The reason I said that is because you said it was very obvious that it was a ponzi. So, if what you say is true, nobody knew more than anybody else (except for pirate, obviously).
By this argument, Pirate wasn't doing anything wrong. Everyone knew he was running a Ponzi. Everyone knows Ponzis must eventually default. All that's unknown is the time of the default. And it's quite possible Pirate didn't even know that much before anyone else. Sure Pirate lied, but nobody believed him, so no harm done.
If the investors knowingly invested in something that was likely a scam, and they knew it was likely a scam, they knew nothing more than PPT's.
And Pirate knew nothing they didn't know. So it was all just honest fun. Pirate's scammer tag should be removed. Right?
Now, I'm not saying it was ethical to run a PPT, I'm just saying that it doesn't really justify a scammer tag.
Then start arguing that Pirate doesn't deserve a scammer tag. In all likelihood, his primary business model was operating a pass through to Zeek. (And market manipulations which largely lost money but he said he was going to do that.)