I think we will need to agree to disagree on this point. I think the moral responsibility rests on the person who makes the claim, not the person who believes it.



They were responsible for the decision they made, but why should you hold them responsible? Surely the loss of their coins is bad enough. And surely this thread is about holding Harnett to account?


I don't excuse anyone who risked other people's money either. They should also be held to account. Scammer tags applied, etc.

But what of those who risked their own money? Do they really need to be pilloried for making a stupid decision? Surely the man who lead them down that road should be the one blamed for what happened. The road lead to disaster, and they should both have foreseen that, but Harnett was the one walking ahead, saying "Follow me, follow me."

His carelessness was not mere personal carelessness. By being careless with other peoples money, he abused the trust that they placed in him.

You say you have no wish to absolve Harnett of responsibility, but when you say that both parties in this transaction are equally culpable for the loss of coins, then you paint the whole thing with a brush of moral ambiguity. When you say to the gentleman who has had his coins stolen "More fool you for believing him!" then you automatically absolve Harnett of at least some responsibility.

In my mind there is a victim and a culprit here. People lost a lot of coins so that Harnett could gamble with their money. I think that what he did was wrong and it was his responsibility to make sure he could do what he said he could before he claimed it. That's an issue of personal ethics and my moral compass, and as I said it's maybe something that we will have to disagree on.