.

[Yankee (BitInstant)]

Any update on this ?

-Subscribed

[Andrew Bitcoiner]

Any update on this ?

-Subscribed

Nope.

[NothinG]

[Serenata]

What I have seen so far.

1. One complains about being banned and losing earnings
2. Owner being very cryptic about what the problem was. No clear answer.
3. One correctly claims that if the clicks were "bad" the profit should be returned to the advertiser instead of charity
4. Owner doesn't have a clear stance to the: "If the clicks were not "bad" then no ban should have occured. If they were bad, then money should be returned to advertiser."
5. Owner draws our attention to the terms of service
6. Owner says "If you don't like the service, don't use it, very simple." effectively meaning OK you got me. Stop using it now you know and let me do the same to others
7. I'm quoting this from the terms "The Service may terminate your access to all or any part of the Website at any time, with or without cause, with or without notice, effective immediately." In my opinion cancelling a service without reason and keeping the earnings, is not at all a rational term.

I find the owner's stance too negative and a bit suspicious. Same with the TOS. Although as far as I'm concerned the above are more than enough for me to stop using the service, I do hope this clears up, to protect others if the service is indeed fraudulent or clear the owner's name, if the service is logical and legitimate.

[Andrew Bitcoiner]

This comment is effectively meaningless.

What I have seen so far.

1. One complains about being banned and losing earnings

My service is almost fully automated, if they would of earned anything they would of been paid.  They didn't lose any earnings since they were not earned.  The complainer also runs a competing ad service.

2. Owner being very cryptic about what the problem was. No clear answer.

This is a private matter not a public one.  As stated earlier we do not engage n dispute resolution in public forums since it is none of your armchair business.

3. One correctly claims that if the clicks were "bad" the profit should be returned to the advertiser instead of charity

In your opinion.

4. Owner doesn't have a clear stance to the: "If the clicks were not "bad" then no ban should have occured. If they were bad, then money should be returned to advertiser."
5. Owner draws our attention to the terms of service
6. Owner says "If you don't like the service, don't use it, very simple." effectively meaning OK you got me. Stop using it now you know and let me do the same to others

7. I'm quoting this from the terms "The Service may terminate your access to all or any part of the Website at any time, with or without cause, with or without notice, effective immediately." In my opinion cancelling a service without reason and keeping the earnings, is not at all a rational term.

Let me quote to you Google's Adsense Terms:

Program Participation. Participation in the Program is subject to Google’s prior approval and Your continued compliance with the Program Policies ("Program Policies"), located at https://www.google.com/adsense/policies, and/or such other URL as Google may provide from time to time. Google reserves the right to refuse participation to any applicant or participant at any time in its sole discretion.

As I stated earlier this policy is industry standard practice.

I find the owner's stance too negative and a bit suspicious. Same with the TOS. Although as far as I'm concerned the above are more than enough for me to stop using the service, I do hope this clears up, to protect others if the service is indeed fraudulent or clear the owner's name, if the service is logical and legitimate.

You allege to have used the service, since I do not have partners forum information it is just as likely you just made that up to spread more FUD.

[Yankee (BitInstant)]

Andrew,

I know the publishers side of your business, Im not involved in.

We've met in SF, and I've vouched for you on this forum when no one else did.

Is this whole thing really worth the few Bitcoins you owe to them? Why cant you just pay your publishers and be done with this.

Your whole companies reputation is being tarnished because of a few Bitcoins.

Moral issues aside, cmon dude this is bad business and you know it. The customer is always 100% right.

Talk to them, settle it out, and end this.

Your gonna lose all your advertisers, including myself if this does not get resolved. That was not a threat, its the simple truth.

What are you gonna do Andrew?

-Charlie

[terrytibbs]

What are you gonna do Andrew?

-Charlie

Touché

[Andrew Bitcoiner]

Talk to them, settle it out, and end this.

I did that and it didn't work, what else do you suggest?

[Yankee (BitInstant)]

Talk to them, settle it out, and end this.

I did that and it didn't work, what else do you suggest?

For a guy who's analyzing everyone's comments line-by-line, you just skipped over my post and commented on 1 line. Is that fair?

To answer your question - make it work - your not in high school Andrew this is the real world. We can't run away from our issues.

[Andrew Bitcoiner]

Talk to them, settle it out, and end this.

I did that and it didn't work, what else do you suggest?

For a guy who's analyzing everyone's comments line-by-line, you just skipped over my post and commented on 1 line. Is that fair?

To answer your question - make it work - your not in high school Andrew this is the real world. We can't run away from our issues.

I replied back with what I had a question on, what's the problem with that?

[Yankee (BitInstant)]

Talk to them, settle it out, and end this.

I did that and it didn't work, what else do you suggest?

For a guy who's analyzing everyone's comments line-by-line, you just skipped over my post and commented on 1 line. Is that fair?

To answer your question - make it work - your not in high school Andrew this is the real world. We can't run away from our issues.

I replied back with what I had a question on, what's the problem with that?

There is no problem with that. I just assumed as a friend you'd give me the decency of responding to my post.

I guess not.

[drakahn]

hmm

And now its official

[Maged]

The terms of service have been updated to prevent this from being a problem in the future. However, Andrew still needs to pay these people who were legitimately using his service under the old Terms.

[Matthew N. Wright]

hmm

And now its official

rofl. The "hmm" of death.

[Maged]

The terms of service have been updated to prevent this from being a problem in the future. However, Andrew still needs to pay these people who were legitimately using his service under the old Terms.

1) There is no significant difference between those versions of terms in the context of this dispute.

Please point out the following from the old terms:
a) which part of the Terms they broke
b) which part allows you to keep the bitcoins for yourself

2) I had reason to believe the banners on websites they controlled were generating false clicks.

Was that against the old Terms?

3) I banned those accounts according to standard practice.

That doesn't revoke your obligation to pay them any funds that were pending.

4) The customer and I were not able to reconcile those differences at which time he illicit's personal friends to a) create a public thread complaining about the issue, b) defame my reputation, c) cause my service significant financial loss, d) he did not then or now use his own advertising service on the dailybitcoin.org website or any other service to replace BitcoinAdvertisers.com banner ad hosting service.

Now you're just pulling a bulanula.

5) Without due diligence or recourse forum moderators judged my service to be guilty without hearing counter arguments.  

We absolutely heard your counter-arguments! In fact, I would have personally been just fine with you refunding the advertisers instead of paying these guys, despite the fact that no court would agree with me (they'd tell you to pay these guys, no exceptions).

6) The threat of seizing partner account funds is there to warn publishers to not try to game the system and we have had a lot of people try this.

And I don't disagree with this at all, which is why I'm glad that you've gone ahead and updated the Terms so that all parties are aware of this.

If I can make any recommendations to the moderators of this forum it would be to not take sides in a dispute between members.  You say you are all about free speech and I now know that to mean that trolling, defaming, and insulting forum members and financial contributors to this website is a forum standard practice.  I have had something like 40btc worth of ad space on this forum and because of your actions I will not be purchasing ads here in the future.

Our whole job in scammer investigations are to take a side, but in a fair and unbiased manner. I knew none of the people involved in this dispute, so I feel that I fit the role (note: this investigation is still controlled by tysat until/unless he transfers it to me)

[bulanula]

Now you're just pulling a bulanula.

You know you have reached legend status on the forums when your username becomes a descriptive word !

Maged is doing the right thing here. It is justice being handed out fairly for all forum users / scammers.

Next time I will also try and hide behind and use fancy TOS with hidden clauses to protect me.

You forget this is BTC world and not court

[Coinbuck @ BTCLot]

Please note term 3) is a lie. CoinAd account wasn't banned or notified about this. Andrew did this to profit even more from the scam.

[Coinbuck @ BTCLot]

Please note term 3) is a lie. CoinAd account wasn't banned or notified about this. Andrew did this to profit even more from the scam.

No one partner contact information is collected at sign up and neither does the service need to notify anyone of this.  And how do you even know?  Do you read his email?  Troll elsewhere.

I've said multiple times that I'm following this case with CoinAd administrator before this thread existence so I can confirm that.

It's up to you to ignore/omit facts. All I can say is that you're screwed up at this moment and you deserve it for the damage you caused to CoinAd and other publishers.

EDIT: I hope you're happy to know that you stole bitcoins that were going to new bitcoin users.

[edd]

Please note term 3) is a lie. CoinAd account wasn't banned or notified about this. Andrew did this to profit even more from the scam.

No one partner contact information is collected at sign up and neither does the service need to notify anyone of this.  And how do you even know?  Do you read his email?  Troll elsewhere.

I've said multiple times that I'm following this case with CoinAd administrator before this thread existence so I can confirm that.

It's up to you to ignore/omit facts. All I can say is that you're screwed up at this moment and you deserve it for the damage you caused to CoinAd and other publishers.

EDIT: I hope you're happy to know that you stole bitcoins that were going to new bitcoin users.

I hope you are happy to know that if nothing was earned nothing can be taken away. 

So your advertisers paid for nothing?

[freespirit]

Please note term 3) is a lie. CoinAd account wasn't banned or notified about this. Andrew did this to profit even more from the scam.

No partner contact information is collected at sign up...

So what? You provide partners with a stats page, which they obviously visit, what prevents you from notifying them via these pages?
Then... when answering to posts in this thread you refer to "fraud" as a justification for bans all the time. In my case, I repeat, my website was banned (as I found out much later), stats page was continuing to show flow of earnings, my message via your support form regarding lack of payouts was ignored for days, you reacted only to my pm here after I posted on the forum and told me that my website was banned because it's not "a good fit" for you. Where is fraud in this equation? (at least from my side LOL).
Not that I care about those pennies you chose not to pay to me, but all this tells a lot about your business practices.

And I recall clicking on one of the partners' addresses on your "global" stats page, and there was a message like "CTR is too high, payouts suspended pending investigation". So you actually used this way of notification (before?/for certain partners?). And now suddenly you complain about lack of partners' contact information?