Choker (chickentraffic.com) are you selling traffic to tube8 & xhamster?

please refrain from using common sense in this thread

really great post a list of the sites that give you lifetime access to their site for the cost of trial membership
so far i have never found remember it is the porn member who is uploading the content (and has the fair use right) not the content liciencee (the site owners).

i have no problem with it, host that put my code up will get a DMCA take down request
the person who bought the code, is going to get sued
and because i provide you with right to always come back to me to get a copy of the script again. you will not be able to hide behind fair use.







the timeshifting my code, well since there are no viewing rights you can't timeshift code, but i assume you mean backup/recovery.

put my code up on the torrent sites
you will get sued,
if you argue you were just using the torrent to backup your content, i will prove you don't need to do that because i provide you with life time free access to the content.

I fulfill your need completely so, i can sue you.




no spin a direct quote you said you could not verify if the models are 18

"without proof of ownership how can you possibly verify if any of the models are 18, you cant "

there is a huge difference between that statement
and saying you could not tell her age
as i pointed out, in the other thread, passing the id of a canadian MILF model to a third party (non governmental) would violate PEPIDA.

you are trying to tie CP to copyright infringement when it really is not connected to try and justify demanding companies do thing that violate privacy laws.




If it was illegal you could stop it, the fact that it is happening and all of the people are bitching about proves it is legal.

well if you are expect him to request liciences for the content without a DMCA notice, that would be violating privacy laws. So you are talking doing something illegal because you to lazy to follow the law.



good we agree you pretending something illegal is going on when it is not.


cool problem half solved
if you are going to send the DMCA to the source, choker can keeping doing exactly what he is doing now, and the issue is completely solved by your action
nothing to bitch about at all

However if you are going to send the DMCA notice to choker he will have to divert CP monitors to deal with that notice

End result more CP because you are too lazy to DMCA the right person.




your forgetting that some sponsors are using the site, and submitting the content
a blanket black list would prevent those sponsors from getting free traffic.

So asking choker to do the blacklisting would either increase CP
or undermine someone elses business.

Sort of pointless when you consider sending DMCA take down to the source (tube8) solves the problem completely.





Exactly copyright issues have nothing to do with CP
You keep bring it up to try and hide the fact that you are asking him to break the law on your behalf (PEPIDA for example)

You ignore the fact that every minute he devotes to dealing with copyright issue, that is not his legal responsiblity to deal with is a minute that could be spend prevent CP.

So yes, if you truely cared about CP, and wanted to protect the children as you claim to be you would tell your friends to DMCA tube8 and leave choker alone.


nope it don't ask people break laws for you, just because you don't want to follow the laws on the books.


that is what i am saying

DMCA the source of the problem. let the people who are looking for CP look for CP and don't waste their time dealing with copyright issues, that really should be handled by the actual infringing source.

People that always calling people crooks, in the closet are the real crooks.
Let me go back to stealing videos

Kind of a stretch. Most of those tube sites were pre-filled with stolen videos. Most of the top uploaders are employees of the company. Most of the content on a tube site is pre-screened. What YouTube is doing could be constituted as legal, what many of these sites do is not.

We both know that they aren't innocent and just happen to have a site full of stolen videos.

and if you could prove that you would be able to sue them for 25k per video, and the safe harbor provision would not protect them at all.
Which means you don't have to ask choker to do a thing to stop all the "stolen content"

sure you post the ip of all the users who uploaded videos to every tube site.
yes paying porn members often upload high quality videos onto tube sites so that they can watch it in lower quality with limitations.. sure, and pigs fly right lol


nope they uploaded it for time shifting. sorry you lose again.


but thank you for the permission
so do the content producers who's content is on the tubesites you are trying to defend




bwahahaha defensive are we ?

The content owners may have the same deal as you do. You never implicitly stated in your code that it cant be stored for backup , nor does it say anything about re-obtaining the code from you for life.







you said you can tell by looking at them , i pointed out you need documentation, you can spin it however makes you feel better, you can pretend i meant one thing when you obviously understand what i meant , or you can play the moron and argue over semantics.

Incase there is any confusion in your mind. You need i.d. to verify someones age , not gideon telling you they looked over 18. If you have a hard time figuring that out then go back to school.









you can guess what i was saying or you could actually read the words and formulate them into patterns you can understand.

i'll make it so clear a neanderthal could understand

no license means no 2257, no 2257 means you could be friends with bubba in no time.




great logic you have there , hope you have a good lawyer on retainer

people bitching about stuff makes things legal.


so asking for a license and/or I.d. for content is illegal. so ccbill commits illegal acts everyday is what you are saying.




good we agree you pretending something illegal is going on when it is not.



if choker is dealing with so much child porn he needs to hire extra people to keep from displaying it , then he has problems. If my choice was an extra $100 a day to keep child porn off my site , or ignore the problem and help cp sites make money i know what i would pick, from the sounds of it we know what you would pick.




awwww i am shedding many a tears
we have already gone through this, as much as you may like to defend content that could be child porn, sane people avoid it like the plague

so once i send a dmca to tube8 they will remove all the illegal videos they have ?



do you bore yourself to sleep repeating stuff over and over, you have repeated this 3 times, its an ignorant assumption. So anything choker does that takes up time causes more cp ? choker must be rampant with child porn.

Choker stubs a toe, more cp
Choker has a nap , cp
Choker has a shower, oh look more cp.


if choker has that much child porn he has alot more problems than selling traffic to tube sites agreed





so hosts shouldn't boot people who have cp , or even ask if its cp because it would be violating privacy laws ? they have to have the victim send them a dmca ?

damn police dont hate the playa hate the game

you can't even name 1 site that give you full access forever for the price of a trial so i call bullshit on that statement








ah canadian
no 2257 in canada
choker not hosting the content
no 2257 issues
the targeted site is the only one who has to deal with that issue

You are talking about getting choker to get proof of liciencing to sell traffic.


considering you were bitching because CCBILL didn't randomly pick 3 pictures from the content and demand licences be produced or no billing would be provided
it obvious they don't do that.
If they asked me for the docs, and it was a canadian model i would point them to the record holder, and tell them

it a zero sum game so every second he spends on a copyright issue is a second he doesn't spend on cp

I personally want him to spend as zero seconds on the copyright issue and 100% of his time on cp

Given the choice how much time do you want him to divert from CP monitoring to deal with this copyright issues.



i want him to spend 100% of the monitoring time on CP and 0% on copyright issues like this
what percentage do you want him to take away from monitoring CP to deal with this copyright issue.


If you send them a Valid DMCA take down request they have to, or face civil liablity for the continued publication, either way the issue is done
either it is gone or they can be sued for 25k per instance.




you keep bring up CP into this dispute
I will say it again
i want him to spend every second of monitoring time stopping CP.
I don't want him to waste a single second dealing with your copyright issues
How much time do you want him to divert from stopping CP to deal with this copyright issue.

let the people who are looking for CP look for CP and don't waste their time dealing with copyright issues, that really should be handled by the actual infringing source.



[/QUOTE]

you are either being deliberately daft or your are the stupidest person in the world

i specifically said
if you are trying to tell me that no cp exist on the internet, we have completely solved that problem nothing like that exist anywhere, but until that happens i don't want him spending 1 millisecond dealing with a copyright issue that he is not obligated too.

I want him spending every free second getting rid of the CP on the sites he sells traffic too.

Hell i would rather him divert every second that he currently spends making sure the tube sites don't have user uploaded content into looking for and reporting CP to the appropriate authorities.

does this mean given the choice between hiring an extra person to searching thru the links to make sure there is no CP

and hiring an extra person to prevent "stolen content" you would rather have choker hire a person to prevent "stolen content"

How about this gideongallery...I NEVER EVER sold anyone a downloadable movie EXCEPT in my VOD section. I sell a membership to an exclusive online club that just happens to have some hardcore in it for your viewing pleasure while you are in the members area.

Now, on my VOD section I DO give the people who buy the video a free copy if they need it. But wouldn't you know it? They still like to upload 'em to tubes and torrents and then slap virtual high fives with their buddies on big tit forums.

Yes, that's right gideongallery. You and I actually agree on one thing. It IS the surfers who are uploading. And it's a sweet deal for the torrent sites and illegit tubes.

But I don't sell them ANYTHING in my members area to download. Nothing, nada. Just a right to view my encrypted streams while they are a member.

thats because you make up the terms as you go along. I have now spoken to several different programs who said they would let a user redownload a video they had already downloaded , this has nothing to do with trials or full. If they downloaded the video they can have a copy. just like you supposedly do








what are you blabbering on about ?


said nothing of the sort



yes i was and that has what exactly to do with ccbill asking for docs ? that they do. ask them yourselves.

and if you have no idea who the record holder is because you have no license and no i.d.



so when choker stubs a toe theres more cp because of it ? i'm sure choker will be thrilled you equate his workload with cp production

umm not sure what to say about that


i'll answer all at the same time since i dont think you realise you repeat yourself over and over like a broken record..

if i was selling traffic to cp sites and illegal tubes then i would stop doing both. If it were so bad i had to make a choice then i would stop selling traffic.



a little hint here because you seem awfully confused. Normally when people mean things they say them. if i was trying to tell you no cp existed i would have said the words that put together say that. But seeing as how i said nothing of the sort chances are i didnt say it.

When i say things , i dont "try" it i just say them , if you have a hard time understanding them, stick to what was said

as i have pointed out to you before
that arguement was made in the betamax case
they said licienced to be watch at a specific time on a specific day and only then
the courts ruled vcr owners had a right timeshift the viewing to another time
Streaming only like your doing, violates that right, and if someone comes up with a way to record the stream (virtualizing the video card) they have a right to keep that copy long after the membership has expired.

as to your second point, i agree with you sue them, take out the hoster of the torrent
hash encode the file so it can be instantly identified,
give the torrent site the hash key so they can prescreen the file
tell them to log the uploader ip address
and sue that user into oblivion
if you are fully providing for the fair use right for free you have every right to target them.


of course if you are charging a huge premium for rights that they actually have for free (streaming only at a membership, and downloads for an ungodly high price) that is a different story.

it not just the videos i download it all the videos i was sold access too even if i didn't download them
think tv shows, if i failed to tape knight rider, i still have a right to borrow my friends copy so i can watch the show i paid for.

no site that i am aware off give you that right. Hell a lot of sites bitch at you if you use one of those site rippers to get every video available.


choker sells traffic to tgp, a cp gallery could exist anywhere on that site.
even 1 gallery is to much CP
IF we were to follow your rules then there would be no traffic because you can't guarrentee there is no CP anywhere on the internet.

However i make the distinction that i don't want him to spend one single cent of money dealing with your copyright issues until CP issue is a 100% cleared

look at it this way suppose 99.9999% of the galleries are NON kiddie porn
and 100% was stolen content before he spent on cent on stopping stolen content i would want him to go after that .0001% cp that is getting thru.



good we agree that CP exists, it might sneak in on one of the thousands of tgp that choker sells traffic too

So i will ask you the question

if choker were to hire another person to review all the galleries to stop the .0001% of CP

or he could hire a guy review sites to prevent indirect support of "stolen content"

Which would you rather he do.

No. This means drama llama, that typically follows all your bullshit threads, and fucked up logic.

Furthermore, I police MY OWN stolen content, and I expect him to follow a DMCA when sent to him. How the fuck will Choker know my content, from someone else's, and if I licensed it to them?!?

Does he have some magic powers I am unaware of? Last I knew he was just some loud mouth from Florida who choked his chicken. I do not give a fuck about Choker. Fuck his fraud prevention, and screwed up ways of doing business accepting credit cards via WU. I have no patience for that bullshit.

That said, he is a business man, and he is ultimate going to do what serves his own self interests regardless of what some message board of BROs, and one torrent promoting, time shifting homo named gideangallery thinks.

You're just not understanding what I'm saying. I'm not selling them ANY videos at all. I'm selling them a membership...end of story. I'm not telling them that they have to watch ANY video and I'm definitely not telling them what time of day or any specific day that they can choose to watch or not watch a video.

I don't see where the betamax case applies at all in any way to what I do for a living. You can't "timeshift" a membership to a club. Just like I can't "timeshift" going to the strip club. Oh, it would be nice to determine that I'd like to see that dancer on the pole strip a few more times for me for free at my house...after all, I paid her to do it once already. But it don't work that way my foolish clown friend.

This ain't a free t.v. show and you can't timeshift your membership to the site. It is what it is. And I will do everything I can think of to stop anybody from trying to get my stuff. Now sue me. lol You can't, even if your parents loaned you the money.

so your selling them a membership and giving them the videoes for free
cool what would happen if someone like me wrote an application that virtualized the video card and recorded the encrypted stream.

Could i then legally upload it everywhere i want.

It the movie theater arguement all over again, for countries that don't make it illegal to record the screening (france, sweden)

It is exactly like that because their is no criminal law against recording a website membership(like the any camming laws in canada, and the US)


i don't have to sue you, i can just use my software and do it.
and if you sued me, you would only end up footing the bill for both my legal fees and yours.

keep dreaming

what rule are you making up in your head this time ?



i want him to not sell traffic to anything illegal , thats pretty simple, if he cant do both then he should quit. pretty simple logic




you have been explained this multiple times, read the words very carefully

HIRE BOTH PEOPLE.

omg shocking , who woulda thunked it. stop making thieves and pedo's money at the same time.

good god

ok so he can hire two people then

he can put two people on getting rid of CP

or one on each

If he puts one on each , some EXTRA CP porn will slide thru the cracks

Which would you like him to do.

let me clarify it so you don't say something stupid like hire 3 people

he can hire two people

if he puts both people on reviewing galleries for CP he will catch some CP galleries and prevent them from making any money, cutting off the funds to the abuse of those childern

IF he put one on CP and another on this indirect "stolen content" issue some of the galleries that would have gotten caught (ie galleries added after the original buy for example) will get thru and some sicko who is making money off CP will make some cash and therefore have an insentive to do it to more kids.


which would you want him to do.

I wouldn't want to sue you. I don't mind one little bit if you joined the site and downloaded a video for your personal use. I wish I could make it that way again. And I don't have a problem with you giving a copy of it to all of your friends either.

You know that the only problem I have is with my stuff being used to make other people money. If there really were a magical way for you to "timeshift" my videos for your personal use there wouldn't be any problem at all. Oh yeah, I forgot...there are plenty of ways for you to do that. I just saw a 1 TERABYTE external usb drive at officemax for $150! That's unreal! And the 500 Gig ones were even cheaper.

So technically, you could just get one of those and download every video I make for the next 100 years and still have plenty of space. Nobody monetizes MY work. And I don't mind one little bit what time of day you watch it. Or even if you make copies for everybody you know.

It's never been about stopping people from doing anything as far as just jerking off to some porn. It IS all about others making money from it. And that includes the illegit tube site owners, the torrent owners, the brokers dealing traffic from the "bad" ones, and the advertisers who bankroll it. They are all making money off of someone else's work.

That's all I've ever said. I will prevent it to the best of my ability with MY stuff. And I will recognize that it is WRONG for someone to make money from another's work and not compensate them for it.

Don't you agree gideongallery? Not illegal... but just down deep in your gut you have to realize it is wrong.

good post Robbie and there is no doubt that it is wrong, whether they can get away with it legally is not the point, it is still wrong, and supporting those that use that as a business model is just as wrong

cool ok we are closer than you think on the issue
Let me ask you a question then
suppose i took one of your videos, layered in a parody song
"torrents killed the pornostar"

would it be ok for me to make money distributing that parody work of your content.

damn this is a war

If you used my actual footage instead of shooting your own footage with a blonde wig and a big set of balloons tied to your chest...then yeah, I wouldn't find that acceptable...UNLESS you were an affiliate and linking back to the actual site. The video work and still camera work that I do are what I use to sell memberships and make a living.

Your biggest problem on GFY is that you come on here and do nothing EXCEPT try to troll guys who do this for a living. You act as if you are the defense attorney for all the bad guys.

I think you have totally mistaken what the argument is. It's not "us" against the consumer. It's "us" against people using the consumer like a pawn to fill up their sites with our content so they can pull traffic and make money off of our work.

Please tell me you can see what is wrong with that, and why it makes me so angry.

Ok see that is where you and i differ
I think that is ok
parody is explictly protected "fair use" of copyright material


things like this
http://www.tube8.com/hardcore/lick-it-music-video/2681
are ok in my book


i am sorry you see it like that
i defend fair use rights like the above, and i prioritize them higher than your right to make money because that is the way the law is currently written.

If you fully provide for all the fair use rights of your customers, then i fully support you nailing the torrent sites to the wall

However if you are going to say things like misrepresent the explictly protected right of parody as a violation of your copyright i am going to disagree with you.

Just like the tv producers arguing that using a PVR denies them the sales of season dvd(becaues if they couldn't tape the show, they would have to buy the dvd) doesn't give them a right to take way the fair use right of timeshifting established by the betamax case isn't valid either.



I can see why you are angry, it cost you money

But can't you see the other side of the arguement

you are arguing that i don't have the same right to make money from my parody
A parody which has less of a contextual meaning if i was just dressing up in a wig and balloons

A right that other artist like weird al have made millions doing.

A right that the legislators specifically expressed be protected in the very act that grants you your exclusve rights.

gideon, what the hell does parody have to do with this topic that was started about Choker dealing with sites like tube8 and xhamster?

you have taken this thread so far out of the important issue and gotten so wordy it has become a pointless jerk off

You're way offbase on Weird Al. He does EXACTLY what I said I would have no problem with YOU doing. He doesn't take the bands video footage or music tracks. He takes the idea (the song) and rewrites it with new words with HIM singing it. And he shoots the videos with HIM dressed up like the star that he is parodying. That is exactly what I told you I had no problem with.

And hell no I wouldn't let you take my footage and call it by another name and claim it's a parody for YOU to make money off of. Call me old fashioned my friend...but there isn't a law or any force on earth that would stop you from feeling my wrath.

I'd keep that in mind when you're on here talking like that to people. You never know who you're dealing with. I know I wouldn't want to make some of these crazy fuckers on here get angry. I know them. Hell, some of these guys are a bit "off" in the head and prone to violence. Scares the shit out of me.

go reread what i already posted to you , pay special attention to the part where i told you if he has that much cp he should find another line of work. Other traffic brokers have already said they wouldnt sell to those sites.

Maybe you just dont understand the concept of "dont support things that are illegal" because you are stuck on finding a way to legalize theft.

Why dont you try answering some of the questions posed instead of coming up with countless reasons to avoid the question ..

I asked specifically about whether hosts should boot a user who has child porn on their server or do they need the victim to provide them with a dmca ?

By your theory even asking for proof of age is illegal, and there is no copyright, and by your own words if it were illegal it wouldnt exist and if people are bitching about it , it must be legal..

good point. Ontario is pretty connected. You end up "pushing up daisies" in a cornfield in the back of a car with 3 of your buddies and no penis

That happened to me once when I smarted off at Helmy on here.

This thread is absurd. Everyone here lives in a glass house. If any one of you played the game of one person removed from evil in the business you would have nobody to do business with.

Choker is a role model and example. First, he owns and operates his own legal tube sites. Second, he lowers the barrier to entry on licensed content and inspires a whole new generation of tube sites which use licensed content.. and in the process converts many doing who were at their worst into changing up their business model.

By all accounts he is an honest business person. He does what he says he is going to do, he has drawn lines on how he won't do business where virtually nobody else has. What does he get in return? Shit.

Perhaps as keyboard warriors you have convinced yourselves that he is part of the problem. Stand up and see for yourselves - at 1,000 feet he's part of a real solution and, is thinking ahead and innovating.

It's healthy to be mad and frustrated by the problems we are all facing, each of us just a bit different but mostly they're the same. Working harder to make the same, less or just fractionally more money... you've got something in common with most everyone.

Cut the BS and focus on the source problems instead of collateral relationships. Shame on every one of you for giving Tom shit when every single billing processor, host, software company, content producer, designer, webmaster board, traffic company, registrar, affiliate and sponsor program - and even you - does business directly or indirectly with undesirables.

You live in a glass house. You're naked. We're staring and nobody likes what they're seeing.

Fucking man up - hire lawyers and file lawsuits. Despite our communal desire for a BBB of sorts in adult or any type of community standard in business practices there is no such entity or unity. There isn't accountability and likely never will be.

It's not entirely everyone for themselves - most of us are good and making sound decisions but none of us can even say we are even one relationship removed from the billing fraud and content theft problems.

Grow up kids.

Brad

Just wanted to say: I never attacked Choker in this thread. I'm only here for the gideongallery amusement.

ok i will answer your question if you will answer mine

The best solution would be to turn the CP page over to the authorities
because there is no violation of privacy laws when the government ask you for id (only when a business like choker does)
Send the fucker to jail where he belongs, letting him off the hook by simply booting him is too weak a solution

However if we lived in a magical world where all you could do was boot him

then yes a host should boot the CP webmaster without DMCA take down request
because CP has nothing to do with copyright violations
and everything to do with terms of service violation. However if they booted someone who was not dealing in CP just barely legal content, then they should get sued for penny of lost income.


i have answered your question so how about you answer mine

simple choice

"However, Nash equilibrium does not necessarily mean the best cumulative payoff for all the players involved; in many cases all the players might improve their payoffs if they could somehow agree on strategies different from the Nash equilibrium (e.g. competing businessmen forming a cartel in order to increase their profits)."

it a form fo user submitted content that would be perfectly legitimate to link too.

And it adds a layer of complexity (censorship) to the issue of blacklisting sites that link to user submitted tube sites and buy choker traffic.

if someone is a "role model" then people expect them to live up to a higher standard than we do ourseves right or wrong, thats why this thread is here , otherwise it just would have said "traffic brokers" not "choker".

Not very many people have been "slamming" choker, simply asking for him to do what is best for the industry/him/us. Look back at my first post, i'm not even saying he needs to do anything , i simply suggested he explain to people WHY it doesnt affect him.

Do i think choker is so shortsighted he is killing his own revenue by selling traffic to the evil tubes ? not for a second.

As a well established and respected adult vet, i was hoping he could bring some valuable input in the direction of the industry and why its not as bad as it sounds.

It is sad this thread turned into "gideons timeshifting daydreams" but hey , it is gfy afterall did you really expect any better

the wonderful thing about building a business based on the nash equilibrium is that it aggravates the problem for everyone else. The more people who fight you the more money you make as a result of the change.

your worst case senerio is everyone agreeing with you.

that is exactly what is happening with the traffic vs content dispute in this tube arguement.

Traffic guys are making more and more money, by aggravating the problem for content guys.

Hense my original statement. You don't have to do a complete turn over, just enough to subsidize your cost.

The nice thing about turning content into a traffic source, is that you turn the edge against the traffic because the what would normally be a benefit to them (lower ratios = need to buy more traffic to get the same results)

becomes a weakness (lower ratio = use product placement/branding bugs instead)

or you could do what any other person here would do. BOTH


maybe you dont understand how copyright works


and of course there is no way you say for a host to know if they are violating the tos if they cant ask for age is there ? how could a host possibly know what is cp if they cant find out the age ?



i already answered yours, pay close attention to where i told you to pay close attention to what i already said.

If true, your best course of action is to shut the fuck up and stop arguing how you're doing the right thing. Quit trying to convince everyone else to agree with you. Since you don't or can't seem to apply this game theory to your business model, you're just babbling nonsense that you think makes you sound intelligent. Nash equilibrium.

lol i still disagree with him so i guess there is a worse worse case scenario.

if a host asked me as a canadian citizen for the id
i would point him the pepida legislation and say sorry i can't do that without violating these models privacy rights
however if you are still conserned here is the number of the police if they want to make a request i can legally provide them with id.

If a host booted me without contacting the police i would definately sue them for every penny of lost income (termination of a contract without cause)

So if other people would be willing to accept that liability good for them
Choker does have to if he doesn't want too.

an maybe you don't understand how the criminal liabilites for CP are in a difference section of the legal cannon than copyright infringement.




sure there is
mr police man this person appears to have child porn please investigate
oh he doesn't have valid id
he goes to jail and you have proof that he violated the TOS.

all without violating the privacy rights of the model

if he does
no problem for the site owner
proof that it is not a violation of TOS
all wihtout violating the privacy rights of the model.


Well that is impossible since i change the question to eliminate the bullshit dancing around the issue (i would just hire two people -- ignoring the fact that would double the cost, and still represent an opertunity cost away for CP monitoring)

let try again

if i was a traffic guy wanting the problem to continue that would be true

i am however not such a person, i want to turn a prisoner Dilema (content seller vs traffic seller) into the 3 gun man equilibrium (content seller vs traffic seller vs product placement/branding bug seller)

the three gun man equilibrium traffic sellers strength into a weakness (bad ratios but high volume) that can be exploited by the content seller.

nobody says he has to.



thats nice, it also has nothing to do with what we were talking about




so you would allow obvious child porn to be hosted on your server if you were a host until you had a court order from the police to remove it..

I think the point only you seem to miss is most people have higher morals.

i pointed out that i pointed out that i already pointed out the answer for you but obviously you are having a hard time so i will repeat it for you.

If choker is in such a financial crisis that he needs extra staff he cant afford just to stop selling traffic to cp sites , he should quit.

but he doesnt its just another fantasy excuse for theft among the other excuses you come up with to try and legitimize content theft.

he couldnt possibly not sell traffic to illegal tubes because then he couldnt fight cp . lol
what a sorry excuse.

Funny how the only people that ever come out in support of these illegal tubes are guys running them, hosts and traffic sellers. Anyone whom sells member ships or owns content gets the idea of what's going on.

No one needs to grow up here.. people need to fucking straighten up and stop helping / do business with these illegal tubes sites that are full of stolen content.

Exactly, the point of this topic was not to personally attack choker or his business. However sometimes there are lines that need to be drawn. Considering the fact that Choker had been here on GFY over the last week or so telling us all how great his tube traffic was, I felt people needed to see where this "great" traffic was coming from.

We all know there are light/grey and black areas in this biz and what he is doing is on the very dark shade of grey. While what he is doing, is not technically legally wrong (most likely anyway), it is damn sure bad for this industry and morally wrong.

It is also pretty much a shit in the face to people whom are in this business who have supported him, by buying his traffic over the years. This is not a black or white issue, is is a wrong issue.

BTW Smokey you know arguing with gideon is like trying to teach a monkey to program.. You would likely have much more success with the monkey.

It's easy to play stupid when your income is not depending on paysites in any way.After all tube sites for hosts are best beacuse they spend more bandwith then any other type of site.

Hey Crockett, just wanted to publicly thank you for bringing this up.