Concerned about Mike?

[brisatrue]

I looked very hard to find the right place to post my concerns and this may be the wrong place. If it is, maybe you could show me where a question like mine is more suited. I just received this email from 2 of Mike's programs, titled "About The Clicks Contest":

"Hello

I tried to do something nice to reward the members for clicking the links by having a click contest on a monthly basis. But instead all i got was an inbox full of emails from people complaining that they thought they should have won.

So if thats the way it's going to be then there will be no more monthly click contest. So much for rewarding members for being active. Looks like once again the whiners ruined it for the rest of you. You can thank them for it.

As soon as all winners claim there prizes the page will be taken down.

Thanks For your time.

Mike"

As most other members know this is about the 4th or 5th very serious and somewhat angry email sent to us by Mike, with other emails from him centered around "cheaters", a"big scam" notice, problems with his site going down, and other emails I have seen posted here that were short and rude to other people.
Here is my problem. I am a member of Mike's programs and have been for over 6 months but I am concerned about his hostility. Am I alone in being concerned about this or is this a part of him that is justified and I just don't know him that well.
I'd really like your honest opinions! Thanks
Michele

[Poncer]

Well, Mike has been getting people e-mailing him nasty stuff. All webmasters go through it. I just think that the contest could be wrong because there are limited click e-mails to only 500, and those 500 people would seem to have more clicks. I am not sure 100% if those links count. I also do not think Search links should count towards clicks either. It is kinda a way for forcing people to do searches, but we are not being forced. The problem is, the advertisers are buying ads for their search sites, and have very few links for people who do not want to do searches. I think all webmasters should banned people buying ads for their search links. It is not fair. I say we should boycott all advertisers who buys search links.

[DAzHiredGun]

Which two programs were you referring to, Michele?


Ron

[Poncer]

She is referring to MikesPaid4Email and ClixMonster. He has been under a lot of attacks lately. Not sure if the possibility of that Jay made him an Admin at JOF, but he wants to get all this behind him, and leave it behind.

[brisatrue]

Well, I think Mike made an excellent decision to send this email to his members today! It has its moments that are even more "stern" than his last three "warning " emails, but it was a nice gesture. I do dislike all the "do not reply" stuff. Looks like I was obviously not the only one seeing this angry side of Mike. It's ok by me that he gets angry and warns us about people who scam others. But why wouldn't he say a word against Jay? It's contradictory but I feel alot better with this email he sent:
Hello

I wanted to give many of you an apology. I at times come across as a mean person to you in

some of my updates. To those of you who are honest members, as i know most of you are. I am

sorry. I am just a very blunt person. I do not believe in sugar coating anything. I just

tell it as it is.

Actually truth be known. I am rather easy going if approached the right way. If someone

sends me an email or posts in the forum with a legitimate problem or concern i will do

whatever i can to help. But if someone is pushy or rude to me, I will come back at them

twice as hard as they came at me.

You are, in essence, a contract worker for this site. You get paid to open and read the

mails i send you. And, anyone who does not pay attention to their work could get a

deduction in pay by clicking the occasional negative value cheat link. I do not like doing

that. But, someone using auto click software can easily rob me and my advertisers blind

with such software. So until there is a better way to combat the software, the cheat links

are necessary.

When you go to work on a daily basis, what would happen if you stormed into your bosses

office and started yelling and cursing at him? You would get fired. In a situation like

that here in Canada, the employer owes no severance to the fired employee. In that

situation. And that is what will happen here if you storm into my office cursing and

swearing, making demands or being down right nasty. You will be fired.

I know you are not my employees in a technical manner. But, the nature of the work is a

similar concept to that of a contract worker.

For those of you that i may have offended with something i said. You have to remember that

every mail sent goes to ALL members. Not just you. You may have been offended by something

not even directed at you.

I have received some positive and negative feed back from many of you regarding my recent

warning to you about getting involved with any site run by a certain person. (Name Will Not

Be Mentioned Again). You know. In all my time on the net, both before i started this site

and since, I have literally been taken for thousands of dollars. And never have i said a

word in public. But when i discovered the large amount of people that this person had

screwed, I had to say something , and i will continue to do so in the future when i see

undeniable evidence in front of me.

This does not mean in anyway that i am loosening the reigns around here. As a matter of

fact, things will probably be a whole lot stricter by the time i am done. I am running a

business. And with any business the liabilities must be dealt with. The liabilities being

the cheaters and inactive members. Being on vacation, or away from your computer is just

not an excuse. There is a vacation manager in your accounts for such times.

The bottom line is, I will never be rude to those who are not rude to me. At least not

intentionally. But i will stick up for myself and my honest members. And i will do what i

can to protect them from a scam. But i will also do what i must to protect myself and my

livelihood from cheaters.

Anyway that's enough of my rambling. Thank you for your time. I know some of you will want

to respond to this mail. Regardless of wether your words are kind or just more rude

comments. At least please use the contact form. I will not read your words otherwise.

Mike

Please do not respond to this mail

[Poncer]

Not sure either, but I can't say how he feels. From what I read about what he did say about this issue with Jay, it sounded like he was deeply hurt about all this. I can understand his feelings. We all who were friends with Jay were deeply hurt when we found out the truth about him. All the attacks on mike lately which had to with the problems Jay caused when Mike's programs were hosted on Jay's servers. I may make a suggestion to him.

[seeseawolf]

Originally posted by Poncer
Not sure either, but I can't say how he feels. From what I read about what he did say about this issue with Jay, it sounded like he was deeply hurt about all this. I can understand his feelings. We all who were friends with Jay were deeply hurt when we found out the truth about him. All the attacks on mike lately which had to with the problems Jay caused when Mike's programs were hosted on Jay's servers. I may make a suggestion to him.

poncer he's not talking about Jay.;)

[Poncer]

I know, but all the problems he had was associated with Jay as well if he does not want to admit. It is hard for some people to talk about something like this.

[brisatrue]

Originally posted by Poncer
Well, Mike has been getting people e-mailing him nasty stuff. All webmasters go through it. I just think that the contest could be wrong because there are limited click e-mails to only 500, and those 500 people would seem to have more clicks. I am not sure 100% if those links count. I also do not think Search links should count towards clicks either. It is kinda a way for forcing people to do searches, but we are not being forced. The problem is, the advertisers are buying ads for their search sites, and have very few links for people who do not want to do searches. I think all webmasters should banned people buying ads for their search links. It is not fair. I say we should boycott all advertisers who buys search links.
Poncer if I got an email like this from you, as I'm sure Mike did, I'd write what Mike wrote too. I just would send it to you, not everyone.
Thanks for making me understand what drives him to get that mad. You whine and complain and point out that nothing is fair to you.
You'd drive me to send out mass emails too.
Can this thread be closed?
Michele

[lil crusader]

You learn quickly grasshopper. :D

[brisatrue]

Mother always said I was slow but sure. And I am so very sure now.
Thank you Mastah,
Michele

[DAzHiredGun]

Originally posted by Poncer
She is referring to MikesPaid4Email and ClixMonster. He has been under a lot of attacks lately. Not sure if the possibility of that Jay made him an Admin at JOF, but he wants to get all this behind him, and leave it behind.


D: Michele ?

P: No....this is Poncer.

D: Oh... I thought I was talking to Michele.

P: She wasn't here; so, I answered the question.

D: I had a reason for asking HER; and, like this thread, it has NOTHING TO DO WITH JAY.......!!!


Ron

[brisatrue]

LOLOL...No hablo english, too.
:)
Me

[Poncer]

Actually, as John O. posted about the last crash, the scripts were not set to be on Mike's own server. Why? Because it was still pointed at Jay's server which has its plug pulled. Mike got a lot of heat from e-mails and posts because of this.

[lil crusader]

Originally posted by DAzHiredGun
D: Michele ?

P: No....this is Poncer.

D: Oh... I thought I was talking to Michele.

P: She wasn't here; so, I answered the question.

D: I had a reason for asking HER; and, like this thread, it has NOTHING TO DO WITH JAY.......!!!


Ron


My impression of Ron:

http://pages.prodigy.net/rogerlori1/emoticons/BANGHEAD2.JPG

[brisatrue]

My self portrait.

http://pages.prodigy.net/rogerlori1/emoticons/BANGHEAD2.JPG

[Poncer]

Well Michele, you did bash Mike when you accused the mods and adminastrators of Jay's forum during your rant on the Get Paid Forum and on Amy's. You may not know he was an admin on Jay's forum. That is the point I am trying to bring up. Mike is okay, but he gets nasty e-mails almost everytime something goes bad.

[brisatrue]

Originally posted by Poncer
Well Michele, you did bash Mike when you accused the mods and adminastrators of Jay's forum during your rant on the Get Paid Forum and on Amy's. You may not know he was an admin on Jay's forum. That is the point I am trying to bring up. Mike is okay, but he gets nasty e-mails almost everytime something goes bad.

That's it for me, Ron. I know you are not Poncer's keeper but seems as though this person cannot be controlled, and I feel like an idiot trying to speak logically here.
Please email or PM me privately.
Poncer... Pick a name.... cuz that's what are for bringing up something mean and outdated just to get attention again.
Michele

[Poncer]

No it is not Michele. I am pointing out things why Mike get upset at which is part of the topic. We have to look at it at every angle. Yes, the Jay issue is part of it because he did became mad at the topic on his forum. I am not saying you are doing it now. I know one case that Mike banned someone from all his programs and his forum for the constant harassment on Trayse. You were not harassing anybody or saying mean names that are derogatory.

[lil crusader]

Can't one thread be Jay-free for God's sake? Jeez David you manage to work that guy's name into absolutely every single topic of discussion.

I swear I think there could a thread about Mother Teresa here and you'd somehow link the two of them together!

My impression of Myself:

http://pages.prodigy.net/rogerlori1/emoticons/BANGHEAD2.JPG

[Tmarie99]

LOL.. The more things change the more they stay the same. That's it for me, Ron. I know you are not Poncer's keeper but seems as though this person cannot be controlled, and I feel like an idiot trying to speak logically here.
Heehee, join the club!

:laugh: ;)

[nadiaasoma]

Originally posted by brisatrue
That's it for me, Ron. I know you are not Poncer's keeper but seems as though this person cannot be controlled, and I feel like an idiot trying to speak logically here.
Please email or PM me privately.
Poncer... Pick a name.... cuz that's what are for bringing up something mean and outdated just to get attention again.
Michele

Can't you answer the question about the 2 programs regardless
of what other members are posting?
There is no need to turn every thread into a hetze against poncer.
He has the right to post as anyone else has.
The only thing I can see in this thread, that is not correct is that he answerd a question which was asked you, and not him.


Marian

[Tmarie99]

There is no need to turn every thread into a hetze against poncer.

Why not? He turns EVERYTHING around to revolve around him or things he thinks he knows about. Even now, he MUST drag jay's name into again.

[nadiaasoma]

Because this looks more like a chatbox than a forum about gptr.
It has nothing to do with the subject.
Did you come to this thread because you wanted to post about Mikes or did you come because poncer is posting here?

[brisatrue]

nadiaasoma? I posted here with a serious concern about a webmaster. From Poncer, I have had my thread reduced to spittoon contents. I think YOU are here cuz Poncer called on all his mommies and complained he was getting beat up by all the bullies again.
I'm against supporting someone MERELY because they are defective. They must have ONE or TWO good points too you know?
I'm still waiting for ROn's answer, but if anyone else feels like I do, I reccommend you post the same ultimatum to Ron. For God's sake, this isn't a child care forum.
Michele

[lil crusader]

Marian's post got me to thinking (something that's always dangerous..lol). Here are a few of the things I thunk:

Considering that this individual forum is "Comments/Suggestions" I would think that on the surface at least, it's the proper place for any and all posts that fall into that rather broad category.

By virtue of this thread's focused title, however, one would expect the majority of the posts to be related to Mike - and they did start off that way. At some point, though, things started to gradually steer off-course and I would suggest that if anyone is uncertain as to just how this happened, they need to go back to the start and see for themself exactly WHO started to turn the steering wheel in the opposite direction.

Since then, there has been a constant struggle to get this thread back on course, but one individual poster has persisted in trying to take control and take things down an entirely different road - a road that is so worn out that very few have any desire to revisit it.

The argument could be made that because of the general nature of this particular forum, this one stubborn person has every right to try to move this thread in the direction of his choosing; BUT the other members here are also well within their rights to try to stay focused on a single topic and they have the right to let this one person know his attempts to deviate off into little side trips are not appreciated.

Also, Tmarie has as much right to post her opinions here without having her motives questioned as you do Marian. Your posts were not about Mike either, but no one asked why you posted did they? Tmarie deserves the same consideration.

Finally, as my attempt to get back on topic, I've got an opinion about Mike (and yes, I know the saying that compares opinions to a part of the human anatomy :p ): In all fairness, I do not know the man, but based on things I've read that he's written, it seems he's a walking talking contradiction. Here are two examples:

1. In the email Michele posted at the start of this thread, Mike made a reference to knowing that most of his members weren't cheaters. BUT..remember the big crash of a few weeks ago and how he started off by asking everyone to send him their stats, but then suddenly changed his mind about that and insinuated that virtually everyone was padding their numbers and so he wasn't going to accept stats afterall. So - which is it - does he think his members are mostly all honest or does he think they are mostly all cheaters who are just waiting for the chance to take advantage of him?

2. Many things he's written sound very "tough guy"...as in, I'm the boss, so take it or leave it. BUT a little over a week ago he made a post on his forum about how he had banned a member "against my will" who had done nothing wrong just to keep one of his mods happy. So - which is he - tough guy WM whose motto is "it's MY way or the highway" or is he a puppet who admittedly will do the wrong thing if certain people tell him to?

The end (finally) so let the happy dance begin!
http://pages.prodigy.net/bestsmileys1/emoticons1/happydance.gif

[brisatrue]

WOW Cruiser!
Those were more than idle thoughts, those were intelligent, logical, thoughtful ideas that helped me very much with the problem I opened this thread with! I'd say more, but I can't express myself here when I know Poncer is salivating to interrupt the intelligent flow of this subject. I just can't. I've reached my limit, I'm sorry.
But thank you very much Cruiser, I'll PM you to discuss my plans.
Michele

[Poncer]

Originally posted by brisatrue
nadiaasoma? I posted here with a serious concern about a webmaster. From Poncer, I have had my thread reduced to spittoon contents. I think YOU are here cuz Poncer called on all his mommies and complained he was getting beat up by all the bullies again.
I'm against supporting someone MERELY because they are defective. They must have ONE or TWO good points too you know?
I'm still waiting for ROn's answer, but if anyone else feels like I do, I reccommend you post the same ultimatum to Ron. For God's sake, this isn't a child care forum.
Michele



The only person who is acting like a child is you Michele. I answered your question about Mike. Yes, Jay is part of the reason of what is going on. Not all of it is because of Jay, but some of it Jay did caused on Mike. Yes, Jay did help Mike and vice versa. Yes, mike's programs used to be hosted on Jay's servers. This kind of facts we can't overlook. Michele? How do you know that Mike never recieved nasty e-mails because of Mike was friends with Jay at one point? We have to look at that as a reason to why Mike gets upset with these e-mails. This was not the only e-mail that Mike sent about people complaining about something. Mike was under attack because the scripts to take members to his website on his own server was pointed to Jay's server.

[Poncer]

Wrong Pam. I kept this on topic. Yes, people have accused Mike of picking up some bad habits from Jay. What I posted are facts because all these things are true. Have you ever thought Mike got backlash from people because of him and Jay used to be friends? What I am pointed out is that with that backlash because of Jay, it caused Mike to be angry, and his e-mails sound like that. Yes, Mike was being put down in the past because of people comparing his anger as that to Jay. The only thing Mike does not do is go out, and call people nasty names and all that. Mike does calm down. He also have another excuse for calming down. Trayse is the one that helps him make it through the rough times.

[lil crusader]

I hate to say this Michele, but I give up too.....my forehead is just too sore from banging it against that brick wall.

[nadiaasoma]

Also, Tmarie has as much right to post her opinions here without having her motives questioned as you do Marian. Your posts were not about Mike either, but no one asked why you posted did they? Tmarie deserves the same consideration
-------------------------

My interest in the subject should be clear:

All high payouts are scams and so is Mikes.
I'm interested in what others have to say about such a program.

:baaa:

[nadiaasoma]

Lol, poncer hates it seeing me in this thread, he doesn't need protection and me callin Mike a scammer isn't what he wants!

I just wonder why you can't answer a simple question by yourselve regardless of what poncer has to say about it.
I was interested in the subject too.

Marian

I was answering a post bisathrue (hope I spelled it right) made.
Some how the quote didn't work, must have been my fault.

[Poncer]

I believe this post was made to cause trouble with Mike. Mike does not want all this attention. Michele, tell your bodies this will not work. I know who your friends are, and it will not work.


Marian? No, mike is not a scam. He pays his members unlike some high payout programs like Nitroclicks. That is why he earned the sealed here because of it.

[nadiaasoma]

He couldn't have earned the seal if the votingproces was realistic!

:baaa:

[Poncer]

Mike's votes were more realistic than Jay's were. :p

[nadiaasoma]

LOL, you have got a sense of humor!

:stupid:

[Tmarie99]

Why am I here? Because I CAN. I'm sure <he>.. uhh poncer ran to you (or WILL run to you shortly) with yet another tale on what a big meanie I am. BUT, he dragged all this crap into another forum, that has absolutely nothing to do with gptr so, I thought I'd come see what all the interest is about.
Marian, get used to seeing me, because... Well, because I can.

[nadiaasoma]

Originally posted by Tmarie99
Why am I here? Because I CAN. I'm sure <he>.. uhh poncer ran to you (or WILL run to you shortly) with yet another tale on what a big meanie I am. BUT, he dragged all this crap into another forum, that has absolutely nothing to do with gptr so, I thought I'd come see what all the interest is about.
Marian, get used to seeing me, because... Well, because I can.

You should try Jerry Springer, you'll fit in perfectly.

[lil crusader]

Originally posted by Poncer
I believe this post was made to cause trouble with Mike. Mike does not want all this attention. Michele, tell your bodies this will not work. I know who your friends are, and it will not work.

:hehe: This is one of Michele's friends and quite frankly, I'm shocked to find out that "IT" won't work!

Of course I have no clue what "it" is, but I'm still shocked nonetheless! :hehe:


Edit: WooHoo - my 50th post! http://pages.prodigy.net/bestsmileys1/signs/14.gif

[brisatrue]

Where is Ron? Is he on vacation or something?
I have nothing against Mike at all, that's why I brought my concern to a forum where I could get some intelligent advice from people who know more than I do. I got a good feel now on what I needed and a clearer picture of things. Unfortunately, I also had to put up with so many sidetracks by one certain drama freak, that this whole thing has been exaggerated to an accusation of me having friends on my side out to get Mike.
It has gone beyond any sense of reality or fact. It always does with this person. And what question do you incessantly want answered. anyway?? whatever your name is. My two programs Im in with MIke? Clixmonster and MikesPaid4Read. What does it matter?
Poncer, you tell me you know where I go, you know who my friends are, that sounds like you are really looking some kind of dramatic overkill of a threat.
I know where you live. LOL Puh lease.
I will respond to intelligent people and questions from nopw on, and can't stress enough my desire to have ROn realize what a better place this would be if only he'd take out the trash.
Tired from banging my head on that wall,
Michele

[DAzHiredGun]

This thread will be TEMPORARILY locked, pending administrative action.


Ron

[DAzHiredGun]

Administrative duties completed, thread reopened.


Ron

[angi]

Hi, Michelle and Lil Crusader--

I am confused---LMBO!!

Kidding--


TO EVERYONE: I just wanted to add that if you are a member of a program such as MIke's and you do not like the way the WM is handling things--you can always delete your account. Noone is forcing you to stay on....no one at all!!!!

I am not on anybodies side!!!

Staying that way!!!!;) :music:

[brisatrue]

I don't necessarily agree with that philosophy of if you don't like something about a webmaster or program, to just leave it. I think that expressing concern about something that bothers you is a better solution than just staying quiet and unsubscribing. The again it depends on how big the problem is.
In my case, it was never a huge thing. I brought up a problem I was concerned about a few weeks ago, and I got a lot of help and feel much better now! Thanks to all who helped clarify things for me, and a bigger thanks to Ron, and what I know had to be a very hard decision about a member. All I can say is I will be more comfortable posting here and hope there are no hard feelings.. for anyone about anything, really!
I think I understand Mike's "aggressive posturing" lately, though I'll never be completely OK with it. I have to believe that he is loyal and honest and good at his job, most of the evidence points that way and I never felt like he was a bad webmaster anyway. This new stuff he is doing surprised me..for example, now he states on every email for us "not to write back", but to send out replies on a suggestion board-like forum place, and he'll answer his members that way. A bit impersonal, but it's not unlike him, as Pam said, he has never been one to share a lot. I'd rather have a program owner whose concerns were about his business, rather than a real chatty one who wasn't businesslike enough, you know?
I'm not in programs to make buddies with the owners, but to make money. ; ) Maybe I'd rather go to lunch with another webmaster, but that's not my main point of sticking with a program.
Anyway, no one can see what the future holds and God knows we've all been surprised before. But for now I'll stick with Mike and make investments there as I see fit and again, I appreciate the feedback here. Even if you didn't think you were helping, you were!
Thanks again..and a special thanks to you Ron.
Michele

[shaykedelik]

lmao! well, since i saw that my name suddenly got dragged in this forum (other thread), figured i'd reply to this one!

mike has his moods! he can be grumpy, rude or really nice! (he he) & that would all depend on what is at stake! if its his sites that are at stake, you can sure expect that he'd fight for it!
he can be really skeery but he ain't that bad! his bark is scarier than his actual bite unless its about something he really cares about! just the way he is! although i can't say that i really know him, that is just my impression of who he really is!
some like it being told the way it is... some don't!
ppffttt!! can't please everybody!
guess the real question that people should be asking & answering is, are you making money or not? if you are... then wtf are you complaining about? lol! :p
if not, then are you actually trying to do anything like click the links? this is a 2way deal! he provides the paid ads, you click & hopefully support! if its not happening that way, then get out! either you are not needed or if its at his end, its just not worth it!complaining won't get you anywhere! but i know that a lot of people are making money on his sites so whats there to complain about? no need to look for justifications for his actions! as long as he fulfills his end of the bargain, just do yours & everyone will be happy & drama-free!

and way i see it, this was a valid concern... and not something that people would do just to stir any cr*p & cause a fight!
she was just wondering if she did have valid reason to be concerned!
and as i also saw, this thread has been hijacked & was made to look like the member was actually bashing the WM which i have failed to see! this same concern has also been posted at other forums like gpf by a lot of other people! so whats the diff between this thread & the threads at other forums? & there were threads like this even before the recent server crash! just kuz they are members of a certain forum means that they are trying to cause trouble!;) :p seems to me that the thread-jacker was the one who caused the trouble here!
true, jay did leave a lot of WM in deep "poop", but that isn't really the main reason! out of how many thousand members he has, what percentage actually reads what is written there? people ask things that are alread written in the TOS! if 3/4ths of the member base does that & expect him to reply, how much time will he have to write the ads? they get deleted for breaking rules in the TOS & they complain! people in general complain too much!
& as i know, what happened with the recent backup used for the latest server crash wasn't really jay's fault! it was kuz someone failed to transfer the database to mikes own servers! john o. has already admitted to that! and no one i know took it against him for being friends with jay! he never sucked up to jay or anyone anyway! he just stayed out of it!
lmao... rabid defenders! fighting & defending even if there wasn't any bashing to begin with! ha ha! what some people would do for the drama!:\ :p

oh & michele, mike must have put that "do not reply to this email" at the end of every mail kuz those emails won't be read! they could usually go into the same folder with the bounced mails & it would be h*ll to sort them all out! thats why they have contact forms so those emails will go to the correct email addy where it will actually be read! or in forums where other people can answer the questions! and am not so sure either, if someone replies to that same email, then it may look like it bounced! & those use up bandwidth & that costs money too!


edited to add this part:

about the other thread about the so-called forum war:\
that "disclaimer" part is such a dead givaway on who the "leak" is! next thing ya know he'll also be putting a "bite me" in there!
*sigh* hypocrites!:\

[angi]

Michele----my little post in no way was against you!!!!

I was trying to lighten the mood!! Sorry if I came off harsh!!!

I am still on NO ONE's side:p

[brisatrue]

I hear you Shay and thanks! Isn't it great?
NO more hijacking of subjects or threads anymore will help simplify so much, lower the drama to practicaLLY ZERO, and keep things steady and on track!I'm thrilled about it too! You gave me more ideas and things to think about and I appreciate it, Shay :)
Ang.. you know I love ya and never thought you were hatin' on me for one sec :) Just made me want to clarify things a little.
I'm getting used to the changes at Mike's and am not as skeered anymore LOL. I'm pretty darm satisfied, actually. God, just let the good luck keep up.
Michele:hehe:

[shadow]

Well their are more then a few things that do not add up.

1. It was stated he did not make a backup for about 9 to 11 days.
This would be his WM backup.
2. He hosted his site on his server. So no host backup was current.
3. They state tne backup was 2 weeks old, but my own account and others were showing stats over 1 month old.
4. Mike is not a green WM, he runs a lot of sites. its known and even mention by John that their was a error message showing
when mike made the backup.

quote,
now as far as the downline info. It is correct. the backup he did from the scripts did not have all the data, it gave him a warning that php had timed out but he did not relize what that ment

http://www.getpaidforum.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=65046&st=195

Questions, how many times did mike see that error message?

Why didn't he right then the first time he saw it contact his programmer? A brand new rookie WM you think would contact his programmer after seeing a warning, so why didn't mike?

The lost of money concerning members referals is mega huge. In each account their was a list of the first referals names for each level. No attempt that I know of was done to restore these referals.

That will save huge amounts of cash because no one had any referals to earn from. Plus the lost earnings that were missing from accounts. At that time he had what 10,000 or 11,000 members. Say 5.00 earning loss average per member thats a big chunk of cash.

It was ask, why I didn't post at mikes the way I did at GPF. I had a laugh about that, his new rules, post negitively and risk having your account deleted.

With 221 lost referals and like 40% of my earnings gone, that was a major hit. When I started calling him a scam at gpf, it came because first it was announce that they would take your records on your referals to restore them. The next day they then say they will not do it, claiming to many will cheat.

So my question is an I the only one seeing too many things that don't add up concerning the membership data loss?

[brisatrue]

So my question is an I the only one seeing too many things that don't add up concerning the membership data loss? [/B]
Hey SHadow, you know I started this subject cuz I'm very concerned about this "new" Mike. So I hear you and am very interested in information like that. It says a lot that one can't speak freely at his forum, but then, remember Jay's at the end..too. Bad bad sign.
Michele

[shadow]

One other thing, I did a lot of advertising there, including 5 cent mails. When the membership count was over 16,000 the best click count I ever got was barely over 8000. Most were in the 7000 count. Thats 8000 members that wouldn't click on a five cent paid to view ad? My conclusion is the count is greatly incorrect. Because wm charge by the membership count their no need to explain why some wm don't post honest membership counts.
Even if you say 25% of the members for one reason or another didn't click on the link that would leave 6000 left from 8000 minus 25 percent.(2000).

[mateypeeps]

Has anyone been paid their $150 yet?

I had an argument with "jambutty" who told me about buying an email to all for $15 that would have cost over $50 if all the stated number of members had clicked it. "Jambutty" emailed Mike, and Mike confirmed that he would stand by the agreement.

That told me that there was something up with this setup, like any other high paying scheme.

How can anyone take $15 and give out $50 or more, unless they cut costs by deleting huge amounts of liability with "server meltdowns", "moving house not around for 2 months or more", "hacked and lost all my data", "host never backed up the site", "latest backup was corrupt", "deleted cheating members today (no right of appeal)", etc..... ad nauseum.

I did join briefly, did not like the feel of it, left a week later, convinced it would be a time waster like BondJamesBond is, or NOCS is/was.

[bulldog10]

Originally posted by DAzHiredGun
Administrative duties completed, thread reopened.


Ron

Poncer got banned because some people thought that he wasn't staying on topic, or because some people couldn't ignore his posts?

[amyszoo]

Originally posted by bulldog10
Poncer got banned because some people thought that he wasn't staying on topic, or because some people couldn't ignore his posts?

No forum owners take banning lightly

[shadow]

HUH??? Was that post for this thread?.

http://www.gptboycott.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=3245&highlight=poncer

[bulldog10]

Originally posted by shadow
HUH??? Was that post for this thread?.

http://www.gptboycott.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=3245&highlight=poncer

If you're referring to my post, no it was not in response to the URL you've pasted here, it was in response to this thread.

[Tmarie99]

Poncer got banned because some people thought that he wasn't staying on topic, or because some people couldn't ignore his posts?
No forum owners take banning lightly

No, it wasn't as simple as ignoring him OR Forum owners taking banning lightly. It was because of personal attacks, and dragging EVERY thread he posted on waaaayyy off topic.
As to ignoring him... There comes a point when one must be accountable for one's actions. Everyone should not have to "ignore" the brutish behaviour.
This is where an explanation was given...

[bulldog10]

Originally posted by Tmarie99
No, it wasn't as simple as ignoring him OR Forum owners taking banning lightly. It was because of personal attacks, and dragging EVERY thread he posted on waaaayyy off topic.
As to ignoring him... There comes a point when one must be accountable for one's actions. Everyone should not have to "ignore" the brutish behaviour.
This is where an explanation was given...


I didn't imply that forum owners took banning a member lightly.

I fail to see how one person can "drag every thread" off topic. If people didn't reply to him, he'd be talking to himself, and the topic would remain intact.

What I saw in this thread was several people appearing to gang up on one person instead of ignoring him, and then asking that he be banned. I understand that your interpretation is different.

I checked out the link that shadow posted which, believe it or not, is the same one that you posed. Thank you both :)

[Tmarie99]

Obviously you don't know him the way the rest of us know him.
Do a search on his name..... Read some of his stuff, personal attacks, accusations, outright lies... Then come back here and tell me you could ignore him.

[brisatrue]

Originally posted by Tmarie99
Obviously you don't know him the way the rest of us know him.
Do a search on his name..... Read some of his stuff, personal attacks, accusations, outright lies... Then come back here and tell me you could ignore him. Yes! Welcome back Tina! I let this post by bulldog kinda hang out cuz I thought Poncer might have paid him or put him up to write something like this. LOL If that is not the case then Bulldog, you must know of who you are speaking of a little better than you do to be taken seriously. There are messages and evidence of his personal attacks all over. You were right about something though, if he isn't talking to somebody he IS talking to himself. Unfortunately it's on a forum for facts, not B.S.
Michele

[brisatrue]

Originally posted by amyszoo
No forum owners take banning lightly
I think I must be reading this wrong. Ron????? Taking banning lightly???? The whole reason this forum is here is to get away from the maniacs that ban or give you no freedom to complain about their program!! This is the best and only place to come to be completely honest and know some mod isn't going to tell you off, etc.
Ron personlly suffers more than I think he ever shopuld over his decisionsto ban or not ban. I believe since this forum has been here, Ron has banned 2 or 3 people, EVER! He told me, but I can't remember if it's 2 or 3!! So the webmaster here cetainly does NOT take banning lightly as he respects diversity like no one I have ever seen online. He has to be pushed so bad, in more than just this little section on his forum, to have made the decision to make the VOTE to ban Poncer. That's another thing! He won't simply ban anyone! He will take it to a vote IF he feels it's really warranted! There is no one as loathe to ban as Ron and GPTBoycott.
Michele

[lexie]

Are you reading it like this ?

No , forum owners take banning lightly .

I believe the complete and correct idea here would read like ... There are no forum owners who take banning someone lightly ( except venomx *grin*) . JMHO .

[amyszoo]

Originally posted by brisatrue
I think I must be reading this wrong. Ron????? Taking banning lightly???? The whole reason this forum is here is to get away from the maniacs that ban or give you no freedom to complain about their program!! This is the best and only place to come to be completely honest and know some mod isn't going to tell you off, etc.
Ron personlly suffers more than I think he ever shopuld over his decisionsto ban or not ban. I believe since this forum has been here, Ron has banned 2 or 3 people, EVER! He told me, but I can't remember if it's 2 or 3!! So the webmaster here cetainly does NOT take banning lightly as he respects diversity like no one I have ever seen online. He has to be pushed so bad, in more than just this little section on his forum, to have made the decision to make the VOTE to ban Poncer. That's another thing! He won't simply ban anyone! He will take it to a vote IF he feels it's really warranted! There is no one as loathe to ban as Ron and GPTBoycott.
Michele

I think people are misunderstanding my statement. Please let me clarify. NO forum owners take banning lightly...in other words it takes ALOT to get to the point where you feel banning is necessary. This forum does NOT take banning lightly. But sometimes forum owners are at their wits end and banning unfortunately becomes necessary. :(

[amyszoo]

Originally posted by lexie
Are you reading it like this ?

No , forum owners take banning lightly .

I believe the complete and correct idea here would read like ... There are no forum owners who take banning someone lightly ( except venomx *grin*) . JMHO .

Lexie I am glad you understood what I meant lol :)

[amyszoo]

Originally posted by brisatrue
I think I must be reading this wrong. Ron????? Taking banning lightly???? The whole reason this forum is here is to get away from the maniacs that ban or give you no freedom to complain about their program!! This is the best and only place to come to be completely honest and know some mod isn't going to tell you off, etc.
Ron personlly suffers more than I think he ever shopuld over his decisionsto ban or not ban. I believe since this forum has been here, Ron has banned 2 or 3 people, EVER! He told me, but I can't remember if it's 2 or 3!! So the webmaster here cetainly does NOT take banning lightly as he respects diversity like no one I have ever seen online. He has to be pushed so bad, in more than just this little section on his forum, to have made the decision to make the VOTE to ban Poncer. That's another thing! He won't simply ban anyone! He will take it to a vote IF he feels it's really warranted! There is no one as loathe to ban as Ron and GPTBoycott.
Michele

Michelle I meant that forum owners DO NOT take banning lightly ;)

[bulldog10]

Originally posted by Tmarie99
Obviously you don't know him the way the rest of us know him.
Do a search on his name..... Read some of his stuff, personal attacks, accusations, outright lies... Then come back here and tell me you could ignore him.

I have ignored him.

[bulldog10]

Originally posted by brisatrue
Yes! Welcome back Tina! I let this post by bulldog kinda hang out cuz I thought Poncer might have paid him or put him up to write something like this. LOL If that is not the case then Bulldog, you must know of who you are speaking of a little better than you do to be taken seriously. There are messages and evidence of his personal attacks all over. You were right about something though, if he isn't talking to somebody he IS talking to himself. Unfortunately it's on a forum for facts, not B.S.
Michele


Not that it matters, but I am a she.

I resent your inference that I am anything but an honest participant of this forum. I was not "put up to" or "paid" to post.

I've seen the former member's posts here and elsewhere and simply disagree with the way some people have treated him. I voiced that. People are allowed to do that without being told that they don't know what they are talking about or being accused of sinister motives.

I realize that my comments have nothing to do with the thread's topic, my apologies to all.

Laurel

[DAzHiredGun]

I guess it's time I spoke up; since, I can "hear" my name being mentioned, LOL.

On the subject of banning members, I would think each forum has it's own rules to follow; and, decisions to ban are made based upon the severity of the violations. Personally, I dislike being put in the position of having to consider banning a member from this forum.

I consider our members to be intelligent, responsible people who come here to discuss certain issues with others in a intelligent, responsible manner. Here, within this forum, we are equally charged with maintaining a certain degree of responsibility, caring and respect toward others as exhibited through our methods and manners of expression. There is so much to be learned, offered, taught, experienced from, and by, each of us here.

Having said that, it troubles me a great deal to be a part of removing someone from our forum. By doing so, we are essentially no longer offering this person a chance to participate in any of the process, whether it be learning, teaching, offering, receiving, experiencing or relating experiences to others. However, we must also consider our responsibilities to the membership, as a whole, and each member's right to be treated with the same respect they exhibit toward others and their rights to participate in the process, unimpeded by undue remarks or criticism by a fellow member.

No, banning a member is not at all a simple decision to reach. Fortunately, decisions of that nature are not made by one person, but requires input of all available staff personnel, as expeditiously as the circumstances require. To date, the staff has banned three members. One was blocked from accessing this site within days of joining. This was done as a defensive measure to protect our members from a person who had been identified by a number of webmasters as a thief, using a number of different user names, signing up in programs more than once and creating downlines with user names and e-mail addresses taken from forums. The other two were venomx and Poncer, both banned for personal attacks, libelous comments and failure to comply with administrative warnings. I sincerely hope there will not be a fourth.

I have said more than I intended on the subject of banning. Sorry for the interruption. Let's get back on track and continue the discussion of Mike's program.

Thank you all .... for being here .... but, most importantly, being yourself and being GPTBoycott.com!


Ron

[DAzHiredGun]

Originally posted by bulldog10
Not that it matters, but I am a she.

I resent your inference that I am anything but an honest participant of this forum. I was not "put up to" or "paid" to post.

I've seen the former member's posts here and elsewhere and simply disagree with the way some people have treated him. I voiced that. People are allowed to do that without being told that they don't know what they are talking about or being accused of sinister motives.

I realize that my comments have nothing to do with the thread's topic, my apologies to all.

Laurel


No need to apologize, Laurel. It appears you were unnecessarily put in a position of having to defend yourself simply because your views differ from someone else's. You are totally within your rights to hold a different perspective.

I think it is time we refrain from discussing former members and continue the discussion concerning Mike's program.


Ron

[Tmarie99]

Originally posted by amyszoo
Michelle I meant that forum owners DO NOT take banning lightly ;)

Amy, I apologize. I read it wrong too. I thought about it later and thought, "DUH! I bet she meant it the other way"... LOL

[amyszoo]

Originally posted by Tmarie99
Amy, I apologize. I read it wrong too. I thought about it later and thought, "DUH! I bet she meant it the other way"... LOL

LOL No problem after I read it I thought oh goodness I see how people could read that wrong:hehe: