# Talk:Pyramid Scheme

Disclaimer: If you took this article seriously, you really need something better to do with your life. Now sign, and join the pyramid! -- Rei 23:18, 12 Dec 2005 (UTC)

## edit VFH discussion

One user on VFH made the following arguments:

The article hardly touches on the true nature of pyramid schemes.

This is precisely how pyramid schemes work. A pyramid scheme is a "trickle up" system that recruits by convincing people that soon they'll have others below them and get a cut of the work done by their underlings (and their underlings' underlings, and so on)

Even real scam artists are reluctant to use that many exclamation marks.

The article is in the tone of your typical pitch person. I've actually seen a pyramid scheme pitched before; this is satire of that. They constantly push how easy it is, how much money you'll make, how much money they've made, and how great money is.

In-joke is definitely one kind of the things that do not deserve to be featured.

In joke? Since when is a pyramid scheme an "in joke"?

You can add links, you know. I just did. Add all you want. And I would hardly call it "almost a dead end".

The article is even linked to a userpage, suggesting vanity.

The article links to a dozen user pages -- everyone who's joined the pyramid needs to be listed so that new recruits know who to pay. Join now and you can end up as wealthy as we have!

```-- Rei 20:48, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
```

### edit Ok...

This is precisely how pyramid schemes work. A pyramid scheme is a "trickle up" system that recruits by convincing people that soon they'll have others below them and get a cut of the work done by their underlings (and their underlings' underlings, and so on)
Let see what the article has actually got to offer:

"to become an editor, you have to pay a simple 10-dollar fee. Half of that money goes to the person who recruited you, half of the rest goes to the person who recruited them, and so on up the chain, all the way to yours truly."

So, why am I supposed to "join" this thing? Because my share appears to get less as the hierarchy below me starts to grow? Think about those who don't do maths well!

The article is in the tone of your typical pitch person. I've actually seen a pyramid scheme pitched before; this is satire of that. They constantly push how easy it is, how much money you'll make, how much money they've made, and how great money is.
So, is an article supposed to have a tone?

In joke? Since when is a pyramid scheme an "in joke"?
And since when article-editing has become a non-in-joke?

You can add links, you know. I just did. Add all you want. And I would hardly call it "almost a dead end".
So, you would hardly call it "almost a dead end"... Alright, then, why did you add links to the article after all?
Before
After

The article links to a dozen user pages -- everyone who's joined the pyramid needs to be listed so that new recruits know who to pay. Join now and you can end up as wealthy as we have!
User-pages = non-in-joke... Moneygal=Rei=\=vanity... Oh the humanity!!

-- Colonel Swordman 09:47, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Because my share appears to get less as the hierarchy below me starts to grow? Think about those who don't do maths well!

This is *exactly* how real pyramid schemes work. Yes, your share gets less the further down the chain you go, but the more people who join, the more you make. Recruiting directly below you returns you the most profit, but your recruitees still make you 1/4 of the profit. For a person who actually believes that a given pyramid scheme is a legit way to make money, 1/4 of some "tremendously valuable" revenue scheme sounds like a lot.

I suggest that you read the article on pyramid schemes from our lying competitor, Wikipedia. [1]

So, is an article supposed to have a tone?

You bet it is. Check out VFH's winners; a good chunk of them have had the "tone" of the subject matter that they're about. Redundancy, J.D. Salinger, AAAAAAAAA!, Morse Code, Zen, Philip Glass, Nihilism, Nobody cares, Redundancy, Zork, Sexual innuendo, OCD, Redundancy, etc.

And since when article-editing has become a non-in-joke?

How does what you just wrote even make sense? I can't make heads or tails of it.

So, you would hardly call it "almost a dead end"... Alright, then, why did you add links to the article after all?

Because of your complaint. I was trying to make you happy. Would you rather I remove them? Just say the word.

User-pages = non-in-joke... Moneygal=Rei=\=vanity... Oh the humanity!!

Unfortunately, a pyramid scheme requires a pyramid of people dumb enough to be part of it. The article does *not* target one individual. I'd be more than happy to have "moneygal" (just one referenced user) point to any other user, or even an article on Tazmanian ground sloths for all I care. However, the article *does* need a pitch person in order to be structured like an actual pyramid scheme.

```-- Rei 23:53, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
```

Note: I'm totally staggered by the sheer amount of effort people have spent here defending their articles. If I were them, I would rather put more time and energy on the articles themselves (and perhaps make myself more useful by saving the non-redeemable and checking out some "noob" stuff). Anyway, the bottomline is: Even if you don't appreciate negative comments, appreciate the fact that you have the right to express yourself your own way.

This is *exactly* how real pyramid schemes work. Yes, your share gets less the further down the chain you go, but the more people who join, the more you make. Recruiting directly below you returns you the most profit, but your recruitees still make you 1/4 of the profit. For a person who actually believes that a given pyramid scheme is a legit way to make money, 1/4 of some "tremendously valuable" revenue scheme sounds like a lot.

I suggest that you read the article on pyramid schemes from our lying competitor, Wikipedia. [2]

Wow... I thought it was just a joke, but it turned out to be a friggin' Doctorate thesis! Should I go now and beef myself up with some hard knowledge?

You bet it is. Check out VFH's winners; a good chunk of them have had the "tone" of the subject matter that they're about. Redundancy, J.D. Salinger, AAAAAAAAA!, Morse Code, Zen, Philip Glass, Nihilism, Nobody cares, Redundancy, Zork, Sexual innuendo, OCD, Redundancy, etc.

Rei's Theorem:
 $AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA = tone$

How does what you just wrote even make sense? I can't make heads or tails of it.

No, it doesn't. As a matter of fact what you just saw didn't even exist - it was just a dream.

Because of your complaint. I was trying to make you happy. Would you rather I remove them? Just say the word.

Good! Now we are getting somewhere instead of nowhere!

Unfortunately, a pyramid scheme requires a pyramid of people dumb enough to be part of it. The article does *not* target one individual. I'd be more than happy to have "moneygal" (just one referenced user) point to any other user, or even an article on Tazmanian ground sloths for all I care. However, the article *does* need a pitch person in order to be structured like an actual pyramid scheme.

So why can't Tazmanian ground sloth be the pitch person???

-- Colonel Swordman 13:22, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Hello, I would like to suscribe to your newsletter. --Gamiac 02:45, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

## edit Calm down dear... it's only a uncyclopedia page

So what if there are some finickity vagueries that have been left out, the naked desire for money is the essential component of the whole parasitic pyramid scheme charade, and the page pretty accurately sums it up with a nice bit of satire.

Great darts

--Billsheppard 09:33, 22 July 2006 (UTC)