[Artoemius]

Although calling someone a psychopath without access to their medical history is not literally correct, I don't agree with the spirit of your comment.

After being caught, this scammer was actively trying to be seen as a human being. That is exactly the tactics he chose and this is exactly the tactics that helped him escape any punishment so far. I would advise against humanizing scammers too much.

[Udik]

So you're saying that after being caught, he should have sent to the victim of his scam a picture of himself putting live cats in a blender? Just to avoid being seen like somebody that tries to look human, you know.

In other words, in your view, if he doesn't look human then he's a psychopath; if he does, this proves again that he's a psychopath. Confirmation bias?

Ah, by the way and just FYI, psychopaths and scammers are human beings.

[Artoemius]

Yes, it's entirely possible to be both human and a piece of shit at the same time. It's the scammer's job to convince everyone that he is more human than a piece of shit, and it's our job not to fall for that. The factual validity of whatever bad names we might call him is irrelevant.

(No, I don't think that calling scammers bad names is a viable anti-scammer strategy. I just don't agree with the opposing effort, which should only be expected from the scammer.)

[ryguytilidie]

"So you're saying that after being caught, he should have sent to the victim of his scam a picture of himself putting live cats in a blender? Just to avoid being seen like somebody that tries to look human, you know."

Why would you even bother making this post? I can't imagine there is even like .0000001% of your being that believes that this is remotely close to what the person you're responding to thinks, so what exactly is this meant to accomplish? "haha, look at me mocking a point you never came close to making..."?

[Udik]

> "After being caught, this scammer was actively trying to be seen as a human being."

This is what the GP posted. He was very clearly saying that the scammer was "actively trying to be seen as a human being", something that apparently in the mind of the GP he's not- or at least not completely.

Well, maybe I misinterpreted, but I read it as "the fact that he tries to look scared and repentant is a further proof that he's a psychopath" - which would be a circular reasoning, since he's assumed that he's trying on the base that he's supposedly a psychopath. In any case I don't see any hint to the possibility that he might have been genuinely scared.

So to answer your question, mine was a reductio ad absurdum: given the GP's premises, the only way not to look as a psychopath would have been to look as a psychopath.

[tzakrajs]

We should try not to devolve further into Redditness.