About anonymity... I think my question to dupedbysteve was valid and I am interested in others' thoughts.
If Steve/TATF had our personal info, how could they use it to endanger those who oppose them on this list or their interests?
- perhaps by sending a hitman after them?
- by arranging tree markers to make sure that they profit the least?
- by diverting proceeds of their lumber sales?
- by bringing some legal action against them?
- by posting nasty things about them on the internet?
I welcome any suggestions of how else Steve/TATF could damage somebody if they knew the names of their opponents on this forum.
Note that, except for the rather dramatic and probably unrealistic method of sending a hitman (or alternately, the somewhat ineffectual and silly method of posting nasty internet references) to take care of their problem investors, TATF doesn't have much recourse against these opponents UNLESS TATF IS A VIABLE BUSINESS.
How could TATF harm an investor by reallocating trees or diverting proceeds unless there were some real, viable trees that had real value to be harvested? How could a false, Ponzi-esque TATF possibly hope to harm somebody by legal action - they couldn't win any action of slander or libel unless they can prove that statements are false. They couldn't prove damage to their business unless there is a real business to damage. It would be insanity for TATF to risk scrutiny in court by bringing action against their opponents if their business is not valid.
I don't know why the gov't would suggest to duped that he not allow his identity to be discovered. No accusation. I don't see the point but it may be true.
I am holding to my own fairly flimsy anonymity (schaef may possibly be a clue of sorts to the most clever among you as to part of my name), because I haven't yet seen any purpose in revealing my identity. I don't care who reveals or doesn't reveal - I don't feel like putting in the effort to verify even those who have given us a name as 'proof' of their identities. I will just take people at face value. It just irks me that dupedbysteve feels free to question others' identity and to put significance on that, when he refuses to reveal his own.
It seems to me that people have come down on the wrong sides of this issue. The people in the position of strength here, who shouldn't need to protect their identities, are the ones who don't think they have anything to lose - those who believe they have been "duped by Steve". How will you bring legal action against Steve without revealing your identity? Ridiculous.
Those who have something to protect are the ones who are still hoping for a return from their trees. I want TATF to respond to my emails, so I don't act like a jerk when I contact them and in case I have anything negative to say here, I hold on to my anonymity. That's pretty much it for me. I agree; there is no evidence that anything good is happening. But I want to be able to send an email every couple of months and hope that somebody will respond. I hope they will be motivated to care for my trees in the hope that I will buy more. These are my reasons for anonymity.
"schaef"
