Senex: Yes, certainly know what to do. Naughty, naughty people must be punished!![]()
Is it my birthday already?

Senex: Yes, certainly know what to do. Naughty, naughty people must be punished!![]()


Maybe we could rationalize it somehow?
How about:
"We're only taking money from non-skeptical woos, and that money goes to good skeptical causes. That way, we promote skepticism and take away money that would otherwise be spent to promote woo."
I dunno, that still feels too oily.
Well, yeah, unless you consider my personal bank account to be the location of a good skeptical cause.![]()
Hmm... Where do you get skeptical liquor and fast women?
I'm in the same boat here. It's hard for me to get too upset over EBay items that claim to be "haunted" or cursed or whatever when it's really up to the overly credulous as to whether they want to buy or not. Then again, the exact same logic could apply to the Sylvia Browns and the Kevin Trudeaus of the world. Yes, they are both definitely scumbags, but at what point does personal responsibility kick in? The big difference, IMO, is that the Browns and Trudeaus are exploiting those who are emotionally susceptible and/or physically ailing so conning the victims deprives them of far more than just money, while the EBay hoax items are primarily a monetary loss (unless the customer likes what they bought and are happy with it I suppose).This being the case, I'm conflicted. On the one hand my sceptical and anti-woo side says "that's just as bad as any other fake artefact" and that something should be done. But as a student of history and an ebayer, I can't help but think this is just a tax on stupidity, and although it's presented as genuine, and even assuming the buyer believes in vampires (!), they should still be aware of the existence of fakes, and the need for provenance with antiques and historical objects.