this post was submitted on 08 Jul 2025
721 points (98.4% liked)

Lemmy Shitpost

33022 readers
4299 users here now

Welcome to Lemmy Shitpost. Here you can shitpost to your hearts content.

Anything and everything goes. Memes, Jokes, Vents and Banter. Though we still have to comply with lemmy.world instance rules. So behave!


Rules:

1. Be Respectful


Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.

Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.

...


2. No Illegal Content


Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.

That means:

-No promoting violence/threats against any individuals

-No CSA content or Revenge Porn

-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)

...


3. No Spam


Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.

-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.

-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.

-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers

-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.

...


4. No Porn/ExplicitContent


-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.

-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.

...


5. No Enciting Harassment,Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts


-Do not Brigade other Communities

-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.

-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.

-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.

...


6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.


-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.

-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.

...

If you see content that is a breach of the rules, please flag and report the comment and a moderator will take action where they can.


Also check out:

Partnered Communities:

1.Memes

2.Lemmy Review

3.Mildly Infuriating

4.Lemmy Be Wholesome

5.No Stupid Questions

6.You Should Know

7.Comedy Heaven

8.Credible Defense

9.Ten Forward

10.LinuxMemes (Linux themed memes)


Reach out to

All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules. Striker

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] knight_alva@lemmy.world 69 points 1 day ago (5 children)

Hoping that isn’t real because that’s kind of an f-ed up definition for fraud. Also, what a legend.

[–] onslaught545@lemmy.zip 74 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (6 children)

It's pretty much the textbook definition of fraud. What are you talking about?

Fraud is defined as intentional deception to deprive a victim of a legal right or to gain unlawfully from a victim.

He intentionally deceived 35 people for material gain. It's even more fraud if he deceived each one about only dating them.

In the US that could also potentially be rape by deception if any of them slept with him because they thought they were exclusive.

[–] knight_alva@lemmy.world 61 points 1 day ago (4 children)

It’s a poor definition because gift exchanges are strictly voluntary and non-reciprocal engagements. I’m not saying what he did was ok or even legal in other contexts. My only point is that I wouldn’t consider this fraud because the victims were not compelled to give. This isn’t a Nigerian prince scam where the victims were promised greater returns at a later date. These victims gave with the expectation of monetary loss.

[–] neukenindekeuken@sh.itjust.works 17 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Seems to fit the official definition pretty neatly. Colloquially, I tend to agree with you, there's a spectrum for fraud. But this still counts as fraud. It's a fraudulent misrepresentation of the truth to convince others to part with something of value (a gift).

The fact that it's a gift doesn't change that this is fraud, only the severity of fraud in a legal sense.

collapsed inline media

[–] Hackworth@sh.itjust.works 11 points 1 day ago (1 children)

intentional perversion of truth in order to induce another to part with something of value

Advertising and politics?

laws don't apply to politicians.

[–] lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com 3 points 21 hours ago (1 children)
  1. image of text: there's this cool alternative called text that doesn't break the web or accessibility. linking to source & quoting text makes an altogether better web for everyone.
  2. dictionary definition: not an official, legal definition.
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Ajen@sh.itjust.works 5 points 19 hours ago

By that logic, fake fundraisers and romance scams shouldn't be illegal either.

[–] onslaught545@lemmy.zip 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

So, it's not fraud if I tell my grandma with dementia that it's my birthday once a week so she keeps giving me birthday checks?

[–] knight_alva@lemmy.world 15 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Your grandma having dementia changes the formula a bit.

[–] onslaught545@lemmy.zip 3 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

Not really, no. It's still using deception for material gain through gift giving. Maybe it's more of an extreme case, but I was being hyperbolic.

[–] knight_alva@lemmy.world 4 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

It is materially different because a person with dementia can’t legally advocate for themselves so it is easier for an action against them to be considered a crime.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] LwL@lemmy.world 3 points 10 hours ago

They're technically voluntary but also socially expected. I'm not sure about birthday gifts in particular but Japan is a country where if you go on holiday somewhere you're expected to bring a gift for each of your coworkers, and people will think worse of you for not doing that. I'd be kind of surprised if omitting birthday gifts for your romantic partner without prior agreement is a real option.

[–] Zahtu@feddit.org 12 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I do Not See the fraud here. If He would have given the Girls His real Birthday, He would have still received the Same amount of Gifts. Nothing would have changed in exchanging the Gifts.

The only Thing, which it probably helped at, was that He could plan ahead for the birthdays, avoiding a Potential meet-in of each girl, that He dated on the Same Day. The only Thing He is gullible of ist deceiving the Woman on their Relationship. Which is Not an offenes in a legal Sense. There is no punishment for 2-timing, so 35-timing should Not have either

[–] AugustWest@lemmy.world 11 points 1 day ago (2 children)

What’s going on with your capitalization? I spent way too much time looking for hidden messages and came away with nothing except the - entirely unrelated - hypothesis that you are German.

[–] naeap@sopuli.xyz 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Not OP:
In other languages (like German) nouns are capitalized.
I often write mails inside Europe that way to make it easy readable and put focus on the stuff I find necessary.

For English native speakers it's probably really looks like hidden code ;⁠-⁠)

Edit: ok, read said comment and you're right. That's just like throwing a dice...

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] FelixCress@lemmy.world 9 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

It's pretty much the textbook definition of fraud. What are you talking about?

Fraud is defined as intentional deception to deprive a victim of a legal right or to gain unlawfully from a victim.

That's what most politicians do every election. Just saying.

[–] onslaught545@lemmy.zip 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Most politicians are absolutely guilty of fraud.

[–] Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 3 points 22 hours ago

I'd even go so far as saying that fraud is pretty rampant in all levels of society.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] RestrictedAccount@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago (2 children)

There is no mention of any consideration (a legal term meaning he didn’t promise them anything in return) provided by the “boyfriend”.

This would not be fraud under English common law.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] NatakuNox@lemmy.world 14 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Found the guy with 35 girlfriend.

[–] knight_alva@lemmy.world 9 points 22 hours ago

I’m down to 28 now. Apparently some of them saw this thread …

[–] cRazi_man@europe.pub 13 points 1 day ago

Look at that smile. He regrets nothing.

Also: Daily Mail source?.......this story is entirely fiction and made up, guaranteed.

[–] RidderSport@feddit.org 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Fraud is a very complicated crime. I absolutely hate that I need to know the basic for my law degree as it fills a thousand pages of commentary literature in just one of the largest German legal commentaries because it's just that complicated.

[–] knight_alva@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

As I said in another reply, my thinking is thus:

It’s a poor definition because gift exchanges are strictly voluntary and non-reciprocal engagements. I’m not saying what he did was ok or even legal in other contexts. My only point is that I wouldn’t consider this fraud because the victims were not compelled to give. This isn’t a Nigerian prince scam where the victims were promised greater returns at a later date. These victims gave with the expectation of monetary loss.

[–] RidderSport@feddit.org 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Just because these were voluntary non-reciprocal dispositions of wealth would not automatically make this not fraud in Germany at least.

I talked with a few fellow students and their gut feeling was that this could be fraud as well. After talking a bit about the matter we had quite a few issues apart from the voluntary aspect as well.

All dispositions in fraud are voluntary for one, otherwise this would be in the ballpark of robbery and the like (as in involuntary dispositions).

The act of giving a gift is not necessarily irreversible as there are ways to fight the disposition on grounds of fraud for one. Which would tick one of the requirements of fraud: the disposition needs to be unlawful.

Anyway you're right in that there are quite a few reasons to conclude this isn't fraud. If it is, it would be a very "heavy" case which would make this a felony in Germany.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Dreaming_Novaling@lemmy.zip 3 points 1 day ago (2 children)

This guy cheated on 35 different women for gifts and you go:

Also, what a legend.

I hope that's a /s 😔

[–] usualsuspect191@lemmy.ca 8 points 1 day ago

There's a certain threshold when you're no longer upset, just impressed. Like if someone ate my slice of cake vs they ate the entire fridge.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Hossenfeffer@feddit.uk 42 points 22 hours ago

Dude outed himself when he told Janice his birthday was the 35th of March.

[–] foodconsumer@lemmy.world 36 points 22 hours ago (2 children)

I'm stupid, can someone explain to me how this is illegal? Like morally questionable I get, but how is it illegal?

[–] tempest@lemmy.ca 70 points 21 hours ago (5 children)

According to a quick Google fraud in Japan is

obtaining property or illicit economic advantages through deceit.

Gifts I assume are property here

[–] SPRUNT@lemmy.world 28 points 21 hours ago (3 children)

Jesus Christ! Can we get some of that law in the US?!

[–] Ajen@sh.itjust.works 15 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

We do - romance scams are fraud, and they're illegal.

[–] Landless2029@lemmy.world 8 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

Enforcement is the issue. Cops in the USA wouldn't care about this.

[–] brown_guy45@lemmy.zip 3 points 2 hours ago

Cops in the US still care about a lot of laws which people don't even give fk about in LATAM, SA and SEA

[–] REDACTED@infosec.pub 6 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

Best I can do is legalizing corruption and then spend billion dollars on public programs explaining how lobbying helps the people, not capitalism

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] altphoto@lemmy.today 4 points 16 hours ago

I've studied laws like that for the better part of 25 years and I've formulated this new law ointment I'd like to call Lawinment2.0! IRS available at Walmart for $17.75! And the shipping is free because its a download. Just pay as you normally would thru Walmart pay and then head on over to laws.com and receive your free gift! And if you pay thru laws.com to receive a free 5% offer on an additional law you'll also receive this custom deluxe gorme designer bag gift pin retainer. Its our way of saying thank you! And thank you George Carling for this fine comedy bit.

[–] Part4@infosec.pub 9 points 10 hours ago

Presumably he had to give 35 presents too.

load more comments (3 replies)

I'm definitely not a legal expert, especially for Japan.

but this sounds like a con artist.

[–] hark@lemmy.world 31 points 23 hours ago (2 children)

We need to ban birthdays so this never happens again.

[–] Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 11 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

Monkey's paw curls. Now abortions are legal and forced.

[–] ballgoat@lemmy.zip 17 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

I thought Monkeys Paw had adverse outcomes.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] WereCat@lemmy.world 3 points 10 hours ago

So... We will be just spawns now?

[–] TheBat@lemmy.world 16 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] NatakuNox@lemmy.world 12 points 1 day ago

In one bed no less. Must be an Alaska king

[–] Brekky@lemmy.world 10 points 1 day ago

Take it he wasn't reciprocating the gifts?

[–] altkey@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Is that the gift economy I keep hearing about?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] FelixCress@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago
load more comments
view more: next ›