Thanks Thanks:  0
LMAO LMAO:  0
Dislikes Dislikes:  0
Ignorant Ignorant:  0
Moron Moron:  0
Page 5 of 9 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 125 of 212

Thread: TimTech versus Real Scummers. Whose is The Ethical Business?

  1. #101
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    19,835
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: TimTech versus Real Scummers. Whose is The Ethical Business?

    The tights I can handle,

    the mesh stockings not so much.
    The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing

  2. #102
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    49
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: TimTech versus Real Scummers. Whose is The Ethical Business?

    Quote Originally Posted by okosh View Post
    Now, now Judy....Is that any way to treat our guest??.....
    Paul admits to running a scam exchange and he seems most keen to join the list....
    So please add PaulCoonan to the list at once....

    .
    Ignorance begins where thinking for oneself ends.

    I do not run nor do I own a traffic exchange. Nor did I admit to "...running a scam..."

    What I stated is that my sites do not meet your extremely loose definition of a "scam site" based on the mere fact that I allow my members to promote many of the sites some of the people here appear to despise.

    Your assumptions allude to your ignorance.

    Besides, based on pure ignorance, one of my sites was already labeled a scam here based on the fact that the name of one of my sites is similar to the name of another site of a "known" scammer and it was assumed that I was somehow affiliated with this guy who I never heard of.

    I think we all old enough here to know what happens when one assumes something.

    Live up to the name of this site and hen peck the REAL SCAMS.

  3. #103
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Tassi Australia
    Posts
    3,478
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: TimTech versus Real Scummers. Whose is The Ethical Business?

    Quote Originally Posted by PaulCoonan View Post
    I do not run nor do I own a traffic exchange. Nor did I admit to "...running a scam..."

    What I stated is that my sites do not meet your extremely loose definition of a "scam site" based on the mere fact that I allow my members to promote many of the sites some of the people here appear to despise.
    I see you are well versed in "scammer speak"......There is nothing "loose" about how we define a scam....
    If it's a pyramid...A ponzi....or outright fraud then it's a scam....

    And you did confess....Here is your post again in case you forgot....

    Quote Originally Posted by PaulCoonan View Post
    My sites do not meet your criteria. My members promote all the same stuff you despise.
    ʎɐqǝ uo pɹɐoqʎǝʞ ɐ ʎnq ı ǝɯıʇ ʇsɐן ǝɥʇ sı sıɥʇ

  4. #104
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    19,835
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: TimTech versus Real Scummers. Whose is The Ethical Business?

    PaulCoonan, Pontius Pilate be thy name.

    Sergeant Schultz is my hero:

    "I hear nothing, I see nothing, I know nothing"
    The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing

  5. #105
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    49
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: TimTech versus Real Scummers. Whose is The Ethical Business?

    Quote Originally Posted by okosh View Post
    I see you are well versed in "scammer speak"......There is nothing "loose" about how we define a scam....
    If it's a pyramid...A ponzi....or outright fraud then it's a scam....

    And you did confess....Here is your post again in case you forgot....
    Oh here, let me requote your quote of my quote!

    My sites do not meet your criteria.
    My site that was deemed a "scam" in this forum was based on the mere fact that I allow my members to advertise sites that you do not like. That is just pure ignorance. I have an advertising site. I guess you forgot to leave that out of your LOOSE definition of a SCAM!

    Why don't you start a crusade against the biggest paid to click site in the world, Clixsense, or the biggest traffic exchange in the world, EasyHits4u? They appear to fit your this forum's criteira of "scam sites" to a T! The sites you despise the most are advertised on those 2 sites 10,000+ times more than any other advertising medium you want to attack. As your crusade is concerned, why not go for the giants? REALLY!!! Why not??? The little guys and nothings you go after appear to just be something to take up your time and means nothing! Go after the big dogs who are the industry leaders and example setters and then maybe you can feel proud of what you are doing, truly proud, instead of the false pride you gain from attacking insignificant nothings!

  6. #106
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    49
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: TimTech versus Real Scummers. Whose is The Ethical Business?

    Quote Originally Posted by littleroundman View Post
    PaulCoonan, Pontius Pilate be thy name.

    Sergeant Schultz is my hero:

    "I hear nothing, I see nothing, I know nothing"
    Then as an administrator of this group, you should say nothing!

  7. #107
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    19,835
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: TimTech versus Real Scummers. Whose is The Ethical Business?

    You see, Paul,

    I must confess to being old school when it comes to questions of "half truths" and "errors of omission" when it comes to the language of "marketing"

    For example, when a website owner says:

    "I can't remove all the scams from my traffic exchange"

    I immediately read that as more accurately being:

    "I don't want to remove" or "I can't be bothered to remove" or "I can't make as much if I remove" or "I don't know how to remove" or, even, "I believe it's OK to make money at the expense of others"

    Anything else, Paul, is simply justifying, rationalizing or laying off blame.
    The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing

  8. #108
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    49
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: TimTech versus Real Scummers. Whose is The Ethical Business?

    Quote Originally Posted by littleroundman View Post
    You see, Paul,

    I must confess to being old school when it comes to questions of "half truths" and "errors of omission" when it comes to the language of "marketing"

    For example, when a website owner says:

    "I can't remove all the scams from my traffic exchange"

    I immediately read that as more accurately being:

    "I don't want to remove" or "I can't be bothered to remove" or "I can't make as much if I remove" or "I don't know how to remove" or, even, "I believe it's OK to make money at the expense of others"

    Anything else, Paul, is simply justifying, rationalizing or laying off blame.
    I am old school as well and well versed and practiced in butting heads with Fox News Drones. You wanna go?

    What "you read into it" is pure ignorance. You have obviously never been a site owner nor are you a programmer. As a site developer and programmer for 12 years, I can say with 100% accuracy, it is impossible to remove all sites considered or proven to be scams. If this task was a true possibility, then it would serve as a model to rid the streets of all drugs dealers. The fact remains that the czars will always find ways to get their product out.

    You speak of "half truths" and "errors of omission" when in reality, you are just plain ignorant!

  9. #109
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    49
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: TimTech versus Real Scummers. Whose is The Ethical Business?

    Quote Originally Posted by littleroundman View Post
    You see, Paul,

    I must confess to being old school when it comes to questions of "half truths" and "errors of omission" when it comes to the language of "marketing"

    For example, when a website owner says:

    "I can't remove all the scams from my traffic exchange"

    I immediately read that as more accurately being:

    "I don't want to remove" or "I can't be bothered to remove" or "I can't make as much if I remove" or "I don't know how to remove" or, even, "I believe it's OK to make money at the expense of others"

    Anything else, Paul, is simply justifying, rationalizing or laying off blame.
    I will say again, as far as your crusade is concerned, your efforts are futile based on the direction you take. The US thought they could end the "drug problem" by removing the users from the picture. Then the feds thought they could make a difference by removing the petty small time street dealer. They realized they needed to go after the heads, the creators of the drugs to make an impact, but even that is a failure!

    Ridding the net of "scams" is no different. You can't even make a ding in the problem if you are going to demonize those who promote the sites that are illegal, especially when the people promoting them are making money! The US war on drugs serves as a perfect example of the war on internet scams. All you can do is educate. Demonizing people who promote the sites is useless. Been there, done that with the Internet Surfers Alliance Against Fraud, iSAAF.com a decade ago. Just as the war on drugs goes, as long as people are making money, it is a losing battle.

  10. #110
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    London UK
    Posts
    3,608
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: TimTech versus Real Scummers. Whose is The Ethical Business?

    Quote Originally Posted by okosh View Post
    Now, now Judy....Is that any way to treat our guest??.....
    Paul admits to running a scam exchange and he seems most keen to join the list....
    So please add PaulCoonan to the list at once....

    .
    I have not cleaned my glasses this morning. I did a quick Google for Paul Conman and could not find anything. I may have missed the point of your message. Has somebody called Paul Conman joined RS or said anything intelleigent?

  11. #111
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    609
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: TimTech versus Real Scummers. Whose is The Ethical Business?

    Quote Originally Posted by PaulCoonan View Post
    I will say again, as far as your crusade is concerned, your efforts are futile based on the direction you take. The US thought they could end the "drug problem" by removing the users from the picture. Then the feds thought they could make a difference by removing the petty small time street dealer. They realized they needed to go after the heads, the creators of the drugs to make an impact, but even that is a failure!

    Ridding the net of "scams" is no different. You can't even make a ding in the problem if you are going to demonize those who promote the sites that are illegal, especially when the people promoting them are making money! The US war on drugs serves as a perfect example of the war on internet scams. All you can do is educate. Demonizing people who promote the sites is useless. Been there, done that with the Internet Surfers Alliance Against Fraud, iSAAF.com a decade ago. Just as the war on drugs goes, as long as people are making money, it is a losing battle.
    First of all, IMHO, the Traffic Exchanges may well be legitimate online businesses as they offer nothing more than an exchange of click views for click views, BUT they do play a positive role in the enabling of scams, as a very large number of the sites they permit promote fraudulent operations - JustBeenPaid being only one of a multitude. As long as there is no serious vetting of sites permitted, they will continue to enable scams. Whether it is possible or, more to the point, in the interests of the TEs to control what is permitted, is another question and it seems that the "nearly anything goes" policy is the one that prevails. This is where the "shady label" justifiably gets attached to the TEs and you cannot blame people for criticitizing their policies of site approval. It is not rocket science to be able identify a ponzi or pyramid scheme after years and years on the web. Defending the innocence of a traffic exchange whilst permitting scam sites on it sounds to me like wanting to have your cake and eat it.

    I believe that it is possible to excercise far more control over sites permitted on all TEs and it is a question having the will to do it or not. (On a personal note, in 2008, Tim Linden's refusal to admit AdSurfDaily onto his rotator and his warning email to his members was a very effective first wake up call to many of us who believed ASD to be a legitimate advertising business. It is and was possible and there is no reason why that kind of action can't be made automatic, in order to protect TE members.)

    You are certainly right in your assertion that going after frauds can be a very risky business and is not for everyone. It is not something to be entered into lightly and everyone has to do their own risk assessment before starting to decide whether they can deal with the consequences. With the advent of the common use of the internet, the criminals of this world have turned to the web as a cleaner and easier way to steal and criminals are not nice people to deal with, especially the big ones. We disagree on the topic of the impossibility of winning the battle. Education of law enforcement is just as important as the education of the public. The latter helps people to stop joining scams and is important, but the former helps create better legislation and better enforcement. It is a job that has to be done and giving up will never change anything. For some people offering education will be a more realistic option than proactive scam busting! But both roles are necessary.

    I will agree with you that the use of the "name and shame" is, again IMHO, only valid if you get it right and there is the danger of falling into the trap of obsessing over individual indians and missing the chiefs completely. However the presence of what could be called the "usual senior indians" is a very useful red flag to look into a scheme. None of them have been known to make money out of legitimate businesses. But IMHO, once identified, it often more interesting to collect details of the scam itself, and publish that as education and pass it over to law enforcement to deal with the chiefs. But again it is a question of style and I say each to their own.

    Paul, you wont catch me defending the innocence of TEs. They know perfectly well what they are permitting on their exchanges and although they themselves are not involved in illegitimate business, they are certainly enabling it. If that is how they choose to make their money, the TE owners have to accept the chips the way they fall

  12. #112
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    19,835
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: TimTech versus Real Scummers. Whose is The Ethical Business?

    Paul, you DO know what is meant by the use of a "strawman" argument, don't you ??

    What on earth do Fox News, drug dealers or the war on drugs have to do with whether or not the owners of traffic exchanges are willing and/or able to police their advertisers ??

    Traffic exchanges carry a large percentage of illegal and immoral advertisers and advertising.

    The hows and whys are a completely separate issue as is the futility or otherwise of pointing the facts out to anyone else.

    I don't know about where you live, but here, to abandon hope and simply do nothing is referred to as "anarchy" and is something to be avoided.
    The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing

  13. #113
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    London UK
    Posts
    3,608
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: TimTech versus Real Scummers. Whose is The Ethical Business?

    Quote Originally Posted by PaulCoonan View Post
    Ignorance begins where thinking for oneself ends.

    One of my sites was already labeled a scam here based on the fact that the name of one of my sites is similar to the name of another site of a "known" scammer and it was assumed that I was somehow affiliated with this guy who I never heard of.

    I think we all old enough here to know what happens when one assumes something.
    I can tell you what happens if you have a similar name to a scammer Paul. It gives you the chance to stand up for youself and tell people who you are.

    I had a similar name to Nick Smirnow who got his thugs to divert attention away from him by claiming that I was an associate and bigger scammer than Smirnow. If you want to claim that path2prosperity is an associate of Nickers Smirnow from pathway2prosperity go ahead and do it. Scratchty has a name which is very similar to the name of a hard porn movie star. She stood up for herself. SO CAN YOU. If a couple of old women have some fight left, you should be able to muster up some guts or spherical objects to overcome minor setbacks like similarity in name to a known scammer.

  14. #114
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    49
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: TimTech versus Real Scummers. Whose is The Ethical Business?

    Quote Originally Posted by Lil Ol' Radical Me View Post
    First of all, IMHO, the Traffic Exchanges may well be legitimate online businesses as they offer nothing more than an exchange of click views for click views, BUT they do play a positive role in the enabling of scams, as a very large number of the sites they permit promote fraudulent operations - JustBeenPaid being only one of a multitude. As long as there is no serious vetting of sites permitted, they will continue to enable scams. Whether it is possible or, more to the point, in the interests of the TEs to control what is permitted, is another question and it seems that the "nearly anything goes" policy is the one that prevails. This is where the "shady label" justifiably gets attached to the TEs and you cannot blame people for criticitizing their policies of site approval. It is not rocket science to be able identify a ponzi or pyramid scheme after years and years on the web. Defending the innocence of a traffic exchange whilst permitting scam sites on it sounds to me like wanting to have your cake and eat it.

    I believe that it is possible to excercise far more control over sites permitted on all TEs and it is a question having the will to do it or not. (On a personal note, in 2008, Tim Linden's refusal to admit AdSurfDaily onto his rotator and his warning email to his members was a very effective first wake up call to many of us who believed ASD to be a legitimate advertising business. It is and was possible and there is no reason why that kind of action can't be made automatic, in order to protect TE members.)

    You are certainly right in your assertion that going after frauds can be a very risky business and is not for everyone. It is not something to be entered into lightly and everyone has to do their own risk assessment before starting to decide whether they can deal with the consequences. With the advent of the common use of the internet, the criminals of this world have turned to the web as a cleaner and easier way to steal and criminals are not nice people to deal with, especially the big ones. We disagree on the topic of the impossibility of winning the battle. Education of law enforcement is just as important as the education of the public. The latter helps people to stop joining scams and is important, but the former helps create better legislation and better enforcement. It is a job that has to be done and giving up will never change anything. For some people offering education will be a more realistic option than proactive scam busting! But both roles are necessary.

    I will agree with you that the use of the "name and shame" is, again IMHO, only valid if you get it right and there is the danger of falling into the trap of obsessing over individual indians and missing the chiefs completely. However the presence of what could be called the "usual senior indians" is a very useful red flag to look into a scheme. None of them have been known to make money out of legitimate businesses. But IMHO, once identified, it often more interesting to collect details of the scam itself, and publish that as education and pass it over to law enforcement to deal with the chiefs. But again it is a question of style and I say each to their own.

    Paul, you wont catch me defending the innocence of TEs. They know perfectly well what they are permitting on their exchanges and although they themselves are not involved in illegitimate business, they are certainly enabling it. If that is how they choose to make their money, the TE owners have to accept the chips the way they fall
    Nice to have an intelligent conversation in this matter, for a change.

    As a programmer, it is impossible to police all sites as a traffic exchange owner. There are so many ways to get around security checks that is makes it impossible. People are now finding ways to get hidden metal through the $100,000 body scanners at airports. As security increases, the vulnerabilities do as well. Those vulnerabilities get found.

    As a programmer I could, if I wanted to, get any porn site approved in most all traffic exchanges. When the site is being approved, the script or actual person checking the site would not see the real site. It is totally impossible to police like some people wish it could be.

    Sometimes I think people just wish they had an easy way to see only sites that were real business opportunities so they would never fall prey and they could actually get rich at the touch of button that was real. It is not the legal responsibility of the advertising mediums to protect people from products or services being advertised in their network. I can't sue a tv network over a product they advertised that did not work as expected.

    Those who fall prey, more times than not, have just not learned what to look out for, or did not listen to those who know better, and have no business trying to make a living online. Education is the key and the only solution.

    As a former and once well known internet scam reporter, good luck and choose you battles wisely.

    Here is a very simple question regarding your "enabling theory." If a city cannot rid itself of all prostitution and drug dealers, does that city become an enabler?

  15. Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post
  16. #115
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    London UK
    Posts
    3,608
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: TimTech versus Real Scummers. Whose is The Ethical Business?

    Quote Originally Posted by Lil Ol' Radical Me View Post
    I believe that it is possible to excercise far more control over sites permitted on all TEs and it is a question having the will to do it or not. (On a personal note, in 2008, Tim Linden's refusal to admit AdSurfDaily onto his rotator and his warning email to his members was a very effective first wake up call to many of us who believed ASD to be a legitimate advertising business. It is and was possible and there is no reason why that kind of action can't be made automatic, in order to protect TE members.)
    Congrats for pointing that out LORM. A RS member "grumpyoldfart" ran a traffic exchange and policed it for a very long time. I will see if he is interested in teaching this Paul Conman how to run a traffic exchange that bans porn, ponzis and viscious serial scammers.

    I really must clean my glasses to see if I have spelled Paul's name incorrectly.
    Last edited by path2prosperity; 05-30-2012 at 05:15 AM.

  17. #116
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    London UK
    Posts
    3,608
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: TimTech versus Real Scummers. Whose is The Ethical Business?

    Quote Originally Posted by PaulCoonan View Post
    Nice to have an intelligent conversation in this matter, for a change.

    As a programmer, it is impossible to police all sites as a traffic exchange owner.
    I think that is "spherical objects " Paul but I am not a programmer so I will se if "grumpyoldfart" wants to challenge you on that.

  18. #117
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    49
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: TimTech versus Real Scummers. Whose is The Ethical Business?

    Quote Originally Posted by path2prosperity View Post
    Congrats for pointing that out LORM. A RS member "grumpyoldfart" ran a traffic exchange and policed it for a very long time. I will see if he is interested in teaching this Paul Conman how to run a traffic exchange that bans porn, ponzis and viscious serial scammers.

    I really must clean my glasses to see if I have spelled Paul's name incorrectly.
    Hey Path2Prosperity, care to share if you live up to you name? Or are you just a grumpyoldfart yourself?

    If you actually googled me, as any non-ignorant person can, even if they are in the first grade, you have seen there is very much info about me. So stop playing the ignoramus and pull you head out of your ass.

  19. #118
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    609
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: TimTech versus Real Scummers. Whose is The Ethical Business?

    Quote Originally Posted by PaulCoonan View Post
    Nice to have an intelligent conversation in this matter, for a change.

    As a programmer, it is impossible to police all sites as a traffic exchange owner. There are so many ways to get around security checks that is makes it impossible. People are now finding ways to get hidden metal through the $100,000 body scanners at airports. As security increases, the vulnerabilities do as well. Those vulnerabilities get found.

    As a programmer I could, if I wanted to, get any porn site approved in most all traffic exchanges. When the site is being approved, the script or actual person checking the site would not see the real site. It is totally impossible to police like some people wish it could be.

    Sometimes I think people just wish they had an easy way to see only sites that were real business opportunities so they would never fall prey and they could actually get rich at the touch of button that was real. It is not the legal responsibility of the advertising mediums to protect people from products or services being advertised in their network. I can't sue a tv network over a product they advertised that did not work as expected.

    Those who fall prey, more times than not, have just not learned what to look out for, or did not listen to those who know better, and have no business trying to make a living online. Education is the key and the only solution.

    As a former and once well known internet scam reporter, good luck and choose you battles wisely.

    Here is a very simple question regarding your "enabling theory." If a city cannot rid itself of all prostitution and drug dealers, does that city become an enabler?
    Sorry Paul, the CANNOT control the content arguement doesn't wash for me. OK you can never get rid of the hard core scammers who are smart enough to change their splash pages, but you can get rid of 95% and you can keep a more watchful eye on what goes on. It may well be time consuming or difficult, but that does not make it impossible. Throwing one's hands in the air and saying "it's too difficult" is not an argument when TEs are for profit businesses.

    And as for your comparison with cities and crime - the short answer is when a city does NOT make real attempts to clean up its streets, then it must take some of the responsibility for what goes on in them. It is untrue that good policing and clean ups do not work. Many cities have cleaned up whole areas of petty crime by trying. Noone is saying that that the hard core do not find other places, but it has certainly been effective on chasing out the indians. Policed areas have better safety records than those which are neglected and left to get on with it.

    Once again - yes the hard core will always be around, but proper control can get rid of one heck of a lot of trouble. It's a question of resources and whether or not you are willing to use them.

  20. #119
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    49
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: TimTech versus Real Scummers. Whose is The Ethical Business?

    Quote Originally Posted by Lil Ol' Radical Me View Post
    Sorry Paul, the CANNOT control the content arguement doesn't wash for me. OK you can never get rid of the hard core scammers who are smart enough to change their splash pages, but you can get rid of 95% and you can keep a more watchful eye on what goes on. It may well be time consuming or difficult, but that does not make it impossible. Throwing one's hands in the air and saying "it's too difficult" is not an argument when TEs are for profit businesses.

    And as for your comparison with cities and crime - the short answer is when a city does NOT make real attempts to clean up its streets, then it must take some of the responsibility for what goes on in them. It is untrue that good policing and clean ups do not work. Many cities have cleaned up whole areas of petty crime by trying. Noone is saying that that the hard core do not find other places, but it has certainly been effective on chasing out the indians. Policed areas have better safety records than those which are neglected and left to get on with it.

    Once again - yes the hard core will always be around, but proper control can get rid of one heck of a lot of trouble. It's a question of resources and whether or not you are willing to use them.
    Now we are getting down to business!

    Most every traffic exchange has a link to report a site, a citizen police force if you will, to rid offending sites that make it passed initial screening whether that screening is manual or scripted.

    Splash pages can be illusive, but as programmer, I don't have to use a fake splash page to get people to see porn if I want to promote porn, but it would not get seen many times before it gets flagged by THE PEOPLE! I am not going to go into details, but the bottom line is, the PEOPLE are the ultimate police force, the surfers! If they accept what they see, the people have spoken! Bottom line! What THE PEOPLE accept will always remain in rotation! Even if it is a site that somehow gets passed initial screening, once again, whether scripted or manual, that site will remain in rotation until it gets reported!

    So who is truly to blame? The site or the people surfing who allow it to be there???

  21. #120
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    609
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: TimTech versus Real Scummers. Whose is The Ethical Business?

    Quote Originally Posted by PaulCoonan View Post
    Now we are getting down to business!

    Most every traffic exchange has a link to report a site, a citizen police force if you will, to rid offending sites that make it passed initial screening whether that screening is manual or scripted.

    Splash pages can be illusive, but as programmer, I don't have to use a fake splash page to get people to see porn if I want to promote porn, but it would not get seen many times before it gets flagged by THE PEOPLE! I am not going to go into details, but the bottom line is, the PEOPLE are the ultimate police force, the surfers! If they accept what they see, the people have spoken! Bottom line! What THE PEOPLE accept will always remain in rotation! Even if it is a site that somehow gets passed initial screening, once again, whether scripted or manual, that site will remain in rotation until it gets reported!

    So who is truly to blame? The site who allow it to be there or the people surfing ???
    There, fixed it for you

  22. #121
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    49
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: TimTech versus Real Scummers. Whose is The Ethical Business?

    Quote Originally Posted by Lil Ol' Radical Me View Post
    There, fixed it for you
    Good luck with that.

    It is nice to see our posts so close together so people can clearly see how you not only changed my "quote" but took me out of context as well.

    Have a good day, and best of luck in your crusade. Focus your attention in the right places and you might make a difference, (said the former owner of the Internet Surfers Alliance Against Fraud from 2001 to 2002 who sees history repeating itself. Nothing like remembering and learning history from someone who lived it, but if a person is not willing to listen, so be it... I will move on.)

  23. #122
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    19,835
    Post Thanks / Like

  24. #123
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    49
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: TimTech versus Real Scummers. Whose is The Ethical Business?

    Thanks for the free advertising! Not like you found anything hidden! It's all public! <kisses>

  25. #124
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    609
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: TimTech versus Real Scummers. Whose is The Ethical Business?

    Quote Originally Posted by PaulCoonan View Post
    Good luck with that.

    It is nice to see our posts so close together so people can clearly see how you not only changed my "quote" but took me out of context as well.

    Have a good day, and best of luck in your crusade. Focus your attention in the right places and you might make a difference, (said the former owner of the Internet Surfers Alliance Against Fraud from 2001 to 2002 who sees history repeating itself. Nothing like remembering and learning history from someone who lived it, but if a person is not willing to listen, so be it... I will move on.)
    It was not only "nice" but deliberate that our posts were close together, so people can see how clearly I changed your quote.

    I have listened to you, but simply do not agree that it is not possible to exercise more control over the sites permitted on for-profit TEs, nor that we should give up on trying. The same goes for the fight against any kind of crime. Just because it is hard, doesnt justify giving up, although you rightly p๒int out that stopping the scams themselves is not for everyone that doesnt excuse their knowing enablement. AND you have to remember that running a TE is a business choice for profit, not a social service run on limited public funds.

    (The fact that the current US laws on Drug Enforcement dont work is no reason to give up the fight against drug abuse nor the education campaign against it either.)

  26. #125
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    49
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: TimTech versus Real Scummers. Whose is The Ethical Business?

    I especially find it interesting how you doctored screen shots! I feel sorry for you that you feel you have to stoop so low!

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •