From one media manipulator to another: when you pay the premium price for a long-standing hacker news account, it's usually more convincing to let people find the comment history for themselves.
Well, personally my guess is that it's actually a legitimate user since the username is based on their real name, and they've linked to their Twitter account in the past. It'd be pretty silly to sell an account so closely linked to your identity. Unless it was hacked and sold without the user's knowledge I guess.
Is it really that much of a premium price? I’ve found a few HN accounts with downvote privileges for sale for reasonable prices compared to what people usually spend on marketing.
This sort of activity and behavior is common on sites like reddit. It's used by media companies and brands, especially as the reach is much bigger than HN comments.
Astroturfing is big business and can be very profitable. An account itself isn't worth much, it's the overall execution that matters.
I'd love to see HN or Reddit or someone work with the feds on how to investigate and prosecute astroturfing/sockpuppets/shilling, perhaps as unauthorized computer access and/or fraud.
Astroturfing and shilling isn’t illegal. Unless an account was hacked, no crime has been committed. Even lying generally isn’t a crime. In terms of fraud, there has to be a determination of unlawful gain or to deprive a victim of a legal right. Astroturfing isn’t fraud, nor is shilling.
