View Single Post
Posts: 2 | Thanked: 18 times | Joined on Feb 2015
#5791
Originally Posted by Dave999 View Post
No arguments there. What would be good if the CF sites had a rating system of the people behind it so users could rate away real scammers, and failers from the successful users.

Since the crowdfunders can say anything and have absolutely no accountability to speak the truth or even try to produce what they say... the sites should atleast have the option to vote or comment the user/company behind it

so threads like this is important so that failed campaigns don't get away with it. It must cost to fail...
That wouldn't have worked in this case, because Jolla had a good reputation.

This was a scam, though. They used crowdfunding money to pay themselves, and hoped to find new investors to pay off the old "donators." When they couldn't make payroll, they reached out to the "donators" to encourage them to "donate" for a second or third of the product that they already couldn't afford to deliver. If that's not a scam, there's no such thing.

Of course, it's not uncommon behavior for startups - relying on new investors to pay off the old ones...