking dumbass.

Please, post something else fucking stupid so I can berate you further.

Don't really need an argument on /. for this one, as it's obvious and should be apparent to anyone who's ever read:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-level_marketing

From the wiki:


"Criticism has focused on their similarity to illegal pyramid schemes, price-fixing of products (BITCOIN BOTS, "EARLY ADOPTERS," EXCHANGE OPERATORS MANIPULATING MARKET PRICE), high initial start-up costs, emphasis on recruitment of lower-tiered salespeople over actual sales (RAMPANT SPECULATION VS. REAL ECONOMY), encouraging if not requiring salespeople to purchase and use the company's products (BITCOIN "ECONOMY"), potential exploitation of personal relationships which are used as new sales and recruiting targets (DITTO), complex and sometimes exaggerated compensation schemes (DITTO), and cult-like techniques which some groups use to enhance their members' enthusiasm and devotion (NEED I SAY MORE)."

AND:

"Independent, unsalaried salespeople of multi-level marketing, referred to as distributors (or associates, independent business owners, dealers, franchise owners, sales consultants, consultants, independent agents, BITCOIN MINERS, BITCOIN EVANGELISTS, etc.), represent the company (BITCOIN P2P NETWORK) that produces the products or provides the services they sell (ONLINE TRANSACTION PROCESSING, COMMODITY SPECULATION). They are awarded a commission based upon the volume of product sold through their own sales efforts as well as that of their downline organization (USD ENTERING THE MARKETS).

Independent distributors develop their organizations by either building an active customer base (BITCOIN EVANGELIZING), who buy direct from the company (BITCOIN EXCHANGE OPERATORS), or by recruiting a downline of independent distributors who also build a customer base (BITCOIN MINERS, BITCOIN MERCHANTS) thereby expanding the overall organization. Additionally, distributors can also earn a profit by retailing products they purchased from the company at wholesale price (EARLY ADOPTERS, BITCOIN MINERS)."

Thanks,

You're a dumbass who has nothing of value to say of their own.  You waltz into a thread with your faux cleverness and try to appeal to your native audience and garner camaraderie though laughing at a perceived pariah. You use sheepish humor as a defense against an uncomfortable presentation against your chosen hobby/obsession.

But that's ok, because here, you're a special and unique flower, and we love you.

[Synaptic]

Well since most people compare it to some sort of pyramid scheme then it must be true is your main premise? I would say that most people barely understand the world around them so it must not exist. People generally do not understand bitcoin at first blush and try to jump to the conclusion that it must be a pyramid scheme or some other form of MLM. They barely understand those either.

It could be argued that the entire monetary system is a pyramid scheme because there is incentive to get people to use it. Children are sent to school in order to learn how to be good drones and also how to be good consumers. They are inundated daily with commercial nonsense in order to partake of this monetary system. The only people who benefit from this are big bankers like rothschilds, rockefellers, jp morgan etc.


And then there is bitcoin. A currency/ commodity  that is owned by nobody and everybody at the same time. There are no big start up costs. My start in this cost me nothing as i already had the equipment. Just about anyone who is floating around the internet has the required equipment. Some equipment is more efficient than others though.

Incidentally your main argument is based upon wikipedia which is inherently weak. Anyone can make a wiki page which other less than intelligent people can quote for truth.

I think bitcoin has alot of inherent problems but i also think it could solve many problems facing the living souls on this plane today.

My main premise is that the bitcoin speculation market is a bullshit three (at least) ring circus, and that bitcoin zealots are no better the retards who think they're going to become millionaires working from home selling fucking gumball machines or whatever the fuck else.

Jesus, just go watch some of the bitcoin retards on You Tube as a perfect example. I'm embarrassed BY PROXY watching their videos...

[jancsika]

OP: What do you think of the MLM comparison to a hypothetical Bitcoin where the value is related to the difficulty of the block where the coins were mined (something like BCP)?

The lack of relationship between mined-coin difficulty and mined-coin value seems like the biggest reason for the "pyramid scheme" accusation (though I guess that's not exactly the same as MLM).  Newcomers to Bitcoin are faced with having to figure out whether this lack of relationship was a) necessary for what is already a very difficult concept to understand, b) an oversight, or c) an intentional, integral part of what amounts to a complicated scam.  What should be obvious is that the soundness of a technological solution to an economic problem shouldn't require one to guess the intentions of the original author-- which, by the way, is why I think Bitcoin is doomed to failure.

I don't know enough about economics to say whether something like BCP would be successful or not, but I think the "pyramid scheme" question would be a nonstarter since early adopters would have no other incentive to draw in newcomers than to see the system succeed.

[Mousepotato]

Thanks,

You're a dumbass who has nothing of value to say of their own.  You waltz into a thread with your faux cleverness and try to appeal to your native audience and garner camaraderie though laughing at a perceived pariah. You use sheepish humor as a defense against an uncomfortable presentation against your chosen hobby/obsession.

But that's ok, because here, you're a special and unique flower, and we love you.

lol.. wait.. hahah holy $h1t.  You're serious with this thread, aren't you?  Wow. hahah wow...

[Mousepotato]

My main premise is that the bitcoin speculation market is a bullshit three (at least) ring circus, and that bitcoin zealots are no better the retards who think they're going to become millionaires working from home selling fucking gumball machines or whatever the fuck else.

Wait, I thought your main premise was that the Bitcoin project is an MLM, or was that a lie?  You keep switching your stories.  Just what is your main premise?

[Synaptic]

OP: What do you think of the MLM comparison to a hypothetical Bitcoin where the value is related to the difficulty of the block where the coins were mined (something like BCP)?

The lack of relationship between mined-coin difficulty and mined-coin value seems like the biggest reason for the "pyramid scheme" accusation (though I guess that's not exactly the same as MLM).  Newcomers to Bitcoin are faced with having to figure out whether this lack of relationship was a) necessary for what is already a very difficult concept to understand, b) an oversight, or c) an intentional, integral part of what amounts to a complicated scam.  What should be obvious is that the soundness of a technological solution to an economic problem shouldn't require one to guess the intentions of the original author-- which, by the way, is why I think Bitcoin is doomed to failure.

I don't know enough about economics to say whether something like BCP would be successful or not, but I think the "pyramid scheme" question would be a nonstarter since early adopters would have no other incentive to draw in newcomers than to see the system succeed.

I think that for all the faggoty adulation that Satoshi receives by his acolytes ("Satoshi is a genius." I've read more than once), Bitcoin is fundamentally flawed and it seems to me that someone so fucking clever should have come up with a way to base the block difficulty on some standard of economic activity and not the absolutely retarded metric of how many people are chomping at the bit for their own blocks.

I've already designed an alternative blockchain myself that addresses this, and many more examples of the massive stupidity inherent to the Bitcoin system, but I'm certainly not going to share it here, and it's unlikely it will ever be published by myself since I'm just a lowly web developer.

However, it's really rather telling that I was able to solve the *hypothertical* economic problems of Bitcoin, and Satoshi wasn't.  Of course, Satoshi never purported to be an economist.  He's a cryptographer, and he solved a very interesting cryptographic problem. However, his proof-of-concept should never have become what is has, until there was a functioning economic underpinning to the creation, distribution, and long term strategy of the currency to begin with.

[Synaptic]

My main premise is that the bitcoin speculation market is a bullshit three (at least) ring circus, and that bitcoin zealots are no better the retards who think they're going to become millionaires working from home selling fucking gumball machines or whatever the fuck else.

Wait, I thought your main premise was that the Bitcoin project is an MLM, or was that a lie?  You keep switching your stories.  Just what is your main premise?

I never once said it WAS an MLM.  I said it shared characteristics of an MLM. The point of the thread was to spur meaningful discussion of why this is and what can be done about it, though my personal premise is that Bitcoin is bullshit and anything to be taken seriously really should be so easily compared to such bullshit marketing schemes.

[Mousepotato]

I think that for all the faggoty adulation that Satoshi receives by his acolytes ("Satoshi is a genius." I've read more than once), Bitcoin is fundamentally flawed and it seems to me that someone so fucking clever should have come up with a way to base the block difficulty on some standard of economic activity and not the absolutely retarded metric of how many people are chomping at the bit for their own blocks.

I've already designed an alternative blockchain myself that addresses this, and many more examples of the massive stupidity inherent to the Bitcoin system, but I'm certainly not going to share it here, and it's unlikely it will ever be published by myself since I'm just a lowly web developer.

However, it's really rather telling that I was able to solve the economic problems of Bitcoin, and Satoshi wasn't.  Of course, Satoshi never purported to be an economist.  He's a cryptographer, and he solved a very interesting cryptographic problem. However, his proof-of-concept should never have become what is has, until there was a functioning economic underpinning to the creation, distribution, and long term strategy of the currency to begin with.

I can actually agree with most of this, except for chaining block difficulty with economic activity alone.  It would make more sense to base it off a hybrid of block generation velocity, economic activity, and remaining blocks yet to be found.  IMHO anyway.

[whenhowwho]

Well since most people compare it to some sort of pyramid scheme then it must be true is your main premise? I would say that most people barely understand the world around them so it must not exist. People generally do not understand bitcoin at first blush and try to jump to the conclusion that it must be a pyramid scheme or some other form of MLM. They barely understand those either.

It could be argued that the entire monetary system is a pyramid scheme because there is incentive to get people to use it. Children are sent to school in order to learn how to be good drones and also how to be good consumers. They are inundated daily with commercial nonsense in order to partake of this monetary system. The only people who benefit from this are big bankers like rothschilds, rockefellers, jp morgan etc.


And then there is bitcoin. A currency/ commodity  that is owned by nobody and everybody at the same time. There are no big start up costs. My start in this cost me nothing as i already had the equipment. Just about anyone who is floating around the internet has the required equipment. Some equipment is more efficient than others though.

Incidentally your main argument is based upon wikipedia which is inherently weak. Anyone can make a wiki page which other less than intelligent people can quote for truth.

I think bitcoin has alot of inherent problems but i also think it could solve many problems facing the living souls on this plane today.

My main premise is that the bitcoin speculation market is a bullshit three (at least) ring circus, and that bitcoin zealots are no better the retards who think they're going to become millionaires working from home selling fucking gumball machines or whatever the fuck else.

Jesus, just go watch some of the bitcoin retards on You Tube as a perfect example. I'm embarrassed BY PROXY watching their videos...

I agree that speculation is bad. I would much rather be able to go to my local store and by stuff with bitcoins. But all markets suffer from heavy speculation they always have.

OP: What do you think of the MLM comparison to a hypothetical Bitcoin where the value is related to the difficulty of the block where the coins were mined (something like BCP)?

The lack of relationship between mined-coin difficulty and mined-coin value seems like the biggest reason for the "pyramid scheme" accusation (though I guess that's not exactly the same as MLM).  Newcomers to Bitcoin are faced with having to figure out whether this lack of relationship was a) necessary for what is already a very difficult concept to understand, b) an oversight, or c) an intentional, integral part of what amounts to a complicated scam.  What should be obvious is that the soundness of a technological solution to an economic problem shouldn't require one to guess the intentions of the original author-- which, by the way, is why I think Bitcoin is doomed to failure.

I don't know enough about economics to say whether something like BCP would be successful or not, but I think the "pyramid scheme" question would be a nonstarter since early adopters would have no other incentive to draw in newcomers than to see the system succeed.

I think that for all the faggoty adulation that Satoshi receives by his acolytes ("Satoshi is a genius." I've read more than once), Bitcoin is fundamentally flawed and it seems to me that someone so fucking clever should have come up with a way to base the block difficulty on some standard of economic activity and not the absolutely retarded metric of how many people are chomping at the bit for their own blocks.

I've already designed an alternative blockchain myself that addresses this, and many more of the massive stupidity inherent to the Bitcoin system, but I'm certainly not going to share it here, and it's unlikely it will ever be published by myself since I'm just a lowly web developer.

However, it's really rather telling that I was able to solve the economic problems of Bitcoin, and Satoshi wasn't.  Of course, Satoshi never purported to be an economist.  He's a cryptographer, and he solved a very interesting cryptographic problem. However, his proof-of-concept should never have become what is has, until there was a functioning economic underpinning to the creation, distribution, and long term strategy of the currency to begin with.

Ahh now all your posts make sense. You were only laying the foundation for adoption of your special block chain.  I think the difficulty metric the way it is is rather elegant in that it keeps generation close to a constant. Assuming your special chain uses difficulty of x while economic activity is y and if y rises then so to does x economic activity would be much the same as it is now. If the opposite is true then value would decrease as economic activity increases.

So by all these posts that you have made berating bitcoin is just a sly way "in your eyes" of fomenting dissent and getting people to move to your chain. Which to me is funny since all the whining you have done thus far about early adopter advantage and what not.

[Synaptic]

I think that for all the faggoty adulation that Satoshi receives by his acolytes ("Satoshi is a genius." I've read more than once), Bitcoin is fundamentally flawed and it seems to me that someone so fucking clever should have come up with a way to base the block difficulty on some standard of economic activity and not the absolutely retarded metric of how many people are chomping at the bit for their own blocks.

I've already designed an alternative blockchain myself that addresses this, and many more examples of the massive stupidity inherent to the Bitcoin system, but I'm certainly not going to share it here, and it's unlikely it will ever be published by myself since I'm just a lowly web developer.

However, it's really rather telling that I was able to solve the economic problems of Bitcoin, and Satoshi wasn't.  Of course, Satoshi never purported to be an economist.  He's a cryptographer, and he solved a very interesting cryptographic problem. However, his proof-of-concept should never have become what is has, until there was a functioning economic underpinning to the creation, distribution, and long term strategy of the currency to begin with.

I can actually agree with most of this, except for chaining block difficulty with economic activity alone.  It would make more sense to base it off a hybrid of block generation velocity, economic activity, and remaining blocks yet to be found.  IMHO anyway.

Not a bad opinion. But again, isn't is funny how obviously stupid the current block generation and distribution scheme is? And is yet vehemently defended by the retarded speculators who want to make bank off of it?

[Synaptic]

Well since most people compare it to some sort of pyramid scheme then it must be true is your main premise? I would say that most people barely understand the world around them so it must not exist. People generally do not understand bitcoin at first blush and try to jump to the conclusion that it must be a pyramid scheme or some other form of MLM. They barely understand those either.

It could be argued that the entire monetary system is a pyramid scheme because there is incentive to get people to use it. Children are sent to school in order to learn how to be good drones and also how to be good consumers. They are inundated daily with commercial nonsense in order to partake of this monetary system. The only people who benefit from this are big bankers like rothschilds, rockefellers, jp morgan etc.


And then there is bitcoin. A currency/ commodity  that is owned by nobody and everybody at the same time. There are no big start up costs. My start in this cost me nothing as i already had the equipment. Just about anyone who is floating around the internet has the required equipment. Some equipment is more efficient than others though.

Incidentally your main argument is based upon wikipedia which is inherently weak. Anyone can make a wiki page which other less than intelligent people can quote for truth.

I think bitcoin has alot of inherent problems but i also think it could solve many problems facing the living souls on this plane today.

My main premise is that the bitcoin speculation market is a bullshit three (at least) ring circus, and that bitcoin zealots are no better the retards who think they're going to become millionaires working from home selling fucking gumball machines or whatever the fuck else.

Jesus, just go watch some of the bitcoin retards on You Tube as a perfect example. I'm embarrassed BY PROXY watching their videos...

I agree that speculation is bad. I would much rather be able to go to my local store and by stuff with bitcoins. But all markets suffer from heavy speculation they always have.

OP: What do you think of the MLM comparison to a hypothetical Bitcoin where the value is related to the difficulty of the block where the coins were mined (something like BCP)?

The lack of relationship between mined-coin difficulty and mined-coin value seems like the biggest reason for the "pyramid scheme" accusation (though I guess that's not exactly the same as MLM).  Newcomers to Bitcoin are faced with having to figure out whether this lack of relationship was a) necessary for what is already a very difficult concept to understand, b) an oversight, or c) an intentional, integral part of what amounts to a complicated scam.  What should be obvious is that the soundness of a technological solution to an economic problem shouldn't require one to guess the intentions of the original author-- which, by the way, is why I think Bitcoin is doomed to failure.

I don't know enough about economics to say whether something like BCP would be successful or not, but I think the "pyramid scheme" question would be a nonstarter since early adopters would have no other incentive to draw in newcomers than to see the system succeed.

I think that for all the faggoty adulation that Satoshi receives by his acolytes ("Satoshi is a genius." I've read more than once), Bitcoin is fundamentally flawed and it seems to me that someone so fucking clever should have come up with a way to base the block difficulty on some standard of economic activity and not the absolutely retarded metric of how many people are chomping at the bit for their own blocks.

I've already designed an alternative blockchain myself that addresses this, and many more of the massive stupidity inherent to the Bitcoin system, but I'm certainly not going to share it here, and it's unlikely it will ever be published by myself since I'm just a lowly web developer.

However, it's really rather telling that I was able to solve the economic problems of Bitcoin, and Satoshi wasn't.  Of course, Satoshi never purported to be an economist.  He's a cryptographer, and he solved a very interesting cryptographic problem. However, his proof-of-concept should never have become what is has, until there was a functioning economic underpinning to the creation, distribution, and long term strategy of the currency to begin with.

Ahh now all your posts make sense. You were only laying the foundation for adoption of your special block chain.  I think the difficulty metric the way it is is rather elegant in that it keeps generation close to a constant. Assuming your special chain uses difficulty of x while economic activity is y and if y rises then so to does x economic activity would be much the same as it is now. If the opposite is true then value would decrease as economic activity increases.

So by all these posts that you have made berating bitcoin is just a sly way "in your eyes" of fomenting dissent and getting people to move to your chain. Which to me is funny since all the whining you have done thus far about early adopter advantage and what not.

Like I said, my block chain DESIGN will likely never see the light of day.  I make webapps and sites. I will likely never be proficient enough in a statically typed, compiled language to program a fully functioning alternative blockchain to my specifications. So, no.  I'm trying to foment dissent to grab mindshare.

That being said, the whole "generation constant" is unnecessary and imparts no inherent advantages. It's mainly just an empty talking point and simply incidental to having to have SOME kind of functioning distribution scheme.  The fact is that dynamic generation is superior, because when it's pegged to acual USEFUL metrics of the blockchain, it allows for the NATURAL and harmonious expansion of network capacity. In contrast to the mindless "lets just make it a geometric scale with a constant distribution rate, cause that sounds like a good idea."

[patvarilly]

The easiest way to know right now that the current setup of Bitcoin is completely suspect is the fact that these kinds of questions even get brought up.  I mean, just try and imagine this office conversation:

Me: Hey guys, I think I've found a way to make our code a lot more efficient.

Office mate #1: Your changes smell like a Ponzi scheme to me.

Office mate #2: I don't know about that, but if you think about the details, it's just self-evident that it is not a multi-level marketing scheme.

A reasonable system would never have these kinds of questions brought up.