|
Hi Gary;
============================
To me, it seems like an electronic variation of the old pyramid sales letter scheme ..where you send $X to the name at the top of the lists then add your name to the bottom of the lists.
The problem, as I see it, is threefold:
1 - Lots of people will not be interested at all (reduces the numbers).
2 - Lots of people will cheat the system (ie put their name at the top)
3 - Very soon, because of the exponential growth of the numbers there are not enough people left to propagate the system.
============================
With the traditional pyramids, those are very true.
With the "paypal randomizer" there's a whole new twist that many don't think of and probably many people don't understand.
See, in the "old" pyramid (on paper) people could cheat and put their name at the top. They can't do that with the paypal randomizer.
But, there are two things that come into play with an online randomizer such as this one.
1) There are many types of randomizers. Is it an evenly weighted randomizer? Or an uneven randomizer.
You see, in an evenly weighted randomizer, each name would show once, in random order, before a name is shown twice.
In an uneven randomizer, one name can be shown multiple times before another name comes up even once.
If it's an uneven randomizer, what is the weight criteria? Is it set by number of referrals? By owner preference? Or how?
Most people don't understand enough about technology and it leaves them vulnerable. For example, counters can be tripped and set to count in increments and inflated. Randomizers can be set with even weight or uneven weight according to the criteria set by the programmer/owner.
2) In a typical pyramid the supposition is that the more people in the pyramid, the more you make. In a randomizer such as this one, it's more like a lottery.
For example, if there are 5 people whose names "come up at random" - they would get paid more often. But what about when there is 5,000? One name isn't going to come up quite so often then.
Unless, of course, it's weighted as I discussed in the above point. Then the issue becomes "what is the weighting criteria?" - something that no one I talked to (so far) had any information about.
: )
Linda
|