Cy-mails

[lil crusader]

It was bad enough that this program blatantly tells everyone on its sign-up page that you are expected to do all searches sent to you or you won't be paid (and in case you're wondering, search ads are all they send, so choosing non-search is a useless option):

http://img156.imageshack.us/img156/1015/cysignuppagevb8.jpg

But now, on top of that, an admin mail was sent out today telling members that this site is having a "valid search contest"!! Basically, the 10 people who commit the most click fraud between 8/14 and 8/19 will be rewarded with extra money -- money the PO can easily afford since the bulk of the search ads being sent from this site are his and so he profits from every single valid search that he demands:

Hi all!
Cy-mails had a ref contest, end in 31-8
And now, a other contest will be open
It is "Vaild search contest"

Easy to win
1- Read mails
2- Do a vaild search
3- Send us a mail : (contest@cy-mails.com)
- Your ip
- quantity of search
Note: Send daily

Prizel for winner : (10 members)
1- 3$ and 30000 banner impressions
2- 2$ and 15000 banner impressions
3- 1$ and 10000 banner impressions
4- 0.7$
5- 0.6$
6- 0.5$
7- 0.4$
8- 0.3$
9- 0.2$
10- 0.1$

Contest will launch from 14/08/2006, end in 19/08/2006
Good luck to all!

Regards!

This site goes so far beyond being a click fraud is cool program that I can't even think of strong enough words to describe it.

[freecashspace]

There seems to be no limit to how low these people will go to pull their click fraud scams, is there?

Yet people seem to be more than happy to join these programs as long as they're reasonably assured they'll get paid for helping rip people off.

Cheers,

Wil

[lil crusader]

I can't decide which is worse - the fact that these programs exist or that so few people seem to care.

[Spare-Dollars]

I can't decide which is worse - the fact that these programs exist or that so few people seem to care.

I think there are more that care but do not want to be vocal about it in the
forums. Like with my member that reported this site to me, which in return
I passed the link on to you. The member cared enough to make the report.

Anyway, great job with exposing them! My complaint has been submitted.

[freecashspace]

I can't decide which is worse - the fact that these programs exist or that so few people seem to care.We've known for a long time that the vast majority of people in PTR care about nothing except whether they get paid or not. I doubt that's going to change any time soon.

Of those who actually do care about anything beyond the next deposit in their Paypal or E-Gold account, I guess different people put their energy into caring about different aspects of the problem. 0-iframes, deadbeat POs, cheaters using clickbot software, spammers, charge-backs, and whatever else. Not to mention for some of us there's only a limited amount of time to devote to caring about the various scams involved in our little industry because we're busy causing mischief in various forums.

Cheers,

Wil

[lil crusader]

I think there are more that care but do not want to be vocal about it in the
forums. Like with my member that reported this site to me, which in return
I passed the link on to you. The member cared enough to make the report.

Anyway, great job with exposing them! My complaint has been submitted.

I hope you're right Kim and I guess it's kind of understandable that some people would be reluctant to incur the wrath of some of the most vocal pro-click fraud people. I noticed that even the person who'd started a thread about this program on GPF and initially agreed it was one to stay away from, did a sudden about face once the pro-click fraud people started showing up.

[azhippie]

If you are referring to me, I did no "sudden about face' . I asked for opinions from members of Cy-mails and another site. You posted the screen shot with that message. I thanked you several times in that thread for posting it. However, I DID go ahead and join the site, and I stated that it was 'out of curiostiy', to see if he actually paid someone who didn't search all the emails. You joined the site also, for reasons of your own, so what is the difference? And if I don't get paid, no big deal, just out a little of my time. I STILL think it's a site to tay away from, if you really expect to get paid, I don't promaote it anyone and if asked, would say that it's a scam.

So tell me the difference in you joining the site, for various reasons, and my joining it for the reasons I did.

ETA ~
I don't appreciate being accused of doing an "about face' because of pressure from the "click frauders' (your term, not mine) Especially since I agreed with you about this site being a scam.

And people wonder why so many of us are not open to your viewpoint? Why would we be, with the way it is presented? Someone agrees with what you posted and we still get accused of things that aren't true.

[lil crusader]

If you are referring to me, I did no "sudden about face' . I asked for opinions from members of Cy-mails and another site. You posted the screen shot with that message. I thanked you several times in that thread for posting it. However, I DID go ahead and join the site, and I stated that it was 'out of curiostiy', to see if he actually paid someone who didn't search all the emails. You joined the site also, for reasons of your own, so what is the difference? And if I don't get paid, no big deal, just out a little of my time. I STILL think it's a site to tay away from, if you really expect to get paid, I don't promaote it anyone and if asked, would say that it's a scam.

So tell me the difference in you joining the site, for various reasons, and my joining it for the reasons I did.

ETA ~
I don't appreciate being accused of doing an "about face' because of pressure from the "click frauders' (your term, not mine) Especially since I agreed with you about this site being a scam.

And people wonder why so many of us are not open to your viewpoint? Why would we be, with the way it is presented? Someone agrees with what you posted and we still get accused of things that aren't true.


azhippie: I referred to your doing an about face because while it's true that you initially acknowledged that this was a site to avoid because of the impossibility of being able to do a valid search from every email ad....by page 2 of the thread, for no apparent reason other than to join in with the stoning, you posted this:

http://www.getpaidforum.com/forums/index.php?s=&showtopic=463369&view=findpost&p=4531700

All that had been posted prior to this was proof of click fraud via things taken from the program itself...and statements of fact given in reply to questions. Your post followed attempts to defend these kinds of programs and you referred to those of us who try to expose them as being "PTR Police" and the "Gestapo" who were trying to force our beliefs down others' throats. Anyone reading that thread knows how things progressed from that point.

And yes, I did join that site too and never made a secret of it - but I didn't join to see if I could get paid....I joined to have access to all the ways this PO is manipulating you and every other member into committing click fraud for him. I had to join to get the proof needed to expose what's going on in this program to both potential new members as well as SE owners. It's got nothing to do with seeing if I can get paid.

That's my reason for being there and maybe there isn't any difference between why I'm there and why you are...to me there is, but if you don't agree, that's fine too.

P.S. The term "click frauders" isn't mine. I've never used that term to describe anyone.

[azhippie]

I apologize if I incorrectly attributed that term to you, if it's not.

As for joining the site, I did that right after you posted that screenshot. I wondered of he would actually pay anyone who didn't search. So I joined out of that curiosity, just like you joined out of curiosity as to what he was telling his members & if he was forcing searches and cheating.

So I really don't see an 'about face.' I joined before the others posted their opinions. After your 1st post, I thought he wasn't going to pay anyone. I still think that and when I don't get paid, I can post to that effect, and maybe others won't join. Whether they know or care about click fraud and forced searches or not, they DO care if a PO isn't likely to pay them.

[bellestraker]

azhippie.

I posted at gpf but it actually belonged here.

No lil did not say click frauder...What she said was click fraud people.

I guess it is correct that she did not say exactly the word you used but I fail to see enough difference to make it worthy of denial.


quote from 2 posts above.
I hope you're right Kim and I guess it's kind of understandable that some people would be reluctant to incur the wrath of some of the most vocal pro-click fraud people. I noticed that even the person who'd started a thread about this program on GPF and initially agreed it was one to stay away from, did a sudden about face once the pro-click fraud people started showing up.

Belle

[lil crusader]

This is a reprint of a post I made on GPF --- Everyone needs to know what this program owner (whoever he is) has done and get out of there if for no other reason than to try to protect your private information since he's obviously not going to:

If you didn't already have more than enough reasons to avoid cy-mails.com like the plague, this admin email sent out yesterday should do it. Note: The entire thing can't be reposted here for reasons that will be explained at the end of the mail:

Today, my script show list 24 members, who had only
<20% vaild search
Sorry, you need do at least 80% vaild search to be
paid
Member on Non active searching can't return active
searching,

And Notice : You need read mails, and search by ip
that you signed up your sccount
If you don't use this ip, my script can't check your
vaild search
And DON'T use any Fake ip tool, as ghostsurf, artera,
hideip ...., you will be suspended if you uesed it

Also, 5 members, who had >95% vaild search will be
bonused
That is :

IDs and IP numbers of 5 "winners" not reprinted here

Bonus will be sent to your paypal/Egold soon

NON-active Searching List :

That's all of the actual email I can post here because the balance of it was a list of nonactive searchers that included:
ID
real name
home address
IP number
email address
encrypted password
payment processor account information
computer ID #

This is the most disgusting invasion of privacy I've ever seen and even surpasses the time when AYS posted some "cheater" personal info in their forum - a practice that was stopped as soon as their host was advised.

This was an admin email and it's sole reason for shattering several members' privacy was the fact that they hadn't done enough searches to please the PO! :o I know they've already been reported to their host for this privacy violation, but unfortunately, there's no way to take back an admin email once its sent, so the personal information of several people is now in the hands of the entire membership.

Don't believe me? Here's just one example of the information this terrible admin mail contained. Obviously I have x'd out much of it -- remember, though, anytime you see an "x" - the real thing was included in the email and sent out to all 400+ members:

Username: bxxx47
Non-active Name: Bxxxxxx Bxxxxxx
Encrypted Password: 2cxxxxxxxxxxxxxx0 Address: 5430 x xxxxxxx xxx
eMail: xxxxxxxxx@sbcglobal.net City: Cxxxxxx
Pay Account: PayPal xxxxxxxx@hotmail.com State: xxxxxxxx
Upline: mxlt5 Zip Code: xxxxx
Referrer: mxlt5 Country United States
4 Signup:
IP/Proxy: 66.73.xxx.xxx
Date & Time: 2006-08-16 02:40:16 Last Login:
IP/Proxy: 65.42.xx.xxx
Date & Time: 2006-08-22 02:00:00
Computer ID: 2006xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Anyone not on that list might want to take note of the line of the email that I highlighted in bold...How can a person with a dynamic IP number possibly search with the same IP # they used to join the program? Answer: They can't. So that raises this question: Why did the admin say everyone had to do something that is impossible for them to do? (Interesting side note: He threatens suspension for not using the same IP #, but apparently he doesn't think suspended members are as bad as those who don't do searches because a second email listing suspended accounts did NOT include their personal information!)

Please folks --- don't stay in a program run by somebody who has absolutely no regard for your personal information whatsoever. This is as wrong as it can possibly get and if you stay in cy-mails, you're telling this PO that what he did was okay.

Hopefully none of you really believe there was anything "okay" about this.

[mcf]

Can you report them to Paypal for revealing the members account id at Paypal ?
Maybe this guy would lose his PP account.

[lil crusader]

I wondered about that too.....guess it couldn't hurt to try!

[lil crusader]

Another thought: Because this PO has committed one of the worst, if not THE worst privacy violations most can ever recall, wouldn't it be wise to boycott this program immediately?

Lots of ways are being used to warn others about cy-mails, but an immediate boycott definitely couldn't hurt.

I think GPTB owes it to the PTR community to sound an alarm right away and not wait for 10+ complaints, discussion when there's time, etc......This needs to be dealt with NOW.

[freecashspace]

Another thought: Because this PO has committed one of the worst, if not THE worst privacy violations most can ever recall, wouldn't it be wise to boycott this program immediately?

Lots of ways are being used to warn others about cy-mails, but an immediate boycott definitely couldn't hurt.

I think GPTB owes it to the PTR community to sound an alarm right away and not wait for 10+ complaints, discussion when there's time, etc......This needs to be dealt with NOW.
Are you the official spokesperson for "most" of us now?

I disagree that this program should be automatically be boycotted without getting at least 10 valid complaints. It sets a bad precedent.

First, it would mean that a program was boycotted because one or a few (less than 10) people thought it should be. Is that really the kind of thing we want to see happen here?

And secondly, if it's not a big enough deal for 10 people to come here and file complaints, then maybe it's a non-issue as far as the greater GPT community is concerned.

Cheers,

Wil

[lil crusader]

Well, I disagree with you.

IMO, if a PO does something as bad as this PO has done, then it's setting a bad precedent NOT to immediately put it on the list. Where is it carved in stone that exceptions to the norm can't be made if the circumstances are bad enough?

[bellestraker]

I also disagree with GPTB changing the 10 complaints but surely there should be no problem getting 10 complaints.

The same thing happens at gpf. I do think this is important but what about next week when someone else thinks another issue is important.GPF changes the rules for oiframes and now are getting treated like dirt because they dont change it for this......and the same for them...what about the next issue.

I dont mean soliciting by sending out a rallying call but with all the posting there should be enough complaints by now.

Did you ask if there were enough.That may be a good start.

Belle

[freecashspace]

Well, I disagree with you.

IMO, if a PO does something as bad as this PO has done, then it's setting a bad precedent NOT to immediately put it on the list. Where is it carved in stone that exceptions to the norm can't be made if the circumstances are bad enough?Well since you apparently speak for "most" of us now, I guess I'm outnumbered. :laugh:

If a minimum of 10 people can't be bothered to make a formal complaint, who says it's "bad enough"? Maybe the GPT community as a whole has sunk to the point that a PO publishing that sort of information isn't something they really care about. Especially if it didn't happen to them.

That's the sort of attitude that seems to be taking more and more hold in this 'industry.'

Another PO pulled a runner? Yaaaaawn.

A PO 'lost his database' and is screwing members out of thousands of dollars? Who cares, I got paid! I totally trust him and can't wait until he relaunches the site!

Forced searches? Liar! I love doing 200+ searches a day and I'm making 3 cents every time I do one!

A PO lost their Paypal account so now they're giving their members' payment info to other people to make the payments for them? He's a hero!

Click fraud? Who cares? Yadda yadda yadda. At least they pay!

To be honest, I'm a bit shocked that nobody's stepped up and defended this PO yet. After all, POs are never really bad. They're just misunderstood.

Cheers,

Wil

[Josh]

Personally, I see no reason why the requirement should be changed for this case. After all, that's just one of the rules of the road here. It's not necessarily good, but it's the way it is.

Look at it this way. BournemouthBreeze was boycotted largely due to the past issues of Tony and Georgina, although some other problems do exist, IMO. Since that was the reasoning, you'd think that the precedent was established to boycott based upon the owner.

Yet, it clearly wasn't, because they did zilch about Georgina's other sites.

Then, Hauling Cash was boycotted. What about Neonlights Advertising and Logan's Legacy? Wasn't BB boycotted because of the actions of its owners? Why give another scammer free reign over the Kingdom of PTR? Is the name of the person really that important?

If they won't lift one finger when all rational thinking says to do so (it was the reasoning that Bournemouth was boycotted, after all), then don't expect anything when it comes to this, a program not owned by an owner of another boycotted program.

Would it be good to have everyone know what's wrong with this program? Of course it would be. Would it be great to boycott it, ban it, and wipe it out from the face of the Internet? Yes! Unfortunately, this system and its use are so flawed that it has no way of participating in that without contradicting itself.

Any 'collection of opinions' will have such a problem. This site gets it the worst because no negative mention is given until 10 negative opinions are collected, the jury deliberates, and the site disappears. It's masked a little better in other such sites since notices are more instant, but then more credibility is lost due to the whimsical nature of the whole process. 'Wisdom of Crowds' does not appeal to me, personally.

Really, the only good way to judge PTR sites is by a set standard of how they are run, with no preferential treatment. That does not require complaints or commendations, nor personal feelings on a program or its owner. It simply needs raw data of whether the program is run well or not, and whether the owner acts like one or not.

Then, you get people telling you that it's not fair because 'the owner is trying' or 'people are on a vendetta against him.'

Yeah, I'm sure being unprepared as a business to the extreme point that it's possible to fall behind is trying so hard, and his clearly-defined, unrepented, continual errors are somehow 'brought on' by the vendettas that may exist. :music: Keep up with the excuses for scammers.

I guess, in short: It would be great to prohibit cy-mails here, but 'disallow' is so clearly tied to 'boycott' on this site, and boycotting has requirements other than being a click fraud, identity theft scam.

That alone tells you the extent of the usefulness of this site, and the extent of its real concern for its members and readers.

The same goes for any site that ostensibly gives members advice on how to be safe in this community. If they refuse to either warn members about such a problem, or outright ban a program's promotion on their sites, what concern do they really have for their members?

Then again, that seems to be what most people in these parts nowadays want. Who cares about risk? It's all about the money, and suckering all the advertisers, owners or members that I need in order to get what I want. If someone taps me, I'll punch someone else. If someone punches me, I'll kick yet another person.

The piranas seem to be feeding off of each other quite well, yet they keep going back to the same pool. That has to say something loud and clear, too.

Regards,
Josh

[Josh]

By the way, let's hope 'one vote never made a difference' is revoked, because I submitted a complaint. :laugh:

We'll see what happens. I'm not holding my breath. In the end most people will do what they want to scam others and even sometimes put themselves (and their families) at risk. It would be nice to help at least one person who may not have otherwise known, but I'm not expecting anything.

Belle, who was treating someone like dirt at GPF? Maybe I am reading a different thread but the one I am looking at now by 2k2p seems more like people tiptoeing through tulips trying to avoid toes. :laugh: There is that cy-mails thread in GD too, but it's too long for me to read, kind like everything in the BG thread here as of late. :laugh: Maybe there were worse comments in there.

Take care all.

Regards,
Josh

[butterscotch]

I vote for a boycott also, as my info was "shared" to the masses.

[bellestraker]

Personally, I see no reason why the requirement should be changed for this case. After all, that's just one of the rules of the road here. It's not necessarily good, but it's the way it is.

Look at it this way. BournemouthBreeze was boycotted largely due to the past issues of Tony and Georgina, although some other problems do exist, IMO. Since that was the reasoning, you'd think that the precedent was established to boycott based upon the owner.




Was BB not boycotted because enough members did put in the required complaints as per the way this forum is set up.



Yet, it clearly wasn't, because they did zilch about Georgina's other sites.

Then, Hauling Cash was boycotted. What about Neonlights Advertising and Logan's Legacy? Wasn't BB boycotted because of the actions of its owners? Why give another scammer free reign over the Kingdom of PTR? Is the name of the person really that important?

If they won't lift one finger when all rational thinking says to do so (it was the reasoning that Bournemouth was boycotted, after all), then don't expect anything when it comes to this, a program not owned by an owner of another boycotted program.



Again whether I agree with everything done by GPTB or not....Were there sufficient complaints made? It is my understanding that GPTB is set up to act on the complaints of members ( not on admin choices)If memory serves me correctly there was a lot of attention as well as the required complaints against BB by the members which is why they were finally boycotted.


Would it be good to have everyone know what's wrong with this program? Of course it would be. Would it be great to boycott it, ban it, and wipe it out from the face of the Internet? Yes! Unfortunately, this system and its use are so flawed that it has no way of participating in that without contradicting itself.

Any 'collection of opinions' will have such a problem. This site gets it the worst because no negative mention is given until 10 negative opinions are collected, the jury deliberates, and the site disappears. It's masked a little better in other such sites since notices are more instant, but then more credibility is lost due to the whimsical nature of the whole process. 'Wisdom of Crowds' does not appeal to me, personally.

Really, the only good way to judge PTR sites is by a set standard of how they are run, with no preferential treatment. That does not require complaints or commendations, nor personal feelings on a program or its owner. It simply needs raw data of whether the program is run well or not, and whether the owner acts like one or not.

Then, you get people telling you that it's not fair because 'the owner is trying' or 'people are on a vendetta against him.'

Yeah, I'm sure being unprepared as a business to the extreme point that it's possible to fall behind is trying so hard, and his clearly-defined, unrepented, continual errors are somehow 'brought on' by the vendettas that may exist. :music: Keep up with the excuses for scammers.

I guess, in short: It would be great to prohibit cy-mails here, but 'disallow' is so clearly tied to 'boycott' on this site, and boycotting has requirements other than being a click fraud, identity theft scam.

That alone tells you the extent of the usefulness of this site, and the extent of its real concern for its members and readers.

The same goes for any site that ostensibly gives members advice on how to be safe in this community. If they refuse to either warn members about such a problem, or outright ban a program's promotion on their sites, what concern do they really have for their members?

Then again, that seems to be what most people in these parts nowadays want. Who cares about risk? It's all about the money, and suckering all the advertisers, owners or members that I need in order to get what I want. If someone taps me, I'll punch someone else. If someone punches me, I'll kick yet another person.

The piranas seem to be feeding off of each other quite well, yet they keep going back to the same pool. That has to say something loud and clear, too.

Regards,
Josh



No matter how anyone else thinks GPTB should be set up....It is set up to boycott only after 10 complaints. IMO if members can not get 10 complaints together ( especially when a complaint can be made even if they do not belong to the site) then I think that says a lot more about the state of gptr in general than GPTB.

No one can question that what c-y did was so over the top and that "something" should be done. Lots of changes could/should be made...I am just not sure it is wise to start changing everything based on a reaction to one issue.

There is no shortage of sites who have deliberately scammed by not paying, by sending oiframes etc and there are others who have just opened with lots of big plans followed by no effort and the site bombs...All valid reasons for upset members and although I agree this case is much more serious ( on a possible danger level) where are the complaints?. Before asking to drop the 10 complaints I would like to know if anyone has checked to see if there already may be enough.

Belle

[Esperanza]

Complaint filed.

[Josh]

I vote for a boycott also, as my info was "shared" to the masses.

I'm sorry to hear that happened to you. Not a clever searcher, eh? :hehe:

I've also been a member since just before that happened. Only had viewed a couple of mails though, looking for SE terms, so that apparently wasn't a large enough sample size to qualify.

One more thing that I was thinking of, to those who have had their personal information compromised: the encrypted passwords. There are methods of compromising that encryption, not truly decryption but basically through compiled lists and brute force. I'm assuming that the encryption was done in MD5. Google 'MD5 brute force' or 'MD5 crack' and you'll know what I'm talking about.

The point being, if your password is the same for your email address or your PayPal account, change those now. Also, some email accounts allow password retrieval through entering personal information such as full name, address, zip code, etc. In those cases I would really encourage you to completely close those email accounts. If that's not possible then at least change your personal information, use a nickname, add a hyphen in your address, do something like that.

If you're a member of this site and you haven't run into privacy issues, I would still recommend that you follow those steps now. Also, I would completely remove all personal details from cy-mails. It's not worth risking that they might reveal yours in the future.

And, please, for the sake of all that is right, don't refer anyone to this program. Not that there are multitudes of wonderful programs out there that deserve having new members referred, but this one really takes the cake. Sadly, it's already been shown, again, that there are people will put others at any level of risk just to earn a few cents commission.

Truly disgraceful.

Regards,
Josh

[bellestraker]

By the way, let's hope 'one vote never made a difference' is revoked, because I submitted a complaint. :laugh:

We'll see what happens. I'm not holding my breath. In the end most people will do what they want to scam others and even sometimes put themselves (and their families) at risk. It would be nice to help at least one person who may not have otherwise known, but I'm not expecting anything.

Belle, who was treating someone like dirt at GPF? Maybe I am reading a different thread but the one I am looking at now by 2k2p seems more like people tiptoeing through tulips trying to avoid toes. :laugh: There is that cy-mails thread in GD too, but it's too long for me to read, kind like everything in the BG thread here as of late. :laugh: Maybe there were worse comments in there.

Take care all.

Regards,
Josh

Maybe a diferent thread or maybe just a different viewpoint but yes, most of the 2k2p thread was not included in what I said.

The point I was trying to make though was that although I agree that many changes could/should be made at many sites I am just not sure its wise to make them as a kneejerk reaction. Why try to change the rules when we dont even know if there is a need.( if there is 10 already)

I think many things need to be changed but IMO it would be better to just concentrate on doing something about c-y as quick as possible instead of getting bogged down with changing the way things are done.

Belle

I need the correct name/url to submit a complaint but am getting nothing by entering c-ymails or cymail/s. Does someone have the proper name.
Thanks.

[lil crusader]

After reading the arguments against my idea to immediately start the Boycott wheels turning on cy-mails, regardless of the # of complaints, I have to agree that they were really valid and so I'm withdrawing that idea.

It made sense at the time, but I can see it causing problems in the future, so it wouldn't be a good idea at all. And no Belle, I didn't ask about the # already received first, but I should have.

I'm sorry that I let emotion get in the way of reason.

(I still hope, though, that those complaints come in quickly and once the right # is reached, that the rest of the process moves along equally fast.)

Thanks to those who argued against my idea because it was a bad one and didn't feel the need to include any personal sarcastic digs.

[trulyfair]

This PO's "tactics" are nothing less than disgusting. :baaa:

I have submitted a formal complaint and hopefully this will aid in having Cy-mails added to the Boycott List ASAP.

[bellestraker]

After reading the arguments against my idea to immediately start the Boycott wheels turning on cy-mails, regardless of the # of complaints, I have to agree that they were really valid and so I'm withdrawing that idea.

It made sense at the time, but I can see it causing problems in the future, so it wouldn't be a good idea at all. And no Belle, I didn't ask about the # already received first, but I should have.

I'm sorry that I let emotion get in the way of reason.

(I still hope, though, that those complaints come in quickly and once the right # is reached, that the rest of the process moves along equally fast.)

Thanks to those who argued against my idea because it was a bad one and didn't feel the need to include any personal sarcastic digs.


I certainly dont think you have anything to apologize for and hopefully we now have enough complaints. I have written one but cannot find the url or full name of the site...Help:\

Belle

[trulyfair]

I certainly dont think you have anything to apologize for and hopefully we now have enough complaints. I have written one but cannot find the url or full name of the site...Help:\

Belle

Here you go Belle:

http://www.cy-mails.com/


:)

[bellestraker]

Here you go Belle:

http://www.cy-mails.com/


:)


Thank you...Done

Belle

[RBNLOVESPOH]

complaint has been filed.

[freecashspace]

Pam, have you by any chance inquired, on behalf of most of us, about the number of official complaints that has been submitted so far?

Cheers,

Wil

[graywolf30]

I just submitted a complaint of my own. Although I am not a member, I cannot understand how anyone would find it "okay" to send their memberbase any other members personal information. I feel for all those whose personal info was disclosed.

Renee

[Merlin2307]

By all the descriptions either this PO taught the PO of BG or BG taught this one. It appears they both climbed out from under the same rock. Let's hope that this one doesn't turn into a 29 page road to nowhere discussion. JMO.

[trulyfair]

Total posters who have verified submitting a complaint = 8. Assuming lil crusader and freecashspace have also submitted, that would bring it to the 10 necessary for a full boycott. :)

Now all we can do is wait. :(

[RBNLOVESPOH]

Thank you for the update Trulyfair;)

[lil crusader]

Total posters who have verified submitting a complaint = 8. Assuming lil crusader and freecashspace have also submitted, that would bring it to the 10 necessary for a full boycott. :)

Now all we can do is wait. :(

Yes, I submitted one even before that admin email came out because of their stated "if you don't search, you won't get paid" policy that appears on the sign-up page along with the "valid search contest" they held.

Sorry I forgot to mention it here.

[butterscotch]

so we need one more complaint..at least it will be on the watch list..maybe?

[RBNLOVESPOH]

so we need one more complaint..at least it will be on the watch list..maybe?


Watch List, no way. It needs to be on the Boycott List and the PO needs to be shut down some how.:)

[nut2]

so we need one more complaint..at least it will be on the watch list..maybe?



it should be ten by now

[butterscotch]

we can only hope it's ten. not that it has any effect in the world,,but 'twould be nice to be validated.

[mlev]

Keep in mind that the complaints have to be verified/validated.

This requires time.

[lil crusader]

The verification process on this one should be pretty simple since this isn't a case of complaints being made for problems with payouts, unfair deletion of accounts, or things like that.

Pretty much everything has been documented in posts here and on other forums and in screenshots accompanying complaints that have also been posted on forums.

Nobody can really send that entire email to admin here, since that would be passing others' personal info on to others, but hopefully the part posted here, combined with what I'm sure many of the complaints had to mention, will be more than enough validation to get this boycott completed very quickly.

[butterscotch]

whoopee!
he has 600 members now and a brand-spanking new bidvertiser account right on the front page!
and my former upline just got paid 30 bucks from :honest: cy.

it doesnt pay to be honest, does it.

[lil crusader]

That membership # is just too depressing for words considering that 200+ have joined AFTER the forced searching/privacy violations were made public.

[RBNLOVESPOH]

Now that is pretty sad. I guess they will do anything for a 1 cent link. They must not care about their info posted to the whole member base, then.

Some will do anything. Nothing like free advertising here and at GPF:(

[butterscotch]

well, ever notice how all the worms come out in the rain?

[Rob]

I am delighted to be able to say that Cy-Mails is now boycotted: http://www.gptboycott.com/programs/programs.php?program=Cy-mails.

[trulyfair]

That is great news, Rob, I am sure that those whose personal information was disclosed by Cy-Mail's PO will be very happy to see this.

Many thanks to you and your staff. :)

[RBNLOVESPOH]

Excellent job, Way to go to all Admin and Mods who had a part in this decision.:)

[bellestraker]

Excellent work GPTB and kudos to Pam ( lil crusader ) for keeping the heat on this site.

Belle

[butterscotch]

i wish we could put a little banner on his cheating site.

[sueyoung]

I have cancelled my account of cy mails.