People in boiler room operations pumping up bogus pharmaceuticals --- for example --- aren't themselves drug researchers and can, of course, tell themselves that they worked not on a scam, but on a product that didn't in the end worked out and simply turned out to be a bad investment.
wolco's point, I think, is that BTC "was supposed" to be a payment mechanism, not a store of value. Those who used it "as directed" ended up no worse for it, while those who "invested" lost their money, but "it's their fault".
The fun part is looking back at any bitcoin thread from the past two years, seeing people mention high transaction fees or delays, and the chorus of replies that it's not a currency but a store of value.
How are the people in the boiler room "lying"? They're not drug researchers. They have no idea if what they're pushing is a good investment or not; all they know is that it's weird that they've somehow got their hands on it, rather than JPMC or GS. The situations strike me as fairly analogous.
We have no trouble calling penny stock pushers dialing for dollars exactly what they are, but when it comes to "cryptocurrency", we're all supposed to keep our mouths shut. That makes no sense to me. What's scary is, the instinct in a lot of places will be to take the analogy and unwind the other side of it --- maybe we should reconsider the morality
of the boiler room operations! Maybe they're doing a service after all! Caveat emptor, after all!
People in boiler room operations pumping up bogus pharmaceuticals --- for example --- aren't themselves drug researchers and can, of course, tell themselves that they worked not on a scam, but on a product that didn't in the end worked out and simply turned out to be a bad investment.