[chowells]

Why do you believe that victims should be punished? Wouldn't it be more compassionate to recover their losses and punish the perpetrators? Trust shouldn't be seen as a weakness. Trust powers all the best things humans can do. Trust should be rewarded, not punished.

[cowtools]

>Why do you believe that victims should be punished?

I don't believe victims should be punished. I just don't think victims should be rewarded either. I do think that the perpetrators should be punished.

>Wouldn't it be more compassionate to recover their losses

It would be "compassionate", but it would also encourage people to make risky and stupid decisions. Tough love I suppose.

>Trust shouldn't be seen as a weakness. Trust powers all the best things humans can do. Trust should be rewarded, not punished.

There is a difference between knowledge, trust, and blind faith. Your inability to discriminate between the three is what allows you to mix these unrelated platitudes.

[chowells]

> It would be "compassionate", but it would also encourage people to make risky and stupid decisions. Tough love I suppose.

What you call tough love, I call inflicting trauma that makes everyone worse off. No one should ever risk being destitute. There's no societal benefit to risks with a downside of total loss.

And that's why I think your comment of blind faith was a non-sequitor. I'm not advocating for blind faith, I'm advocating for informed faith. I think we should have an informed assumption that the risk in a scam is on the part of the scammer. When something blows up, the scammer pays. Let's go ahead and reward people for blowing up scams from the inside.