Thread: Traffic monsoon. Better than MAPS with trusted admin Charles Scoville

Originally Posted by Fat City, LA

Its sad how desperate Scamville has gotten for any praise no matter how crackpottish.
https://www.facebook.com/groups/Traf...6237086410435/

Other than to the few remaining faithful, nothing Scoville says from here on in is going to make the slightest difference.

Spout away all you want, Charlie.

Originally Posted by laidback

So, you're sayin' that if Chuckles was a contestant on "Are you smarter than a 5th grader," he'd fail miserably? Just askin'!

Of course!

Originally Posted by littleroundman

Other than to the few remaining faithful, nothing Scoville says from here on in is going to make the slightest difference.

Spout away all you want, Charlie.

Yes. Anything Scamville, Scamey Williams, Scamil Patel, Jose Nonsense, etc say now is just the sound of a turd hitting the bowl.

Originally Posted by laidback

So, you're sayin' that if Chuckles was a contestant on "Are you smarter than a 5th grader," he'd fail miserably? Just askin'!

And Stacy Williams could easily win "America's next top moron".....

Lynn is on a roll! BAMMM!

William_G_Bryant.jpg

so that would be a resounding 'no'. knew you were a coward bryant.

Originally Posted by okosh

And Stacy Williams could easily win "America's next top moron".....

Stacy's been very quiet recently... perhaps he's working on a point by point response to Muhammad, involving bakeries and Happy Meals...

Originally Posted by stephenjgray

Stacy's been very quiet recently... perhaps he's working on a point by point response to Muhammad, involving bakeries and Happy Meals...

That powerpoint for the SEC doesn't assemble itself.

Remember when Charles and Stacy thought Traffic Monsoon and Neobux were a great comparison?

NeoBux Scam? Yes It Is In My Opinion! - Ethan Vanderbuilt

Originally Posted by stephenjgray

Stacy's been very quiet recently... perhaps he's working on a point by point response to Muhammad, involving bakeries and Happy Meals...

stacy did respond to Muhammad's post with his typical circle jerk logic and here's his reply, and I quote:

"let me give you and the world revolves around me muhaamad.. some facts the extra 5 $ is not owed at the sell of the service purchased by the customer ... the purchasing of the service and any service disqualifies that money to do anything except pay the expenses owed by the traffic monsoon . once you agree to purchase something the money is gone and you receive a service you paid for.. the transaction at that point is finished end of story ..

by buying an adpack it does allow you to share in company revenue no matter where it was originated. revenue is revenue.. to qualify for this sharing of revenue one must perform a service and complete a task set forth by the admin of the monsoon. and since he is in the business of traffic hit generation he ask that a member surf 50 ads minimum . and you may surf more if you need more hits to your promotions.. the only way money returns in any form or is paid to any member is through being paid to click on advertisements , this is a common feature found on such websites as neobux and clixsense ..

ads are placed on the website for members to click on . once a member clicks on an advertisement he or she is paid an amount of money to do so.. one might say that the only reason for clicking on advertisements on those two mentioned websites is not to lose money but rather to gain more money than you started with .. if its illegal for the traffic monsoon to allow members to surf ads for profit neobux and clixsense ought not to be allowed to perform the same actions= clicking for profit..

on real scam forum ribshaw mentioned he has no issue with the buying of a traffic package for 50$ he goes on to say that Charles should have had another website where he pays folks 5$ to surf 50 ads.

a few questions i ask is why would he have to open another site just to make the paying of money to an ad clicker more or less legal? why would he only have to pay 5$ for 50 ads since he is collecting money on one site and then taking whats left over expenses and paying ad clickers why not offer all of that to his ad clickers ? why not pay 55$ every time someone surfs 2750 ads ? you might say well he will go bankrupt doing so ? well not if he only shares what he has when he can . no point in sharing more than you have taken in in the form of an IOU.. only pay folks what you can as you can for instance he could allow members to click 50 ads a day on his rib Shaw legal other website and allow those members to earn up to 1$ a day for clicking ads . and yes he would still have no problem with the transactions because to him the paying money from one website already collected and dispersing it to clickers of a another website is completely legal no matter how much he shares with the other website.."

And of course he broke both his arms patting himself on the back thinking he had debunked Muhammad's points. Wouldn't it be rich if stacy was the next one to get a subpoena from the Receiver?

Originally Posted by Bestbud

Lynn is on a roll! BAMMM!

William_G_Bryant.jpg

Actually William deleted the post I made in response to my post. I am just shocked he hasn't banned me and deleted this post as well. He's been deleting all posts asking him about his subpoena, and I was surprised that he left my post up.

Originally Posted by EagleOne

I was surprised that he left my post up.

Even ponzi pimps gotta sleep sometime

Originally Posted by stephenjgray

Stacy's been very quiet recently...

What can he say ???

Other than wild conspiracy theories and even wilder distortion of the relevant laws by uninformed Monsooners what has happened since the day the SEC injunction was granted and Traffic Monsoon was stopped dead by the Federal Judge ???

All stacy can do is continue his strategy of trying to get under peoples' skin by advancing more and more nonsensical theories and irrelevant analogies.

Does anyone sensible REALLY think Scoville will be exonerated, everything will returned to "normal" and Traffic Monsoon will be allowed to continue ???

Originally Posted by EagleOne

stacy did respond to Muhammad's post with his typical circle jerk logic and here's his reply, and I quote:

"let me give you and the world revolves around me muhaamad.. some facts the extra 5 $ is not owed at the sell of the service purchased by the customer ... the purchasing of the service and any service disqualifies that money to do anything except pay the expenses owed by the traffic monsoon . once you agree to purchase something the money is gone and you receive a service you paid for.. the transaction at that point is finished end of story ..

by buying an adpack it does allow you to share in company revenue no matter where it was originated. revenue is revenue.. to qualify for this sharing of revenue one must perform a service and complete a task set forth by the admin of the monsoon. and since he is in the business of traffic hit generation he ask that a member surf 50 ads minimum . and you may surf more if you need more hits to your promotions.. the only way money returns in any form or is paid to any member is through being paid to click on advertisements , this is a common feature found on such websites as neobux and clixsense ..

ads are placed on the website for members to click on . once a member clicks on an advertisement he or she is paid an amount of money to do so.. one might say that the only reason for clicking on advertisements on those two mentioned websites is not to lose money but rather to gain more money than you started with .. if its illegal for the traffic monsoon to allow members to surf ads for profit neobux and clixsense ought not to be allowed to perform the same actions= clicking for profit..

on real scam forum ribshaw mentioned he has no issue with the buying of a traffic package for 50$ he goes on to say that Charles should have had another website where he pays folks 5$ to surf 50 ads.

a few questions i ask is why would he have to open another site just to make the paying of money to an ad clicker more or less legal? why would he only have to pay 5$ for 50 ads since he is collecting money on one site and then taking whats left over expenses and paying ad clickers why not offer all of that to his ad clickers ? why not pay 55$ every time someone surfs 2750 ads ? you might say well he will go bankrupt doing so ? well not if he only shares what he has when he can . no point in sharing more than you have taken in in the form of an IOU.. only pay folks what you can as you can for instance he could allow members to click 50 ads a day on his rib Shaw legal other website and allow those members to earn up to 1$ a day for clicking ads . and yes he would still have no problem with the transactions because to him the paying money from one website already collected and dispersing it to clickers of a another website is completely legal no matter how much he shares with the other website.."

And of course he broke both his arms patting himself on the back thinking he had debunked Muhammad's points. Wouldn't it be rich if stacy was the next one to get a subpoena from the Receiver?

Jeeez... LOL... you have to hand it to Stacy... he's never lost for words is he. Charles must be very proud.

Originally Posted by stephenjgray

Jeeez... LOL... you have to hand it to Stacy... he's never lost for words is he. Charles must be very proud.

scammers always think more, say nothing words = more right.

Sunil is getting very upset about "haters" targeting him. We've had a few ranting posts and memes posted about haters. Suppose he didn't like this person's picture added after his, as person was booted very quickly.

screenshot.73.jpg

Originally Posted by it's like eating a burger stacy

revenue is revenue..

No, no it isn't and hasn't been since this thread started.

stacys back 2.jpg

A Ponzi scheme (/ˈpɒn.zi/; also a Ponzi game)[1] is a fraudulent investment operation where the operator, an individual or organization, pays returns to its investors from new capital paid to the operators by new investors, rather than from profit earned through legitimate sources. Operators of Ponzi schemes usually entice new investors by offering higher returns than other investments, in the form of short-term returns that are either abnormally high or unusually consistent.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ponzi_scheme


Koscot Test

(1) Payment of money to the company;
(2) The participant receives the right to sell a product (or service);
(3) The participant receives compensation for recruiting others into the program;
(4) The compensation is unrelated to the sale of products (or services) to the ultimate user.

A (MLM) Skeptic: MLM Dictionary: Koscot Test

The Amway Safeguards Rule

1. This rule required that representatives make 10 sales to retail customers as a qualification for eligibility to receive commissions and bonuses on sales/purchases made by other representatives in their personal sales organization.
2. representatives to sell a minimum of 70% of previously purchased product before placing a new order.
3. an official "buy-back" policy for unsold, unopened inventory

Pyramid: Yes or No

Originally Posted by it's like eating a burger stacy

on real scam forum ribshaw mentioned he has no issue with the buying of a traffic package for 50$ he goes on to say that Charles should have had another website where he pays folks 5$ to surf 50 ads.

I don't think I said he had to create another website, and I believe it was click 500 ads for $5 otherwise returns would be Ponziesque.

Originally Posted by it's like eating a burger stacy

a few questions i ask is why would he have to open another site just to make the paying of money to an ad clicker more or less legal?

He doesn't, he has to have people actually buying advertising with the expectation of making a return from whatever THEY are selling. In the case of the Monsoon best case that always seemed to be another Ponzi/Pyramid, worst case referral links for Monsoon itself.

Then you would need 1000s of people not involved in the scheme to view those ads. That is how real advertising works.

Originally Posted by it's like eating a burger stacy

why would he only have to pay 5$ for 50 ads since he is collecting money on one site and then taking whats left over expenses and paying ad clickers why not offer all of that to his ad clickers ? why not pay 55$ every time someone surfs 2750 ads ?

Namely because clicking 2750 ads doesn't pay $55 in this world or any other. Another sign Scoves was runnin a Ponzi.

Originally Posted by it's like eating a burger stacy

you might say well he will go bankrupt doing so ? well not if he only shares what he has when he can . no point in sharing more than you have taken in in the form of an IOU.. only pay folks what you can

Stacy Monsoon is bankrupt, which is exactly why Ponzi schemes are an illegal business model. At present people in Monsoon believe that they were owed about $500,000,000 through the creation of Ad Packs out of thin air.

Yet...

"Thus far the Receiver has marshaled $49.5 million in assets."
SEC: Traffic Monsoon does not have sufficient funds to repay investors


Even with your narrow Ponzi World view Charles didn't do what you both claim he was doing.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/Traf...6809926353151/

Scamville accoutability.jpg


Muhammad Maf Rahman
" Jose, in fairness this is a good post, many of the points you made hold true when it comes to the human condition. People do look for scapegoats; it is easier to blame someone else when things go wrong. Taking responsibility for your own actions, holding oneself to account and introspection would go a long way in solving many of the social and political ills that we witness in this day and age.

Having spoken to many people who joined TM and following their comments online, it is clear to me that the vast majority (who have become anti-TM) have accepted responsibility for the part they played in joining this scheme. Many have commented that their actions were motivated by greed when they saw an opportunity to get rich quick etc., but let’s not forget that many vulnerable people who experience economic hardship have also been emotionally exploited into joining TM with the promise of making money (‘putting food on the table’ as Immy kept saying) and a way out of poverty.

Either way the point is, it takes two to tango, the irony is that many of the points you mention about taking responsibility/being held to account would equally apply to and should really be aimed at Charles. Has Charles shown any contrition? Has he shown any sorrow and taken personal responsibility for the lives that have been affected due to this doomed TM project? Has he offered any apologies? Has at least offered an apology as a CEO for the position TM finds itself in?

A true leader takes responsibility for his own flock and doesn’t abandon them when times get tough (even if the difficulties caused are not of his/her doing). When the times were good Charles was happy to play the TM ‘family’ card but as soon as things started going pear shaped all we have heard is excuse upon excuse, contradiction after contradiction; on one hand Charles claims that he is fighting tooth and nail for his TM family but then makes comments like “oh well it was an ad service, I never promised you any revenue......buyer beware......I only promised you an ad-service nothing else......go and blame paypal/SEC don’t blame me” which basically means ‘the shi* has hit the fan and you’re on your own’!

In my mind there is no doubt that a crime has taken place, there are victims, and time will tell who the perpetrator is. It would be interesting to see who you hold to account once the court has ruled and whether you will persist thereafter in blaming the victim for the actions of the criminal."
Like · 2 · 14 hrs

Originally Posted by Muhammad Maf Rahman

https://www.facebook.com/groups/Traf...6809926353151/



A true leader takes responsibility for his own flock and doesn’t abandon them when times get tough (even if the difficulties caused are not of his/her doing).
Like · 2 · 14 hrs

People continue to confuse the definition of "leader" in MLM.

Leader in MLM = Con man

In other words, there is no such thing as a bad leader in MLM - They're all bad. I believe it's hard for people to grasp that concept. Think of "bad murderers", "bad thieves", or "bad drunk drivers".

Ah, I wondered what way Our Shazza was going to jump. Cryptocurrency it seems. Wonder if that was what she and her bezzie make Anita were talking about on their "girly" (cough) weekend?

tm 348 oCT 16.jpg TM 349 Oct 16.jpg

Meanwhile, Anita is waiting longingly for TM to return......

TM 350 Oct 16.jpg

Good luck with that, 'Nita.

Coin Leaders and DasCoin present the usual comparisons to legitimate cryptocurrencies and crap about external use of the coin through a merchant network.

The reality however is that Coin Leaders and DasCoin offer up nothing more than a Ponzi pyramid hybrid.

Coin Leaders Review: DasCoin is a OneCoin Ponzi points clone

Originally Posted by EagleOne

Actually William deleted the post I made in response to my post. I am just shocked he hasn't banned me and deleted this post as well. He's been deleting all posts asking him about his subpoena, and I was surprised that he left my post up.

Well, William's not scared, so there!

TM 351 Oct 16.jpg

And don't anyone argue with him or he'll bring his Dad along, and his Dad is bigger than your Dad, so double there!!

William G Bryant is definitely sweating the Subpoena he received. Otherwise, he wouldn't be trying to justify that it means something else. Once the Receiver files her Initial Status Report, William G Bryant will really be singing the blues...

Originally Posted by Della Cate

Ah, I wondered what way Our Shazza was going to jump. Cryptocurrency it seems. Wonder if that was what she and her bezzie make Anita were talking about on their "girly" (cough) weekend?

tm 348 oCT 16.jpg TM 349 Oct 16.jpg

Meanwhile, Anita is waiting longingly for TM to return......

TM 350 Oct 16.jpg

Good luck with that, 'Nita.

Looking forward to the relaunch of TM Anita? Where have you been for the last few months? There is more chance of the origunal 1960s moon rockets being relaunched.

Originally Posted by Bestbud

William G Bryant is definitely sweating the Subpoena he received. Otherwise, he wouldn't be trying to justify that it means something else. Once the Receiver files her Initial Status Report, William G Bryant will really be singing the blues...

lol. he certainly is.