QuickBuck Zango Pop response...

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • mikeyddddd
    Viva la vulva!
    • Mar 2003
    • 16557

    #201
    2 hunnert zangos



    Comment

    • Iron Fist
      Too lazy to set a custom title
      • Dec 2006
      • 23400

      #202
      Originally posted by TheSwed
      Funny... I like it.
      i like waffles

      Comment

      • cykoe6
        Confirmed User
        • Apr 2005
        • 4499

        #203
        Originally posted by CarolCox
        I have contacted Quickbucks on three (3) different occasions about the problem with the carolcox.org website that is using stolen content and sending traffic into xxxpass.com. Since the affiliate in question was going against the T&C's, I had fully assumed that my notification would be taken seriously and acted upon accordingly. I sent proof that we owned all content and that their affiliate was in both Trademark and copyright violation. Needless to say, I was just ignored and never received a response back.

        I did try to handle this privately, but since Quickbucks deemed to ignore this issue I must now ask publicly, will you take action?
        This seems to defeat the Quickbucks argument that they will take care of these problems with "rouge" affiliates when contacted directly.
        бабки, шлюхи, сила

        Comment

        • Brad Mitchell
          Confirmed User
          • Nov 2001
          • 9813

          #204
          Originally posted by VG.Content
          Brad is one of the best, and he sticks to his ethics. Anytime I have spoken to him it's been nothing but the best answers.

          You'd be making a good move.
          Thank you for the compliment!

          Brad
          President at MojoHost | brad at mojohost dot com | Skype MojoHostBrad
          71 industry awards for hosting and professional excellence since 1999

          Comment

          • DannyWRP
            Registered User
            • Apr 2003
            • 7

            #205
            Finally figured out my own login for this place!

            Brad and his company MojoHost are great. We moved to them a number of years ago and have never had a problem. My main concern is always quick support, and no matter the time of day, these guys act immediately.

            Comment

            • AGS-17
              Confirmed User
              • May 2005
              • 1402

              #206
              not exclusive... but modern releases from really good studios.

              Comment

              • Papillon
                Confirmed User
                • Sep 2007
                • 254

                #207
                bump so you know who NOT to send traffic to
                You WILL make more money with Loaded Cash

                Comment

                • Drake
                  Hello world!
                  • Mar 2003
                  • 12508

                  #208
                  Originally posted by scoreman
                  You have stated that 100% of your traffic comes from affiliates. The natural conclusion then is that your company places great emphasis on studying the affiliates and working with them to build your business. This "rogue" affiliate was sending quite a bit of business and yet he/she/<you?> would not have been able to demonstrate any sort of traffic in comparison to the sales. NATs provides a number of ways that you would have seen the sales volume and it would have shown immediately that this person was up to something. 50 joins on zero traffic tends to stand out doesn't it? or was it 500 or 5000 joins on zero traffic?

                  You guys come on here with huge brassy balls basically telling everyone to fuck off and that this is a rogue webmaster. Any program owner that runs an affiliate program smells bullshit in your explanation. Combine this with the fact that you run $50 free trials, it seems to virtually impossible that you were not scrutinizing those affiliates sending joins that did not have traffic to explain those sales. The exact same stats could also indicate an affiliate carding joins to your program, and I fail to see how you would not have measures in place to protect against that, especially since you are running your own merchant accounts. So on the one hand you can catch fraud like someone running joins from a credit card database and proxies, but you cannot catch the "rogue" affiliate who runs joins via a Zango redirect until the shit hits the fan on the message boards?

                  You guys are full of shit crooks.

                  Holy smokes! It's not every day that you see the head of a huge program post something like this.

                  Comment

                  • Quickdraw
                    Confirmed User
                    • Mar 2004
                    • 1717

                    #209
                    Originally posted by Mike33
                    Holy smokes! It's not every day that you see the head of a huge program post something like this.
                    And very well put too

                    Comment

                    • Brad Mitchell
                      Confirmed User
                      • Nov 2001
                      • 9813

                      #210
                      Originally posted by scoreman
                      You have stated that 100% of your traffic comes from affiliates. The natural conclusion then is that your company places great emphasis on studying the affiliates and working with them to build your business. This "rogue" affiliate was sending quite a bit of business and yet he/she/<you?> would not have been able to demonstrate any sort of traffic in comparison to the sales. NATs provides a number of ways that you would have seen the sales volume and it would have shown immediately that this person was up to something. 50 joins on zero traffic tends to stand out doesn't it? or was it 500 or 5000 joins on zero traffic?

                      You guys come on here with huge brassy balls basically telling everyone to fuck off and that this is a rogue webmaster. Any program owner that runs an affiliate program smells bullshit in your explanation. Combine this with the fact that you run $50 free trials, it seems to virtually impossible that you were not scrutinizing those affiliates sending joins that did not have traffic to explain those sales. The exact same stats could also indicate an affiliate carding joins to your program, and I fail to see how you would not have measures in place to protect against that, especially since you are running your own merchant accounts. So on the one hand you can catch fraud like someone running joins from a credit card database and proxies, but you cannot catch the "rogue" affiliate who runs joins via a Zango redirect until the shit hits the fan on the message boards?

                      You guys are full of shit crooks.
                      Now that's a great fucking post.

                      Brad
                      President at MojoHost | brad at mojohost dot com | Skype MojoHostBrad
                      71 industry awards for hosting and professional excellence since 1999

                      Comment

                      • TheSwed
                        Confirmed User
                        • Feb 2004
                        • 3483

                        #211
                        that sucks

                        Cheap Viagra and Cialis Erectionpills

                        Comment

                        • TheSenator
                          Too lazy to set a custom title
                          • Feb 2003
                          • 13330

                          #212
                          damn... sucking balls
                          ISeekGirls.com since 2005

                          Comment

                          • TampaToker
                            Confirmed User
                            • May 2006
                            • 5828

                            #213
                            Originally posted by scoreman
                            You have stated that 100% of your traffic comes from affiliates. The natural conclusion then is that your company places great emphasis on studying the affiliates and working with them to build your business. This "rogue" affiliate was sending quite a bit of business and yet he/she/<you?> would not have been able to demonstrate any sort of traffic in comparison to the sales. NATs provides a number of ways that you would have seen the sales volume and it would have shown immediately that this person was up to something. 50 joins on zero traffic tends to stand out doesn't it? or was it 500 or 5000 joins on zero traffic?

                            You guys come on here with huge brassy balls basically telling everyone to fuck off and that this is a rogue webmaster. Any program owner that runs an affiliate program smells bullshit in your explanation. Combine this with the fact that you run $50 free trials, it seems to virtually impossible that you were not scrutinizing those affiliates sending joins that did not have traffic to explain those sales. The exact same stats could also indicate an affiliate carding joins to your program, and I fail to see how you would not have measures in place to protect against that, especially since you are running your own merchant accounts. So on the one hand you can catch fraud like someone running joins from a credit card database and proxies, but you cannot catch the "rogue" affiliate who runs joins via a Zango redirect until the shit hits the fan on the message boards?

                            You guys are full of shit crooks.
                            Wow
                            Icq 247-742-205

                            Comment

                            • d-null
                              . . .
                              • Apr 2007
                              • 13724

                              #214
                              Originally posted by scoreman
                              You have stated that 100% of your traffic comes from affiliates. The natural conclusion then is that your company places great emphasis on studying the affiliates and working with them to build your business. This "rogue" affiliate was sending quite a bit of business and yet he/she/<you?> would not have been able to demonstrate any sort of traffic in comparison to the sales. NATs provides a number of ways that you would have seen the sales volume and it would have shown immediately that this person was up to something. 50 joins on zero traffic tends to stand out doesn't it? or was it 500 or 5000 joins on zero traffic?

                              You guys come on here with huge brassy balls basically telling everyone to fuck off and that this is a rogue webmaster. Any program owner that runs an affiliate program smells bullshit in your explanation. Combine this with the fact that you run $50 free trials, it seems to virtually impossible that you were not scrutinizing those affiliates sending joins that did not have traffic to explain those sales. The exact same stats could also indicate an affiliate carding joins to your program, and I fail to see how you would not have measures in place to protect against that, especially since you are running your own merchant accounts. So on the one hand you can catch fraud like someone running joins from a credit card database and proxies, but you cannot catch the "rogue" affiliate who runs joins via a Zango redirect until the shit hits the fan on the message boards?

                              You guys are full of shit crooks.
                              wow is right!

                              __________________

                              Looking for a custom TUBE SCRIPT that supports massive traffic, load balancing, billing support, and h264 encoding? Hit up Konrad!
                              Looking for designs for your websites or custom tubesite design? Hit up Zuzana Designs
                              Check out the #1 WordPress SEO Plugin: CyberSEO Suite

                              Comment

                              • Quickdraw
                                Confirmed User
                                • Mar 2004
                                • 1717

                                #215
                                Originally posted by Blazing
                                unfortunately, the links from this guys .org & .net sites with unauthorized content is still linking up to the join page....
                                I wouldn't expect that to change either, especially after seeing how Caro Cox has such a hard time dealing with these crooks.

                                Comment

                                Working...