Since we are discussing going to jail, gambling, etc... (1 Viewer)

[Hooper31]

What now?

Unlucky stole/lost people's prize money for his Phenoms leagues. Its a lot of money.

Reactions have been varying on a sliding scale of rationality. Someone posted his father's address and phone number to a threads. Most are likely sitting back hoping they can get some form of return on their money.

Gotcha. He netted 600k from people here?

Netted probably isn't the right word if his claims are true. Some folks think he pocketed the money and has scammed a bunch of people. He claims he got in over his head attempting to develop a website that would rival MFL.

 

[St. Louis Bob]

What now?

Unlucky stole/lost people's prize money for his Phenoms leagues. Its a lot of money.

Reactions have been varying on a sliding scale of rationality. Someone posted his father's address and phone number to a threads. Most are likely sitting back hoping they can get some form of return on their money.

Gotcha. He netted 600k from people here?

Netted probably isn't the right word if his claims are true. Some folks think he pocketed the money and has scammed a bunch of people. He claims he got in over his head attempting to develop a website that would rival MFL.

About how many people lost money? How much each?

 

[jon_mx]

What now?

Unlucky stole/lost people's prize money for his Phenoms leagues. Its a lot of money.

Reactions have been varying on a sliding scale of rationality. Someone posted his father's address and phone number to a threads. Most are likely sitting back hoping they can get some form of return on their money.

Gotcha. He netted 600k from people here?

Netted probably isn't the right word if his claims are true. Some folks think he pocketed the money and has scammed a bunch of people. He claims he got in over his head attempting to develop a website that would rival MFL.

About how many people lost money? How much each?

He has like 700 leagues....most leagues are probably $100 per person. Maybe $50 or maybe $250. But since the season was done, the people really out of money were the people who had a chance to win their league. Some people in multiple leagues probably out $2000 or so.

 

[rockaction]

I just deleted a post out of propriety, but safe to say that I'm kind of unimpressed by your credulity, inferential reasoning, and tactics and substance within debating.

I don't understand why you think there's a debate going on. Neither of us knows exactly what happened. To each their own.

You are pretty set in your position; this is true. Good luck, Hooper31.

 

[St. Louis Bob]

What now?

Unlucky stole/lost people's prize money for his Phenoms leagues. Its a lot of money.

Reactions have been varying on a sliding scale of rationality. Someone posted his father's address and phone number to a threads. Most are likely sitting back hoping they can get some form of return on their money.

Gotcha. He netted 600k from people here?

Netted probably isn't the right word if his claims are true. Some folks think he pocketed the money and has scammed a bunch of people. He claims he got in over his head attempting to develop a website that would rival MFL.

About how many people lost money? How much each?

He has like 700 leagues....most leagues are probably $100 per person. Maybe $50 or maybe $250. But since the season was done, the people really out of money were the people who had a chance to win their league. Some people in multiple leagues probably out $2000 or so.

JFC. I can't believe people would send that much money to some guy from the Internet

 

[Premier]

What now?

Unlucky stole/lost people's prize money for his Phenoms leagues. Its a lot of money.

Reactions have been varying on a sliding scale of rationality. Someone posted his father's address and phone number to a threads. Most are likely sitting back hoping they can get some form of return on their money.

Gotcha. He netted 600k from people here?

Netted probably isn't the right word if his claims are true. Some folks think he pocketed the money and has scammed a bunch of people. He claims he got in over his head attempting to develop a website that would rival MFL.

Even if his claims are true about MFL he still scammed everybody.

 

[rockaction]

What now?

Unlucky stole/lost people's prize money for his Phenoms leagues. Its a lot of money.

Reactions have been varying on a sliding scale of rationality. Someone posted his father's address and phone number to a threads. Most are likely sitting back hoping they can get some form of return on their money.

Gotcha. He netted 600k from people here?

Netted probably isn't the right word if his claims are true. Some folks think he pocketed the money and has scammed a bunch of people. He claims he got in over his head attempting to develop a website that would rival MFL.

Even if his claims are true about MFL he still scammed everybody.

That's why this non-debate is weird. I don't think Hooper31 gets that the guy promised the money would be there, presumably in a separate account, going so far as to post proof checks (which means he knows how important that is) and the money isn't.

And that the money isn't there is almost like a legal res ipsa loquitur-type thing. That it isn't there and wasn't sitting in a separate bank account kind of proves the malfeasance in it of itself.

I'm glad I'm not debating with Hooper31; he'll just try to drag one down the rabbit hole this way. Subtle definitional shifts and evidentiary standards are the whole crux of this. The money isn't there. The guy, for whatever the reason, scammed people. He mixed the funds at the best. That's enough to call it a scam. It's like I said, the process of how you store and safeguard the money is substantive in and of itself. There's a reason for escrows, trust, separate accounts, accounting, etc. Hooper31, for all of his intelligence, seems lost and blinded by this.

 

[St. Louis Bob]

What now?

Unlucky stole/lost people's prize money for his Phenoms leagues. Its a lot of money.

Reactions have been varying on a sliding scale of rationality. Someone posted his father's address and phone number to a threads. Most are likely sitting back hoping they can get some form of return on their money.

Gotcha. He netted 600k from people here?

Netted probably isn't the right word if his claims are true. Some folks think he pocketed the money and has scammed a bunch of people. He claims he got in over his head attempting to develop a website that would rival MFL.

Even if his claims are true about MFL he still scammed everybody.

Yep. I used to collect money from deadbeats back in the day. A face-to-face meeting always helped guys find money.

 

[Hooper31]

I just deleted a post out of propriety, but safe to say that I'm kind of unimpressed by your credulity, inferential reasoning, and tactics and substance within debating.

I don't understand why you think there's a debate going on. Neither of us knows exactly what happened. To each their own.

You are pretty set in your position; this is true. Good luck, Hooper31.

So that we're on the same page, could you tell me what you perceive my position to be? I'm not looking for an iFight or anything. Just curious to know what you're perceiving. I find often the written word is read with the worst possible tone. My guess is that we agree a lot more than we disagree.

 

[BRONG]

Excuse me, sometimes websites don't work out. You guys do realize he is still going to distribute up to 40% of the funds, right? Hello, he already emailed everybody about this.

 

[rockaction]

I just deleted a post out of propriety, but safe to say that I'm kind of unimpressed by your credulity, inferential reasoning, and tactics and substance within debating.

I don't understand why you think there's a debate going on. Neither of us knows exactly what happened. To each their own.

You are pretty set in your position; this is true. Good luck, Hooper31.

So that we're on the same page, could you tell me what you perceive my position to be? I'm not looking for an iFight or anything. Just curious to know what you're perceiving. I find often the written word is read with the worst possible intonation and tone. My guess is that we agree a lot more than we disagree.

I'm not either. I agree. I always have to check for tone. Half of the time my buttons get pushed too easily, half of the time I write something and the look on my face when I'm writing it and the way it looks in print on the page is incongruous with my motive or intent, and it comes off awfully. I wince at certain things, some of which wind up liked around here, which is weird.

I perceive your position to be that the funds have been commingled, that there's no excuse, but that there might have been a guy that just got in over his head and didn't intend to scam, but wound up morally in the wrong and stealing money. Your initial posts in the SP were to throw brakes up so quickly -- and maybe that is just my impression as it unfolded -- that it sounded like you were like themtman, or whoever he was, and it sounded like you were defending Zangrilli while waiting for the evidence to come in.

My position is that the evidence is in: There's no money. The initial letter he sent to John1970W is enough because, as I'm going to start stating ad nauseam, the fact that the money isn't there speaks for itself. I could be using res ipsa loquitur wrong in the legal sense, but this is a drawing upon that evidentiary standard to make a moral judgment in life. The money was supposed to be in a separate account, he himself knew how important it was to provide proof of the money being there, and it wasn't there. I think Otis and Steve Tasker pointed this out, and I think that's the best way to look at it. The process that was promised to his customers was so abrogated (and there was a reason for that promise, or there likely would have been no capital outlays) that at the very least there has to be a presumption of a scam, if not an outright declaration. I'd err on the side of outright declaration. The existence of legal creations like escrows, trusts, independent handling of monies, laws against commingling, which are specifically designed to both remove doubt and serve as evidentiary standards of intent within the law, lead me to believe that process was flouted, and that therefore this is a scam. His failure to abide by any sort of typical legal process is evidence in and of itself, and in this case, it's pretty stark. It's not like he was unaware of these things. He promised them and posted fake checks to his website, if I'm not misreading the thread.

Like I just stated in another thread. I should concentrate things that bring me joy, and I will. Mike Zangrilli and I don't know each other, and likely never will. I find no fun in this. I empathize with addiction and funds and the dark side of the human heart. I just think the people defending him as a well-meaning guy that got in over his head are missing the evidence in the first place, which is that none of the remedies or constraints on him and his income were availed of, he lied about them being used, and it's… it's bad.

 

[bostonfred]

If Mike is telling the truth, which I actually believe, then he knowingly used money that he claimed would be held in prize money escrow for something else. there's a very good reason for people to feel betrayed. If his plan had worked, he would have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars of other people's money to build his own company, knowing that if it worked, he would get all the spoils of his investment, and if it didn't, he could (and ultimately did) cry poor and say he couldn't pay everyone their winnings.

That's wrong from an ethical standpoint, but it may not be wrong from a business standpoint. When you put money in a bank, you expect it to be there. But you also understand that the bank is investing your money to grow their business. And that all investments carry risk. When you put money in the bank, it's insured, but other investments like stocks or bonds aren't.

When Mike took people's money, they were effectively paying for a service, with the assumption that they would be paid back later if they won. If he promised to put that money in escrow (he allegedly promised that at some point but is since been removed from the site) then he lay have a legal obligation to keep the money in escrow. Otherwise, he may have has the legal right to invest the money his company received in any way he sees fit, just like any other company does with their revenues.

But just because it's legal doesn't make it ethical. The only thing I can think of to make it more tolerable from an ethical standpoint, is if his story is true and he thought he had investors who would cover the prize money, but they pulled out when the site wasn't finished. If that's the car, I can understand why he would dig himself into a deeper and deeper hope trying to improve the site - once he dig into the payouts, his only way to make people while would have been to get the investment, so he had little choice but to pay less than a hundred percent or work twice as hard to get an investor.

I don't think he made good decisions no matter what the outcome. I don't think he's inculpable. But I personally think his story is legit and I don't think he tried to steal anything from anyone. I feel bad for the kid - he started running fantasy football leagues, had early success, didn't have a ton of business acumen, made some big mistakes, and people were literally threatening or suggesting violence in the shark pool thread. I understand that people are pissed and they have every right to be but some people are going way over the line and they've lost the moral high ground imo.

 

[Hooper31]

I perceive your position to be that the funds have been commingled, that there's no excuse, but that there might have been a guy that just got in over his head and didn't intend to scam, but wound up morally in the wrong and stealing money. Your initial posts in the SP were to throw brakes up so quickly -- and maybe that is just my impression as it unfolded -- that it sounded like you were like themtman, or whoever he was, and it sounded like you were defending Zangrilli while waiting for the evidence to come in.

This is a fair assessment. However, I would add that I think its possible that he did something really stupid and might not have intended to lose all that money. Even still, I think he should be held responsible, potentially even for a criminal act. I think it isn't fair to the guy to assume bad intent.

My position is that the evidence is in: There's no money. The initial letter he sent to John1970W is enough because, as I'm going to start stating ad nauseam, the fact that the money isn't there speaks for itself.

I'm not aware of that evidence. Are you sure there's NO money? From what I understood there was a claim that partial winnings could still be paid. Is there some evidence (other than someone's assumptions) that the cupboards are bare?

 

[AAABatteries]

I just deleted a post out of propriety, but safe to say that I'm kind of unimpressed by your credulity, inferential reasoning, and tactics and substance within debating.

I don't understand why you think there's a debate going on. Neither of us knows exactly what happened. To each their own.

Wait, we have to know all the facts before we start debating? Might as well shut down the FFA.

 

[rockaction]

I perceive your position to be that the funds have been commingled, that there's no excuse, but that there might have been a guy that just got in over his head and didn't intend to scam, but wound up morally in the wrong and stealing money. Your initial posts in the SP were to throw brakes up so quickly -- and maybe that is just my impression as it unfolded -- that it sounded like you were like themtman, or whoever he was, and it sounded like you were defending Zangrilli while waiting for the evidence to come in.

This is a fair assessment. However, I would add that I think its possible that he did something really stupid and might not have intended to lose all that money. Even still, I think he should be held responsible, potentially even for a criminal act. I think it isn't fair to the guy to assume bad intent.

My position is that the evidence is in: There's no money. The initial letter he sent to John1970W is enough because, as I'm going to start stating ad nauseam, the fact that the money isn't there speaks for itself.

I'm not aware of that evidence. Are you sure there's NO money? From what I understood there was a claim that partial winnings could still be paid. Is there some evidence (other than someone's assumptions) that the cupboards are bare?

First bolded is the crux of the matter: The fact that he didn't avail himself of the opportunities to not make off with the money -- and had acknowledged these things' importance --- is serious evidence that goes to bad intent. I keep repeating that the process by which one does things is evidentiary. We don't agree. That's cool.

Second bolded: I should lawyer better with language. This is why I don't. There is NOT ENOUGH money. The full prize money isn't there, and that's enough. I don't think bad and ill-advised declarations in the service of rhetoric on my end detracts from my end point. Your point is taken about my declaration, but shouldn't distract from the overall concept of separate accounts, commingling, escrow accounts, abrogation of duties, evidentiary standards etc...

 

[Premier]

That may be the worst post bostonfred has ever made. In fact, I would bet on it.

That's wrong from an ethical standpoint, but it may not be wrong from a business standpoint. When you put money in a bank, you expect it to be there. But you also understand that the bank is investing your money to grow their business. And that all investments carry risk. When you put money in the bank, it's insured, but other investments like stocks or bonds aren't

Has to be shtick right?

 

[BRONG]

I thought, like me, bf was fishing.

 

[Hooper31]

I perceive your position to be that the funds have been commingled, that there's no excuse, but that there might have been a guy that just got in over his head and didn't intend to scam, but wound up morally in the wrong and stealing money. Your initial posts in the SP were to throw brakes up so quickly -- and maybe that is just my impression as it unfolded -- that it sounded like you were like themtman, or whoever he was, and it sounded like you were defending Zangrilli while waiting for the evidence to come in.

This is a fair assessment. However, I would add that I think its possible that he did something really stupid and might not have intended to lose all that money. Even still, I think he should be held responsible, potentially even for a criminal act. I think it isn't fair to the guy to assume bad intent.

My position is that the evidence is in: There's no money. The initial letter he sent to John1970W is enough because, as I'm going to start stating ad nauseam, the fact that the money isn't there speaks for itself.

I'm not aware of that evidence. Are you sure there's NO money? From what I understood there was a claim that partial winnings could still be paid. Is there some evidence (other than someone's assumptions) that the cupboards are bare?

First bolded is the crux of the matter: The fact that he didn't avail himself of the opportunities to not make off with the money -- and had acknowledged these things importance --- is serious evidence that goes to bad intent. I keep repeating that the process by which one does things is evidentiary. We don't agree. That's cool.

Second bolded: I should lawyer better with language. This is why I don't. There is NOT ENOUGH money. The full prize money isn't there, and that's enough. I don't think bad and ill-advised declarations in the service of rhetoric on my end detracts from my end point. Your point is taken about my declaration, but shouldn't distract from the overall concept of separate accounts, commingling, escrow accounts, abrogation of duties, evidentiary standards etc...

Fair enough. I think we understand each other.

 

[bostonfred]

That may be the worst post bostonfred has ever made. In fact, I would bet on it.

That's wrong from an ethical standpoint, but it may not be wrong from a business standpoint. When you put money in a bank, you expect it to be there. But you also understand that the bank is investing your money to grow their business. And that all investments carry risk. When you put money in the bank, it's insured, but other investments like stocks or bonds aren't

Has to be shtick right?

I honestly don't know the legal standing of fantasy football businesses. I'm sure you do, so I have no choice but to accept your judgement. Fwiw, ant sports supposedly did the same thing and got away with it.

 

[Premier]

That may be the worst post bostonfred has ever made. In fact, I would bet on it.

That's wrong from an ethical standpoint, but it may not be wrong from a business standpoint. When you put money in a bank, you expect it to be there. But you also understand that the bank is investing your money to grow their business. And that all investments carry risk. When you put money in the bank, it's insured, but other investments like stocks or bonds aren't

Has to be shtick right?

I honestly don't know the legal standing of fantasy football businesses. I'm sure you do, so I have no choice but to accept your judgement. Fwiw, ant sports supposedly did the same thing and got away with it.

Oh I'm not saying he is going to jail. Probably tough to prove embezzlement here. But I'm also not going to compare it to a bank or investing in stocks.

 

[bostonfred]

That may be the worst post bostonfred has ever made. In fact, I would bet on it.

That's wrong from an ethical standpoint, but it may not be wrong from a business standpoint. When you put money in a bank, you expect it to be there. But you also understand that the bank is investing your money to grow their business. And that all investments carry risk. When you put money in the bank, it's insured, but other investments like stocks or bonds aren't

Has to be shtick right?

I honestly don't know the legal standing of fantasy football businesses. I'm sure you do, so I have no choice but to accept your judgement. Fwiw, ant sports supposedly did the same thing and got away with it.

Oh I'm not saying he is going to jail. Probably tough to prove embezzlement here. But I'm also not going to compare it to a bank or investing in stocks.

I get that. Its obviously not the exact same thing. But almost all businesses are allowed to invest their revenues back into their business. Any time you ask someone to hold your money and pay it back later, there's a reasonable belief that they will invest that money unless otherwise specified. And that's what I was comparing to bonds - we are all familiar with the idea that banks are safe and everyone else isn't. Now, if he said he would put it in escrow (supposedly he did and then took it off his website) that may be different. But from a legal standpoint in not sure what they can charge him with if he goes bankrupt. You can chase your money through civil court, but good luck.

 

[randall146]

Why would leagues send him their prize money to hold in the first place?

Don't trust your friends to hold money? Send it to the internet!

 

[Doctor Detroit]

This would be a lot easier if jon_mx had stole the money.

 

[joffer]

still with Hooper on this

 

[rockaction]

still with Hooper on this

genuine

I guess, man.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Did Zangrilli ever use the term escrow? I don't remember that. My recollection is that he simply said that the prize money would be held securely in a separate account. That's not the same thing as using an escrow service.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Why would leagues send him their prize money to hold in the first place?

Don't trust your friends to hold money? Send it to the internet!

People on Phenoms often played with strangers, not friends. Joining a twelve-team league at Phenoms was sort of like joining a twelve-team league at FanDuel: you didn't necessarily know any of the other owners.

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

Why would leagues send him their prize money to hold in the first place?

Don't trust your friends to hold money? Send it to the internet!

12 strangers sign up for a fantasy league via his website. Where else are they going to send the money to?He'd done this with no complaints and quick payouts it seems for over a decade.

 

[joffer]

still with Hooper on this

genuine

I guess, man.

the fact that you're on the other side doesn't hurt

 

[rockaction]

Did Zangrilli ever use the term escrow? I don't remember that. My recollection is that he simply said that the prize money would be held securely in a separate account. That's not the same thing as using an escrow service.

I don't know if he did, and if that is what the criminal complaint hinges on, then I hope he did. Not sure separate accounts and commingling of funds trigger moral obligations that are any different.

 

[rockaction]

still with Hooper on this

genuine

I guess, man.

the fact that you're on the other side doesn't hurt

I was being nice, but yeah, you've been on my ### since my first ten posts. And a predictable dupey leftist on the board. One was about Jerry Jones. I kinda knew then.

I don't care, man. Have fun.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Did Zangrilli ever use the term escrow? I don't remember that. My recollection is that he simply said that the prize money would be held securely in a separate account. That's not the same thing as using an escrow service.

I don't know if he did, and if that is what the criminal complaint hinges on, then I hope he did.

I don't think it would hinge on that.

I don't do criminal law, but even if he falsely said he'd use an escrow, I see that as more civil fraud than criminal fraud.

The part that might seem like criminal fraud, if it happened, is using the money for personal stuff like gambling or drugs or whatever.

If he really used the money for software design, I don't see a crime here. But again, I don't do criminal law. Maybe Woz can tell us what he might hypothetically be charged with under various scenarios if he were in Arizona.

 

[jon_mx]

I think a better example is the Lock Box our government holds out social security deposits in, only Mike's is a bit safer.

 

[jon_mx]

This would be a lot easier if jon_mx had stole the money.

Would have gone down as the biggest theft since last year's Fister's deal, amirite?

 

[Doctor Detroit]

This would be a lot easier if jon_mx had stole the money.

Would have gone down as the biggest theft since last year's Fister's deal, amirite?

Been waiting 11 years for you to say something funny.

Still waiting.

 

[jon_mx]

This would be a lot easier if jon_mx had stole the money.

Would have gone down as the biggest theft since last year's Fister's deal, amirite?

Been waiting 11 years for you to say something funny.

Still waiting.

Haters gonna hate.

ETA: Besides, the 'rooster' stuff was some of the funniest stuff ever, even if it started off completely unintentional. My spelling does suck.

 

[joffer]

still with Hooper on this

genuine

I guess, man.

the fact that you're on the other side doesn't hurt

I was being nice, but yeah, you've been on my ### since my first ten posts. And a predictable dupey leftist on the board. One was about Jerry Jones. I kinda knew then.

I don't care, man. Have fun.

Predictable duper leftist? What the hell does right/left have to do with this?

 

[Doctor Detroit]

This would be a lot easier if jon_mx had stole the money.

Would have gone down as the biggest theft since last year's Fister's deal, amirite?

Been waiting 11 years for you to say something funny.

Still waiting.

Haters gonna hate.

ETA: Besides, the 'rooster' stuff was some of the funniest stuff ever, even if it started off completely unintentional. My spelling does suck.

That is true, but I'm not sure we are allowing unintentional comedy in.

What the hell, it's the holidays...I'll allow it.

 

[Chemical X]

with phenoms going out, seems like there is a gap in the marketplace for his failed service.

i suppose if iStrangers want to send me over 500k i can hold the funds. i will get jzilla to setup business model.

more to follow.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

with phenoms going out, seems like there is a gap in the marketplace for his failed service.

i suppose if iStrangers want to send me over 500k i can hold the funds. i will get jzilla to setup business model.

more to follow.

Have customer service run through Lester. /lowtalker

 

[jon_mx]

This would be a lot easier if jon_mx had stole the money.

Would have gone down as the biggest theft since last year's Fister's deal, amirite?

Been waiting 11 years for you to say something funny.Still waiting.

Haters gonna hate.

ETA: Besides, the 'rooster' stuff was some of the funniest stuff ever, even if it started off completely unintentional. My spelling does suck.

That is true, but I'm not sure we are allowing unintentional comedy in. What the hell, it's the holidays...I'll allow it.

Merry Christmas and happy New Year.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

This would be a lot easier if jon_mx had stole the money.

Would have gone down as the biggest theft since last year's Fister's deal, amirite?

Been waiting 11 years for you to say something funny.Still waiting.

Haters gonna hate.

ETA: Besides, the 'rooster' stuff was some of the funniest stuff ever, even if it started off completely unintentional. My spelling does suck.

That is true, but I'm not sure we are allowing unintentional comedy in. What the hell, it's the holidays...I'll allow it.

Merry Christmas and happy New Year.

You too jon!

 

[eoMMan]

This would be a lot easier if jon_mx had stole the money.

Would have gone down as the biggest theft since last year's Fister's deal, amirite?

Been waiting 11 years for you to say something funny.Still waiting.

Haters gonna hate.

ETA: Besides, the 'rooster' stuff was some of the funniest stuff ever, even if it started off completely unintentional. My spelling does suck.

That is true, but I'm not sure we are allowing unintentional comedy in. What the hell, it's the holidays...I'll allow it.

Merry Christmas and happy New Year.

You too jon!

No Kwanzaa for you, DD?

Icon was gonna send you a card. He wanted to know.

 

[Quez]

Can I get some cliff notes on this.

Eta. Nevermind, I think I figured it out. This is all related to the phenoms stuff. So was the guy who screwed everyone over a regular poster?

 

[Quez]

That may be the worst post bostonfred has ever made. In fact, I would bet on it.

That's wrong from an ethical standpoint, but it may not be wrong from a business standpoint. When you put money in a bank, you expect it to be there. But you also understand that the bank is investing your money to grow their business. And that all investments carry risk. When you put money in the bank, it's insured, but other investments like stocks or bonds aren't

Has to be shtick right?

Well, we all know what the best BostonFred post is.

 

[Quez]

Is jzilla one of these guys?

 

[Doctor Detroit]

Is jzilla one of these guys?

He's the opposite of ZANGRILLILOLOL™

HTH

 

[fantasycurse42]

Where is the line on criminal and civil on something like this? Reading MT's posts it appears if there was no ill intent (meaning he didn't just pocket the money and use it on personal expenses), then it appears he hasn't broken any criminal laws?

And who the #### would even handle this case? Like what is your recourse if you're owed $$$? You can't just pick up the phone and call your local police dept and say Zangrilli from the Internet owes me money...

$600k isn't a box of crackerjacks.