Since the data is not mine I can only comment on the data and not on the accused. Also - since I have limited time analyzing the data I am assuming that comments brought here are based on accurate enough analysis.
1. A site faking a top-list is dishonest. That is close enough to cheating. (I did not establish this fact as truth since I have no access to the original site)
2. A site using illegal copy of a script is a cheater towards the script owner (Since no word from Tim is out it?s only a general not). If someone is cheating/stealing from someone its safe to assume he/she has little conscience barriers cheating you.
3. Haveing incoming traffic from the trader from 2 IPs of 255.*.*.* but productive clicks from the same trader from 100 IPs of 255.*.*.* is very illogical. I don?t know what trading system you use, but if you trust it to be accurate and correct then you should come to the conclusion the trader is a cheater. Productive clicks can only come from same IPs that was sent by the trader ? that?s the whole idea of productivity measurement. If that anomaly is what you indeed encounter it means that the trader emulated a hit on your site which is regarded as productive click while faking a cookie indicating the ?visitor? was sent through the trading system from him.
It also points to the following fact: The trader is most likely ? technically speaking ? dumb. This is due to one of the following reason: he forgot to pass those 100 IPs through the trading script to get them registered as sent hits. (well... you live and learn
)
4. Unlike what NiteChatDotTV said, IF the traffic is proxy traffic, it won?t necessarily help to put the traffic through a simple leading page test since enough bots out there ?know? to follow levels down.
BUT?
5. If most of your traffic is from AOL, I would suspect such a trader anyway. Last I checked AOL proxies were closed to non-AOL users (serving as gateway proxies internally). If that is the case and most traffic is AOL it is very likely that this is not proxy botting but IP spoofing botting. Differences are too long to count here.
Suffice to say, that may explain why the productive clicks were not registered as incoming hits (since they have to be first emulated through the IN procedure of the trading script, and it?s a pain in the ass to waste time on being so organized). What can be done in spoof botting is basically saving the cookie once for one IP and using it to emulate prod clicks with random spoofed IPs. You can see now why the 100 255.*.*.* IPs were not registered as IN traffic!/?
6. The general rule of ?If it?s too good to be true ? it probably is? may be right in TGP/CJ trading. But don?t be too quick to use it.
Summing it all down:
* Very high proxy incoming traffic
* Productive clicks from non-registered IN IPs
* Very high AOL traffic (either as IN or PROD)
* A site that fakes a UCJ top-list and/or uses an illegal copy of a trading script
If all points above are facts ? It is way past the ?good-enough-for-me? scale for cheater-proven trade.