MOH Forum: A Postal-Mail Chain Letter?

A Postal-Mail Chain Letter?

Posted By:
Maegan
in Tampa, FL - USA
Nov 14, 2004

I received this chain letter in my mailbox:

Dear Friend,
Greetings: I am a retired attorney. A few years ago a man came to me with a letter. He asked me to verify the fact that this was legal to do. I told him I would review it and get back to him. When I first red the letter my client brought me, I thought it was some "off-the-wall" idea to make money. A week and a half later we met in my office to discuss the issue. I told him the letter he originally brought me was not 100% legal. My client then asked me to later it to make it perfectly legal. I asked him to make one small change in the letter.

***
It goes on for another 2 pages about how if you send $1 to the 6 names on the list & you will make $800,000.00 in just 3 months. You pay for a list of names to send letters to. I KNOW this is a scam. I just can't figure out how I got it. It came to me at my married name (junk-mail tends to come to my maiden name), & it came to my actual house address. (My driver's license lists my PO Box & if you look me up at the DMV, the physical address is actually my prior residence...haven't had time to change it yet.) The phone & electric aren't registered in my name, they're registered to my husband. (There's not a water bill, we have a well.)

What I wanna know is: How did this come to me, with my correct name at my current physical address??? The 'person' who sent the letter is: Mr. Louis Jordan/1234 Shakespeare Avenue/Apt # 2E/Bronx, NY 10452

Also, a co-worker recently had someone slip this same letter under his door at his apartment building...Anyone hear anything about this??

Category: Scams; Replies: 1759

Comments

Page 8 of 30 pages ‹ First < 6 7 8 9 10 > Last ›
Greg	Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2007 \| 02:07 PM I never said that they worked as advertised...... I never said they were PERFECTLY leagal. What does perfectly legal mean. Is that the opposite of imperfectly legal, or perfectly not legal....or is it the same as legaly not perfect or the backwards version of illegally perfect. Help me out here Flanky......IM PERFECTLY CONFUSED. Now Im starting to sound like you and your partner.
Charybdis in Hell Member	Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2007 \| 02:49 PM You're arguing against us, Greg. This <i>should</i> mean you have a point in favor of chain letters. What is that point? Why do you think chain letters are acceptable? Once again, it's completely irrelevant what else might be wrong in the world, the question is 'Why do you think a system to scam people out of their money is okay?' It sounds very much like you're simply flame-bait, but I'm trying to give you the benefit of the doubt.
Greg	Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2007 \| 05:20 PM What in the world is flame-bait????
Cranky Media Guy	Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2007 \| 07:07 PM Greg said: "Jokers....this is a 6 dollar game." So people get involved in a chain letter so they can walk away with SIX DOLLARS? No, they put six dollars (or whatever the requested amount is) because they believe they will come out with HUNDREDS or THOUSANDS of dollars. Yes, each participant may only "invest" a few dollars but as I made perfectly clear, there are many participants, which makes the stakes fairly high. "I don't even know why there would be much available info on chain letters." So, are you saying all those books about scams (including chain letters) in all those libraries around the country don't exist or are you saying you don't know WHY they exist. Either way, it's irrelevant. They DO exist, a fact you could easily determine for yourself via a simple visit to any decent-sized library. "They are just fun games to try to turn your 6 bucks into 60 or 600 or whatever." You say "game." The LAW says "scam." "Did you graduate from Highschool?" Irrelevant. "Are you a Democrat?" Irrelevant. "Did you ever play cards for small change as a kid?" Irrelevant. You truly can't understand that FACTS are FACTS even if they contradict what you desperately want to believe, can you? I take it you've completely abandoned claiming that chain letters are legal, right? Now it's down to "So what if they're illegal? Who cares, so long as I come out ahead." Why did you pretend to think they were legal for months?
Charybdis in Hell Member	Posted: Wed Nov 28, 2007 \| 08:14 AM Once again Greg opts not to answer a direct question.
Cranky Media Guy	Posted: Wed Nov 28, 2007 \| 01:51 PM "Once again Greg opts not to answer a direct question." Only a Democrat would say that.
Lynn	Posted: Thu Nov 29, 2007 \| 10:06 AM Here are my thoughts... There are about 200 million people in the USA alone, give or take. If I mail this letter to 200 of them, and only 10 respond, I'll still get 10 dollars and have 10 people on my mailing list. Credit card companies, banks, schools, even the government makes mailing lists, so that much is okay. Then, even just in the second step, those 10 send to 200 and each recieve 10 responses... that's 200 for me, and I've cleared $210 from an initial investment of 100 or so... Better than a money market or alot of stocks. And that's only in the second step. And about "where's the money come from, only the people who start the letter come out ahead" who's to say that people would only participate once? Also, there are always new people being born in this country, thus there is a whole new generation of teens, and young adults that would be recieving a letter for the first time. How are the people who started the letter the only ones who make anything? They drop off the list after SIX circulations. Also, who are you to say that it is illegal... No disrespect, but are you a lawyer or a postmaster? I have read the referenced postal code in US law, and it does state that chain letters are illegal, however it also states that you have to exchange a product OR SERVICE for money... Adding someone to your mailing list, provided that you actually do so and file the names of the responses you recieve IS a service. Now, if one were to just take the dollar and throw away the rest, then there's no actual exchange taking place and is another story. Just my thoughts.
Charybdis in Hell Member	Posted: Thu Nov 29, 2007 \| 01:01 PM <i>Credit card companies, banks, schools, even the government makes mailing lists, so that much is okay.</i> Right up until the part where you asked them to send you money. That's the illegal part, and that's the part that isn't okay. And has been pointed out, Lynn, even if every person in the world played the game over and over again, nobody is making money off of it. Nobody. All you're doing is shuffling money around. Ask yourself this - if you made your $210, and you then received 200 chain letters asking you to send each originator $1, would <i>you</i> do it? Wouldn't you keep your money instead? You're right, we're not lawyers or postmasters. That's why we've encouraged people over and over again to <b>ASK A LAWYER OR YOUR LOCAL POSTMASTER IF YOU'RE IN DOUBT!</b> If you had read the postal code further you would also have seen where it stated that just because it presents itself as a mailing doesn't mean it's not illegal. The service you're 'providing' is to show other people how to commit an illegal act.
Charybdis in Hell Member	Posted: Thu Nov 29, 2007 \| 01:03 PM This would be the part where Greg, in lieu of an actual argument, insults Cranky and me. I also expect some vague rambling about lotteries and our political persuasion. He'll also probably reiterate that he's not the one trying this, yet he won't actually tell us what his point is beyond being obnoxious.
Cranky Media Guy	Posted: Thu Nov 29, 2007 \| 01:40 PM Lynn said: "I have read the referenced postal code in US law, and it does state that chain letters are illegal, however it also states that you have to exchange a product OR SERVICE for money..." Please show us the part of the law which says this.
Charybdis in Hell Member	Posted: Thu Nov 29, 2007 \| 03:45 PM Cranky, you have posted. I must now make some mildly offensive comments about your marital status as well as question your political leanings. For good measure I will point out that illegal acts are comitted by other people. I will also make some other comments that sound offensive, but are too incoherent to really be sure of. Lastly I will call you by a name that rhymes with yours, but isn't the same. I will <i>not</i> answer any questions or explain myself.
Cranky Media Guy	Posted: Fri Nov 30, 2007 \| 12:38 AM Chary/Greg, you forgot about implying that I'm interested in child pornography. 'Cause if THAT doesn't prove that chain letters are legal and work as advertised, I don't know what could!
Greg	Posted: Fri Nov 30, 2007 \| 08:04 AM Cranky...in all seriousness now, I NEVER implied that. So don't accuse me of saying that about you. And I never would say that about anyone unless it was absolutely true. I defended you on that one. Read back and you will see. As for the insults....isn't that what this is all about. This isn't Larry King, this is more like Jerry Springer. Can't you guys have any fun with this thing. Instead you lay down and cry like babies because you think you are being insulted.
Charybdis in Hell Member	Posted: Fri Nov 30, 2007 \| 09:19 AM Greg still hasn't answered my direct question. Odd, that.
Greg	Posted: Fri Nov 30, 2007 \| 05:07 PM :) :( 😊 :( 😊 :(
Greg	Posted: Fri Nov 30, 2007 \| 05:10 PM I asked you what flaim-bait was and you never answered me. You both are starting to make me sick in the stomach.
Lynn	Posted: Fri Nov 30, 2007 \| 06:48 PM It's okay Greg, I think they just like to have their lives consist of making arguments with strangers online over unimportant issues. I have to wonder why they even care about the chain letter thing, (which is what this thread is actually about, instead of people insulting anything anyone other than them say...) if they haven't even done it and have no legal capacity to even be involved with the issue in the first place. Strange, that. Lynn
Cranky Media Guy	Posted: Sat Dec 01, 2007 \| 12:45 AM Lynn said: "I have to wonder why they even care about the chain letter thing, (which is what this thread is actually about, instead of people insulting anything anyone other than them say...) if they haven't even done it and have no legal capacity to even be involved with the issue in the first place. Strange, that." What does "legal capacity" mean? As I've explained several times now, my posting here is not really about the few of you who keep trying, sans logic, to defend chain letters. It's for the benefit of someone who may be considering participating in a chain letter and who is looking for information on the subject. You'll notice that the only people who ever provide any actual FACTS about chain letters on this thread are Chary and me. Everyone else is just basically pulling nonsense out of their ass. All the evidence that any rational person could need to realize that chain letters are ILLEGAL and DON'T WORK is contained in this thread. There are links to the exact law(s) that say clearly that they are illegal and simple explanations of why they don't and can't work. Those of you who say that they are legal and pay off for all participants are engaging in irrational wishful thinking.
Lynn	Posted: Sat Dec 01, 2007 \| 01:31 AM Dear CMG... Ah, since apparently I'm so "irrational" and illogical (when you are the one who doesn't even know what legal capacity means... and by the way, feel free to SEARCH GOOGLE) all I have further to say to you specifically is this, mon chere: Your mother was a hamster and your father smelled of elderberries. Good day to you sir.
Cranky Media Guy Member	Posted: Sat Dec 01, 2007 \| 01:56 PM Lynn said: "Ah, since apparently I'm so "irrational" and illogical (when you are the one who doesn't even know what legal capacity means... and by the way, feel free to SEARCH GOOGLE)..." So I go to Google and enter the search term "legal capacity." The first "hit" is for wikipedia which says: "The capacity of both natural and artificial persons determines whether they may make binding amendments to their rights, duties and obligations, such as getting married or merging, entering into contracts, making gifts, or writing a valid will. Capacity is an aspect of status and both are defined by a person's personal law..." And that makes sense in the context of what you said before how exactly? We're getting off topic here again, I can see. Let's cut to the chase. The bottom line is that to defend chain letters, you have to completely ignore the law and the fact that they DO NOT and CANNOT work as advertised. That IS irrational and illogical.
Lynn	Posted: Sat Dec 01, 2007 \| 02:49 PM Wow. I thought you knew how to perform an internet search? First of all, Wikipedia is not a credible source always as it can be edited by anyone... also, since you only visited the first site, you didn't research very well. In the link for that article, it is cited as being for CAPACITY, and not LEGAL CAPACITY inclusively. The actual definition of legal capacity is thus: " a person's capability and power under law to engage in a particular undertaking or transaction or to maintain a particular status or relationship with another " which would be from webster's dictionary. This definition is also supported by my suggested Google search in nearly every link OTHER than the ONLY one you clicked on. Way to try and support your argument by merely finding one thing to refute mine other than doing research to completely disprove it. Oh, and I find it funny that all you keep repeating about the issue of chain letters is "Talk to a lawyer or the postal authorities"... You yourself never provided any facts with respect to the issue... and at least one earlier poster said that they DID go to their lawyer who said it WAS in fact legal, and you went on to state that "oh the lawyer must be wrong" That's a great way to make yourself credible! Have you any references to anyone getting arrested for a chain letter, or being convicted? If the USPS has such as "high rate of conviction" (which by the way, last time I checked, the USPS wasn't a court in itself, and doesn't have the right to "convict" anyone) why haven't you referenced where you got this information? Or are YOU the one pulling things out of your proverbial ass? What evidence do you have again that they "do not and can not work as advertised?" Wouldn't people posting on here that it worked for them be evidence to the contrary? Especially with this chain letter being as old as you claim (and it probably is quite old) wouldn't the fact that some people are still making money off of it be proof that more than the originators make money and that it does indeed work? Also, as for the legality of the issue, we are not in disagreement that the majority of chain letters are in fact, illegal. However, the one mentioned in the original post is slightly different. I ask you to reread the US Postal Code more thoroughly and take note that it does say they are illegal with the following EXCEPTIONS... then if you still don't understand, I will cite the specific line and explain it to you further... Because as long as a person ACTUALLY makes the mailing list and adds every single person who responds onto it, that is a SERVICE actually being performed. Also, no one is "making" the people who recieve the letter send anyone money, it's a choice. The law is open to interpretation on the issue of service, it doesn't say anything about mailing lists not counting. Feel free to notify me if they revise the code to make your argument valid.
Greg	Posted: Sat Dec 01, 2007 \| 07:25 PM TOUCHE LYNN I'm Speechless
Greg	Posted: Sat Dec 01, 2007 \| 07:29 PM Lynn, I just read your input again and all can say......again, is TOUCHE!!! (And I've never used that word before in my life.)
Wendy	Posted: Sat Dec 01, 2007 \| 10:33 PM Yeah I got one of the letters in the mail a couple of months ago, I have just been debating whether or not to even attempt this. It just seems to good to be true. Especially since I recieved a package from UPS about a month ago with $2,500 in fraudulent traveler's checks, luckily I used my head for something other than a hat rack and called my bank for advise as to whether or not to cash them. They advised me that there has been several scams that could cause innocent people to get into trouble, I was told to let my local law inforcement deal with it. I really don't feel it is wise to participate in any mail or computer scams that are out there now. If it seems too good to be true it probally is.
Cranky Media Guy Member	Posted: Sun Dec 02, 2007 \| 12:21 AM Lynn said:
Cranky Media Guy Member	Posted: Sun Dec 02, 2007 \| 12:22 AM
Cranky Media Guy Member	Posted: Sun Dec 02, 2007 \| 12:34 AM From the U.S. Postal Service's website (again): "There's at least one problem with chain letters. They're illegal if they request money or other items of value and promise a substantial return to the participants. Chain letters are a form of gambling, and sending them through the mail (or delivering them in person or by computer, but mailing money to participate) violates Title 18, United States Code, Section 1302, the Postal Lottery Statute. (Chain letters that ask for items of minor value, like picture postcards or recipes, may be mailed, since such items are not things of value within the meaning of the law.) "Regardless of what technology is used to advance the scheme, if the mail is used at any step along the way, it is still illegal. "Chain letters don't work because the promise that all participants in a chain letter will be winners is mathematically impossible. "Do not be fooled if the chain letter is used to sell inexpensive reports on credit, mail order sales, MAILING LISTS, or other topics. The primary purpose is to take your money, not to sell information. "Selling" a product does not ensure legality." So, the U.S. Postal Service ("Post Office") says that chain letters are ILLEGAL and DON'T WORK. In simple English, no less. It even covers the whole "mailing list" thing. Please don't go into a long harangue about how LEGAL mailing lists exist. No one disputes that. We're talking here about chain letters which try to masquerade as legitimate mailing lists. I can't wait to hear an explanation of how the Postal Service doesn't know the meaning of its own laws. Lynn, I really don't care if you respond to any of the stuff I've said up to this point. I would, however, like you to tell us all if you have ever operated a chain letter or participated in one in the past or are doing so currently, however. Call me curious, I guess.
Cranky Media Guy Member	Posted: Sun Dec 02, 2007 \| 12:46 AM As for the conviction rate of U.S. postal inspectors: http://www.phrack.org/issues.html?issue=27&id=9#article: Conviction Rate ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The Inspection Service maintains a consistently high conviction rate each year of approximately 98% of cases brought to trial, a rate not exceeded by any other federal law enforcement agency. http://www.allbusiness.com/finance-insurance/3998383-1.html: In law enforcement circles, however, the U.S. Postal Service is known for fielding a law enforcement unit known for its professionalism and being competent, fiercely proud and hard-nosed. All of its inspectors are trained at a police academy and are authorized to carry a weapon (and in interviews with this writer, most were wearing a holstered sidearm). Their pre-dawn arrests at 6 a.m. are legendary and, says Inspector John Feiter, the agency boasts a 94 percent conviction rate. http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0110/15/bn.11.html: ESPOSITO: Well, we are working together with the FBI. But the postal inspection service has a long, proud and successful tradition of protecting the American public from those criminals who would use the U.S. mails to either defraud or otherwise endanger the American public. We have a 98 percent conviction rate on all of our cases that go to trial, so we are very confident we'll be able to handle this matter. ================== Is that enough for you or would you like more? 94% to 98% is pretty high, wouldn't you agree? By the way, my Google search term was "conviction rate of postal inspectors" oddly enough.
Lynn	Posted: Sun Dec 02, 2007 \| 01:57 PM Is that enough for you or would you like more? 94% to 98% is pretty high, wouldn't you agree? By the way, my Google search term was "conviction rate of postal inspectors" oddly enough. Funny, you mentioned that they have a high rate of conviction earlier, and yet just now google searched it? Perhaps you did so earlier as well, so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. However, it is ironic that you apparently went to THREE sites when you searched for your topic. What's the matter, did the MOST POPULAR site not prove your point for ya? Oh, and by the way, just because an internet search is the most POPULAR hardly makes it the most CORRECT. As for whether or not I've ever done one, I find my personal actions to be irrelevant to the issue. I have not participated YET, however based on our conversation I'm more inclined than ever to give it a shot. I bet you work for the sales division of the USPS, don't you Swanky? Oh, and I DID talk to my lawyer. He said it's a touchy issue, but like most things relating to law (like the loose interpretation of religious freedom that requires most Christian references being removed from EVERYTHING... another issue) it is open to interpretation. He did inform me that you would have to be VERY careful and make sure to document everything about the people requesting your service. He also said another way, would be to "advertise a service/item" and change the service from a mailing list to sending something in return for the dollar. This would require a SASE with the dollar, and then send each person who participates an advertisement, drawing, etc. Then you're exchanging a more tangible good for the money. Oh, and FYI, his name is Bobby Lancaster, and I'd appreciate it if you don't call me a liar as I am not... That's the one thing you could do to piss me off 😊
Charybdis in Hell Member	Posted: Mon Dec 03, 2007 \| 02:42 PM flame bait: n. [common] A posting intended to trigger a flame war, or one that invites flames in reply. See also troll. flame war: n. [common] (var.: flamewar) An acrimonious dispute, especially when conducted on a public electronic forum such as Usenet. Since you're either unwilling or unable to address just why you're on here insulting us I have no reason to believe this isn't what you are doing, Greg.
busta	Posted: Thu Dec 06, 2007 \| 11:58 PM Hello all, After reading most of this, it's quite a rousing but useless roundabout going on here. I've received several of these letters, and plan on trying to manufacture (sp) a legal version, if possible. Hope precedes victory, dispair precedes failure, after all... Cranky, you're an absolutist, a troll, a loser and a fool, and a drain on this otherwise intelligent and informing forum. Greg, don't encourage people like him. More importantly, right on to the peeps gaining something from this! Money is invented all the time by the feds, (cause of inflation), and this thing could circle the globe indefinitely if allowed to do so, we'd all pay off our debts with earnings, and then pay back the system with new money generated, poof from federal coffers...this is how banks work, they earn money off of circulating money, they generate nothing. So there goes the impossible argument... As for the illegal argument, there is no law if you're not caught, and laws continuously change anyway. Again, not really a solid argument... If you're screwing someone, it's for 6 bucks, not exactly a sin worthy of hell, maybe a few minutes in purgatory... Maybe I'll wander back here one day and let you all in my success or failure regarding this, otherwise, peace to the hopeful, and to the nay sayers, go f*ck yourself!
Charybdis in Hell Member	Posted: Fri Dec 07, 2007 \| 09:48 AM Wow, that was so totally uninformed it's almost not even funny. So Busta, if the feds printing money causes inflation, just what do you think your miracle money solution is going to do? :lol: You're not screwing one person out of 6 bucks. 6 bucks hardly makes it worth the effort. In order to pay off my debts I'd have to screw over 3000 people out of 6 bucks each. That's just my debts. Now, let's pay off the debts of everyone in the US. Let's see, 300 million people, I'll roughly guesstimate each person on average has my debt load. Ah, 900,000,000,000 people have to be scammed out of 6 bucks each. That should be easy to accomplish. Of course we're short about 894,000,000,000 of them, but we can quickly make that up. Get an education, Busta. If this were so easy and fullproof then how come it isn't already working? How come all of our debts haven't been paid off yet? You think you're the first person to ever 'figure it out'?
jrod	Posted: Fri Dec 07, 2007 \| 06:59 PM You have got to be kidding me busta. You thinks banks make money by circulating it? ddduuuhhh They "create" money by getting as many people to deposit as much as they can while paying as little deposit interest as possible. Then they loan that money as a auto/equity/mortgage or some other type of loan at a much higher interest rate. This is called a "spread" but this is not where banks make the big profits. They are able to create more wealth by repeating this process over and over sometimes 8 to 10 times with the same money,(not new money printed and given to them by the feds, idiot)as money after being transfered on the exchange or purchase just ends back up in a bank. This works, as there is proof, (Check your banks numbers on the nyse). Chain letters do not work, they do not create money,(interest) they just move it around and if you were to execute one perfectly and everyone participated you would eventually end up with a mailbox full of chain letters asking for 6 bucks and no more dollars to send out because yours had been exhausted when every man woman and child on earth got on board. Why can't you people just realize there is no get rich quick scheme out there and listen to cranky and chary. Go to a library and check out a book on ponzi schemes. It will enlighten you and you just might realize you were wrong on this whole chain letter thing. Now if we could just get out of the legal government ponzi scheme called social security I could "grow" all my money.
Cranky Media Guy Member	Posted: Sat Dec 08, 2007 \| 10:43 PM busta said: "I've received several of these letters, and plan on trying to manufacture (sp) a legal version, if possible." Good luck with that, busta. Here's a clue for you: it ain't gonna happen. If you use your chain to exchange anything of value, like money, it'll be illegal. "Cranky, you're an absolutist, a troll, a loser and a fool, and a drain on this otherwise intelligent and informing forum." Thanks for reminding me that ad hominem insults are a substitute for supplying facts to support your position. I forgot that. "Greg, don't encourage people like him." I wasn't aware that Greg was "encouraging" me. I could have sworn that he was ARGUING with me, albeit, like you, sans facts. "As for the illegal argument, there is no law if you're not caught, and laws continuously change anyway." Wow, just wow. So you honestly believe it isn't against the law if you don't get caught? PLEASE tell me you don't have children. I would pay to get you a vasectomy so that you don't pollute the mind of a child with nonsense like that. Promise us all that, if you ever do get caught breaking the law, that you will use this "logic" as your defense. I'm sure prosecutors can use a good laugh. More importantly, right on to the peeps gaining something from this!
Cranky Media Guy Member	Posted: Tue Dec 11, 2007 \| 02:16 AM Just in case you thought that the Postal Inspection service didn't exist or that they don't prosecute people for postal infractions: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071208/ap_on_fe_st/odd_greeting_card_scheme No, I'm NOT claiming that this proves that you'll absolutely get caught if you operate or participate in a chain letter. It just shows that these guys ARE on the job.
Greg	Posted: Tue Dec 11, 2007 \| 09:14 AM Janky, Now I know you are Lost In Space.... This guy was stealing greeting cards with money in them. I wonder if they prosecuted the people that sent the money in the greeting cards. Hardy Hardy Har!!! You should be ashamed of yourself for even associating that link with this debate.
Charybdis in Hell Member	Posted: Tue Dec 11, 2007 \| 01:15 PM Once again Greg fails to answer my direct question, choosing instead to make a nonsensical attack on Cranky. Once again Greg is simply reinforcing the impression that he's a troll.
Lynn	Posted: Tue Dec 11, 2007 \| 02:36 PM Once again, Chary ALSO provides a non-useful post doing nothing but accusing Greg of not answering a question. Hm, maybe you should reask the question? And you didn't know the meaning of flame-bait yourself and had to look it up in the dictionary? Tsk tsk tsk... By the way, is there a particular REASON you're in hell?
Cranky Media Guy	Posted: Tue Dec 11, 2007 \| 04:37 PM Oh, but Greg, I BELIEVE that they are equivalent and as I learned from you, if you BELIEVE something, it just IS. You know, like how you think that 2+2=5 if you BELIEVE it is. You're not going to start being a member of the reality-based community on us now, are you?
Greg	Posted: Tue Dec 11, 2007 \| 05:46 PM How can they possibly be equivalent? The dude was stealing mail. Or was he scamming those greeting cards out of the money they contained?
Cranky Media Guy	Posted: Tue Dec 11, 2007 \| 11:50 PM I BELIEVE they are equivalent, Greg, and that's all the proof you need.
Cranky Media Guy	Posted: Tue Dec 11, 2007 \| 11:50 PM You're not a DEMOCRAT, are you?
Lynn	Posted: Tue Dec 11, 2007 \| 11:54 PM WOW, you are DUMB Cranky. Seriously. If you believe that God doesn't exist, does that get you out of going to hell with Chary? I don't BELIEVE so.
Charybdis in Hell Member	Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2007 \| 10:16 AM Lynn, what gave you the impression that I had to look up 'flame-bait' in the dictionary because I didn't know the definition? My location is a joke. Get over it. This discussion is getting way off topic. Either stick to the topic at hand or your comments will be deleted. Personal attacks and random postings are not allowed. Do you have something to support your belief that chain-letters are legal and valid? Something other and questioning our political/religious leanings?
Cranky Media Guy	Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2007 \| 01:45 PM Lynn, you seem to have totally missed my point. If you go back and look, you'll see that, on several occasions, I've said that things are what they are, regardless of your personal belief. I was referring to Greg and others saying that they BELIEVE that chain letters are legal, despite all evidence to the contrary. In other words, my recent comment was SATIRICAL.
J.A.	Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2007 \| 11:27 AM I received a letter last week and I came here looking for information. I never received one of these letters before and I knew nothing about them. I did read practically every post and I think there are a lot of repetitive things on here, but I just wanted to state my opinion about some things. I consider myself a pretty ethical person. I think I have good morals. I tend to follow rules pretty well with the exception of speeding a tad over the limit. I can now say that I definitely would never participate in a scheme like this. Yes, I could use the money. Yes, it would be incredible. But I still would not do it. First, it's pretty clear to me that the whole operation is illegal. Maybe if Cranky had never attached links, then it could be questionable. But the link specifically says usps.com in the address. I even went straight to the usps website and typed in chain letters on the link and it took me there. It says chain letters are illegal, even if a mailing list is included. And for those people that still insist that it is not a chain letter - if there's a list of names and you take off the top name and put yours on the bottom - that is precisely a chain letter. It's a chain of names. Second, as far as all the comparisons between this and lotteries or casinos... well when you go to Vegas and gamble at casinos or play the lottery, it is always known that you might not win. There are always odds that tell you what % would win. You know there is that chance. Well, the difference is that the letter I recevied is guaranteeing that if I follow the steps listed, I will get the amount of money listed. That is what's wrong with this to me. The person in NC who sent it to me, is promising that if I do what he did I will get all this money. All I know is that if I sent these out and did not make the money that it said, I'd be pretty pissed since I followed the rules exactly. I also wanted to point out something that someone wrote several months back. Nicole had said that she called the people on her list and one woman told her that she has been receiving money. Well, I'm not saying that the woman lied, but what would make anyone think that she was telling the truth? If I sent letters out and didn't receive much money, but someone later down the list got in touch with me and asked if I was receiving anything - I would certainly lie and say I did, that way she would send me money and continue the chain. (that is, if I was stupid enough to do this) I'm not trying to put anybody down, but in my opinion the people who do these scams have little care and respect for other people around them. There is a chance you could scam other people out of their money and there's a chance you could get scammed. I personally would feel bad if I made tons of money, knowing full well that I took other people's hard earned money. The ones who get involved know full well the way these things work and that not everyone comes out ahead. All they care about is themselves and they don't care if they screw others. That is what is wrong with this world. There are way too many people that are all about "me, me, me." Continued...
J.A.	Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2007 \| 11:27 AM ... continued Another good point was made earlier about filing taxes. I am not an expert on these things and I will never claim to be, but don't you have to pay taxes on all income? I know you have to pay taxes on lottery winnings and 401K cash-outs. I also thought that if you win the lottery and you give some to someone as a gift, you don't pay tax on that. But in this case, if the government found out you had all this money, I would think you would have to prove where you got it from. I hardly believe that if you fake-cried and said you were all broken up because your Grandma just died and she left you all this money, that they would pat you on the back and let it go. So what are these people are going to do about taxes if they make this money? Those who do this, I hope the IRS finds out that you have this money and I hope you get fined for not filing. I do find it funny that there are people on here who admit to doing this. The government can track IP addresses and find you. And even if you don't get arrested for it, maybe you'll get fined. Who's to say that I am not tracking your IP addresses right now? There are so many people who use the Internet and pretend they are someone else. There are police who pretend to be young children to catch child predators. There are also those who track music sharing sites to catch people who don't pay for downloading music. In fact, my friend's younger brother got caught doing that. Of course his mother had to pay the fine, but he got caught and he had thousands of songs that he didn't get in a legit manner. I'm just saying that the evidence has been brought forward that proves these activities are illegal. If you still do it, I hope you get caught. I hope you get fined a lot of money. I personally believe that when you do good things, good things will come to you. And I believe that when you do bad things, those people will get what's coming to them. Come on people, work for your money. Invest it legally. Show a little more care and concern for people in the world. Keep your morals intact and do what's right.
Raymond J.	Posted: Fri Dec 21, 2007 \| 11:59 AM I hate working. It sucks. I received one of these letters, and wanted so much to believe all my dreams would come true and I could stop slaving away for "the man". However, I do have what some people refer to as a "rational" mind, and I decided to research. First of all I noticed that the "nay-sayers" on this thread were the only ones making any sense (typical in the real world). None of the people who are in favor of this scam ever provided concrete evidence that it was legal and that they were making money. The few that claimed it worked only appeared once or twice and grammatically revealed themselves as scammers. Ever received one of those e-mails from Nigeria telling you that they have millions of dollars just waiting for you? The writing styles are identical. Point is, not one person clearly and consistently stated that they were legally making money off this. I wonder why? As for making outrageous claims about evolution, science, and other facts not being accurate; it is asinine and furthermore has nothing to do with the topic.
nathan	Posted: Fri Dec 21, 2007 \| 09:35 PM The reason why you are not seeing the results from posters who said they sent letters and would post their results is because they are being deleted by the monitor of the forum. That person stated they would delete the posts that would convince people to do it themselves. Strange that they didn't post at all stating that they lost their money either??? Don't waste your time with this forum and cranky's 1000 word rants. Why read an edited thread?
Raymond J.	Posted: Fri Dec 21, 2007 \| 09:55 PM I can definately see where you're coming from Nathan. I don't want to have a completely closed mind here. But clear this up for me; are you saying that people have posted numerous responses about their successes that have been deleted? Do you know this for a fact? Have you responded to one of these letters? I am not being sarcastic, and I am certainly not trying to incriminate anyone. I just want some concrete testimonials.
Cranky Media Guy	Posted: Sat Dec 22, 2007 \| 12:16 AM J.A. and Raymond, you both make excellent points. I've said numerous times that the other skeptics here and I are the only ones who ever provide any actual PROOF of what we say. The chain letter defenders keep reiterating what they want to believe, but can't back it up with FACT. Nathan, can you show us all where the "monitor" of this thread has said he/she would delete any postings which attempt to convince people to participate in a chain letter. If such a posting exists, it should be an easy matter for you to copy and paste it for us all to see. Please put up or shut up.
nick24lon	Posted: Sat Dec 22, 2007 \| 05:33 PM I got one of these letters in the mail 6 months ago. I wanted to try it so badly but my mother told advised me not to do it. I had gotten so far in debt with my student loans that you can say I needed a way out. So a month after I got this letter, I decidd to do it. I spent about 100.00 dollars for stamps, mailing lists and envelopes. I couldn't believe that in 3 weeks I started to see results back to back. So naturally, I didn't want to end a good thing, I got myself a p.o. box ordered more mailing list and sent them off again. I have been doing this for the past 5 months. I earned a total of 6,700.00. I am on a roll and I won't stop. I do not think that this is illegal but if it is then it's not my fault I fell for a scam. I can't go to jail for being a victim. I am making a hell of alot of money and my student loans will soon all be paid for. I'm not saying that you should do this, hell you are the captain of your own ship. I am simply saying that it worked for me and I will continue to do this until all of my loans are paid for. this has truly been a blessing. Besides just because regular people such as yourselves say it's illegal does not make it illegal. Why should I believe any of you anyway, from my understanding, 99% of you said that it does not work. I am proof that it does work. I have done my research and until some sort of Federal authority comes to my door and tells me to stop what I am doing because it is illegal, I am going to continue to do this because I am in the clear. Now if I continue to do this after I have been warned By some sort of Federal Authority then I can go to jail.
Raymond J.	Posted: Sat Dec 22, 2007 \| 08:08 PM Once again; I don't mean to disrespect anyone, but all these positive posts seem fishy. It's like I said, one person tends to show up out of nowhere claiming these things work, and disappear off the map. They also tend to be very choppy sounding with lots of misspellings. Leading me to beleive they are spam. If I am wrong, than I apologize to these people, but that's how it appears to me.
Cranky Media Guy Member	Posted: Sun Dec 23, 2007 \| 12:27 AM nick24lon said: "I do not think that this is illegal but if it is then it's not my fault I fell for a scam. I can't go to jail for being a victim." Nick, are you honestly saying you've never heard the saying, "Ignorance of the law is no excuse"? Even if that was the case, how do you see yourself as a "victim" in this? Logically, you are the victimizer. After all, you're the one taking money from other people. If claiming ignorance of the law meant that you went scot-free, how could there ever be any successful prosecutions? After all, EVERYONE would use that as their defense. If we assume that your story is true (there's no particular reason to make that assumption but let's go with it for the time being), you have taken money from other people who will ultimately lose everything they put into the chain. There is NO source of profit in a chain letter other than from the participants. "Besides just because regular people such as yourselves say it's illegal does not make it illegal." It isn't what "regular people" say that matters; it's what the LAW says and the law has been linked to several times on this thread. The U.S. Postal Service ("Post Office") says chain letters are illegal and that means they ARE. "I have done my research and until some sort of Federal authority comes to my door and tells me to stop what I am doing because it is illegal, I am going to continue to do this because I am in the clear." I'd LOVE to know what kind of "research" you've done, since, as I just said, the actual LAW outlining the illegality of chain letters has been cited here more than once. You are NOT "in the clear," no matter what you want to tell yourself. "Now if I continue to do this after I have been warned By some sort of Federal Authority then I can go to jail." Uh, what fantasy world do you live in where the FBI and/or the Postal Inspection Service calls you up to politely inform you that what you are doing is illegal? If you are unfortunate enough to attract their attention, the only "notice" you will receive is when they show up at your door with a warrant. Time to grow up and live in the Real World, son.
Cranky Media Guy Member	Posted: Sun Dec 23, 2007 \| 12:28 AM Raymond J. said: "It's like I said, one person tends to show up out of nowhere claiming these things work, and disappear off the map." I think you're on to something there, Raymond. They're "drive-by apologists."
Raymond J.	Posted: Sun Dec 23, 2007 \| 03:57 PM Cranky, I doubt you're on myspace, but it kind of reminds me of all these friend requests I get from these hot chicks. They all make it seem like they're interested in you, but it's really some porn site trying to get you to join. It always amazes me how many guys fall for this. They so want to beleive that there are just tons of smokin babes out there who actually have to use the internet to get laid.
Cranky Media Guy	Posted: Mon Dec 24, 2007 \| 01:43 AM That happens on YouTube, too, Raymond. So many girls with only one name!
Charybdis in Hell Member	Posted: Wed Dec 26, 2007 \| 09:40 AM But... but... I thought Anastasia really loved me! I suspect what Nathan, our drive-by accuser, was talking about was my post a while back about not allowing comments that include links to sites advocating illegal activity and the like. I can't remember exactly what I said, and I'm too lazy to look it up, but if I can recall it was in reference to the talk about sites compiling mailing lists for chain letters. Providing the tools to commit illegal acts is itself illegal in most cases, and this site wants no part to that. It's the same with all illegal activities, not just chain letters. The only posts I have deleted/banned were the ones from that guy a month or so ago who just kept popping in and spouting nonsense that had nothing to do with anything. Otherwise I have not moderated this thread, I've specifically asked another mod to look at this one from time to time as I don't like moderating threads I participate in. At least when the posts aren't obvious trash/spam posts.
Tracy Giblin	Posted: Tue Jan 01, 2008 \| 04:18 PM My two cents: I got two of these letters in the fall 2007. I thought: Ok, The guy said he received $800,000 ... bla bla bla. Sounded good. But since I am an estimator by profession, I was inclined to do some quick math. I just couldn't help it. Nobody has commented on this yet that I can see, but what I discovered really surprised me, and really was the first give-away that the wildish claims of massive amounts of cash is pure rubbish. Listen: Has anybody here actually thought about just how much work would be involved in opening sorting, and handeling 800,000 one-dollar bills and the associated trash? Really. Or even 500,000? Can you imagine for a minute? Now I'm not talking about the lucky few who recieve $1,500 to $5,000 etc. (Where are you anyway?, You seen to be a rare sight in this forum) Good for you. No, Im talking about the wild claims of hundreds of thousands. Yeah. 800,000 one dollar bills. It's all Rubish. Here's why... Walk with me...Say you can open, dispense and dispose of say 10 envelopes a minute. Remember, this is a "sustained rate", including all handeling, so this figure is probably quite good. Thats 4,800 for an 8-hour day. On day two you do it again. Day three, day four, day five, day six. 8-hours a day. By now you obviously have quit your job or are going to be "sick" for a long time. Speaking of sick, at this point you're probably completely wiped out and bored to-death with envelopes. You diserve a break. You take day seven Off. Next week, same stuff all over again. Week after that -same, By now your arms and hands are numb. You're sick of opening envelopes. You have filled 20 trash bags with envelopes. At the end of week four you have opened 115,200. That's a whole month!! And congratualtions, you have SEVEN more months of this to go!! Thats 8 months of opening envelopes. Hopefully you have purchased a money counter (and bundler too), because you don't have time to count all the bills.Yeah right. In your dreams. We're not done. If you quite your job, you still have to pay your bills and write checks -no? So you have to make bank deposits -no. Anything over $10,000 gets reported. So to avoid DIA, IRS or UPS knowlege your deposits are limited to $10,000. Well, congratulations again. That's going to take EIGHTY freaking trips to the bank! At one-hour each thats 80 hours, which subtracts from your envelope opening time. So now you have to spend an additional two-weeks opening envelopes!! By the way, What kind of trash pick-up service do you have? I'm not saying it's impossible, just not credible. Anybody that had that much success would say, on round three, "screw this 1-dollar crap". If this many folks are willing to send $1, I'll make out just fine figuring only 10% of the return rate sing $5 bills! I mean nobody that made $800,000 that way, would be so desparate for more money, as to go through all that $1 bill nonsense again!!! Ya Think!
Cranky Media Guy	Posted: Wed Jan 02, 2008 \| 12:23 AM Tracy Giblin, someone actually did say some similar stuff a while back, but there's nothing wrong with reinforcing the irrationality behind believing in chain letters. You are, of course, correct in your analysis. I guess it's fortunate that chain letters don't work, huh? Step back! We have to make room for the apologists to come forward with their absurd rationalizations of how this all allegedly "works."
Page 8 of 30 pages ‹ First < 6 7 8 9 10 > Last ›

Note: This thread is located in the Old Forum of the Museum of Hoaxes.