i actually agree with this too, it should be mandatory to upgrade to mpa3 from mpa2.....at least for both companies to save face

can someone post a list of sponsors using mpa2...so i can stop sending traffic and not sign up to any others...
:)

A non-confidentiality clause in the MPA3 agreement wont allow us to do so.

Very simple reason really.

:)

could you answer this one too while your at it?

The answer to this one is pretty easy. They dont want to change because they have so many special custumizations made just for their program that it would be a pain to move them over to mpa3. The 15 programs that are still left using the mpa2 program have all either got he module you guys talk about taken out by their requests OR this feature where not in the mpa2 program when they bought it.

Well I think we owe it to the webmasters and program owners to run this competition a while longer. We have to at least run it till the end of the day tomorrow.....

of course, just curious :)

mpa2 mpa3 mpa5 died already.
whatever you do whatever you say!
are you understand?

only one chance:
change your company name, phone ...
change your name...
change your software name .. .

:1orglaugh

:1orglaugh

interesting thread to read through. :glugglug

15 programs.. you go work it out. :)

how about this...instead of just doing what every other fucker does.....why not go to a government agency that handle things of this nature and report them for shaving? they are commiting a federal offense, why not get them busted? I am sure somewhere in the government there is some sort of task force or agency that investigates these things, and can track things of this nature

so much talk, and I guarantee 90% of the people on here that say they will stop using an mpa2 sponsor don't have more than 100 clicks through to any sponsor a day

Actually... from my perspective... I would say quite the opposite is true.

I see programs that are caught cheating time and time again and yet people still flock to them.

It amazes me.

One thing I have learned in all the bullshit we have gone through...

No offense to anyone at NATS since I do not know them or their software. I just see time and time again whoever claims that they are the most honest and everyone else cheats is probably the biggest fraud of all.

oooooo snap!

Raw stealing of signups isn't the only way sponsors 'shave' the cream of the traffic. It's funny watching all the anti-shave vigilante webmasters get riled up over something that's been happening since 1995/6

Let's not forget who put NATS on the map.

Hint: see sig (shave-free)

Ok ... Who use mpa3 ? I don't see many big programas out there using it ...

And if you consider this place a small part of this industry, you'd be surprised how many people come and read.


GFY isn't only this business ...
I post on JBM DMPM AWI and sometimes on couple other boards ...

you guys who are knocking MPA are newbs. that's the only excuse for you...

any program paying out more than $25 PPS, ***IS SHAVING YOU***.... this is fact, and my resume certifies this so STFU if you say anything otherwise.

He resumed everything in this post ... read it, and maybe go find another business because I doubt you'll get anywhere in this one with that kind of attitude . Learn from your mistakes and move on

100

looks good guys good luck :thumbsup

If you acted like a grown up, admitted your mistakes instead of blaming them on everybody else, put a encryption feature in mpa3 and make sure that everybody don't shave, you would have trust gained back .

But you didn't .
You blamed everybody else, even affiliates.

If affiliates don't want mpa3, paysites owners won't use it . And right now you are making me hate it even more ... (lots of other guys too).

I got no doubt that your script is good.

Your attitude and ethics lacks.

Actually it's more about the attitude /ethics they have toward things then the script itself .

mpa2 was a pretty damn good improvement .

1st : Make lensman close this thread
2nd : Start a thread, saying you apologize ... and don't try to take anything away from what you guys did, writing a shave feature.

It dosen't matter if 1 or 1000 webmasters used it, it was still there .
3rd : Make EVERYTHING you can to stop shaving in the next features. .. you are the programmers, think about it .

You guys had kickass ideas . you just went too far with the shave script ...

and acting the way you did toward it (not taking the responsability for your action), won't make people trust you

Do you have an ownership interest in the company or in absence of that make any sort of income from promoting it?

:1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

No, he does not. Also, he gets no money from us for promoting us. The only way he sees income from promoting NATS is that he uses it himself on RealityCash.

Sorry, that is actually not correct. Just because you do not understand how to make money off of traffic does not mean everyone that does has to shave.

There are many ways to make enough money to pay $30 per trial signup.

Saying he dosen't understand how to make money from traffc is kinda wrong. He's pretty good at it :P

Just to set the record straight... Kman certainly does know a thing or two about turning traffic into cash... and I am sure you are familiar with what people do to get those numbers to be able to pay high PPS; who can forget those using overly aggressive upsells which bring out the FTC for things like pre-checked sales to other sites?

Yes, I know Kman knows a thing or two about traffic. And he still claims more than $25 is impossible without shaving. Weird when I see it happen every day.

And there are ways to do so without overly aggressive cross sells. And it does not involve shaving.

Yes, I know that. Imagine how much he could make if he knew even more...

$30 per signup IS possible if you know how to maximize per-member profits. Thats all I am saying.

Maybe, but a lot of people do a lot of things that hurt the industry a lot to get that 5-10 $ more a signupi

I'm sure they do, but they are not using NATS.

at least you picked a good place to find yourself some sheep. you get credit for that.

What a horrible thing to say. You are acknowledging that sponsors using MPA2/MPA3 are shaving their affiliates. Do you realize you just discouraged every webmaster with half a brain cell from promoting sponsors using MPA2/MPA3 software? Do you think your clients appreciate that?

What does this statement mean, that you have removed the shave feature in MPA3?

Well if not, I recommend you seriously consider removing it. Else, you will not be able to compete with NATS.

so even lens paying $35 a trial through nats is shaving?

I am not going to disagree with you. In fact, I agree but...

I also happen to know some hookers that have hearts of gold.

Regardless, I have learned these lessons the hard way. We won an injunction, a nearly impossible remedy to obtain, against a so-called trustworthy program that was using our tour to direct signups to their own competing site.

My point is that I don't care who uses NATS or how fraud free it was built. I just know that using NATS, or MPA2 or 3 does not make a company honest or dishonest. There are many ways to commit fraud in spite of any of that.

I have no reason to say NATS is or is not a great product. I will take it on faith that it is. After our tribulations, I just don't have the same confidence in human nature. Unfortunately.

Shut up jackass. I've dealt with you and oyster cracker enough to know that when compared to the nats folks you're a drop of piss in a shitbucket. I send my clients to NATS every time instead of you. in fact I think I just talked ANOTHER one of your customers into NATS.


:thumbsup