CCBill - What The Fuck??? - Page 2 - GoFuckYourself.com

GotGauge · 02-09-2005, 01:23 PM

"None of the girls found on the tour or the sample video clip are in the website"

Did it Promise that the girls on the tour were inside??

What about all the Galleries of people who BUY content to promote sites,
those girls will not be inside...

Yes, I understand it was the TOUR, but the same thing can be said.
See a girl on a gallery, with a link to that site, the girl shold be inside?

Rui · 02-09-2005, 01:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeanCapture

This works? Charging people $19.95 for a months subscription to a website that doesn't give it's members what is promised in the tour - that works?

sadly cookie-cutter sites are king nowadays

Bansheelinks · 02-09-2005, 05:33 PM

an awful lot of whining for $20 imo

DeanCapture · 02-09-2005, 05:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bansheelinks

an awful lot of whining for $20 imo

Who the fuck cares with you think asswipe - I certainly do not!

killshot · 02-09-2005, 05:51 PM

Some people will probably hate me for this
But I really do stand by my reviews here
http://awfulporn.com

Lots of websites out there that don't have what is promised

Undisputed1 · 02-09-2005, 05:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeanCapture

Mark - with all due respect - why should I get special attention for a problem like this when the average surfer would not? I mean...I appreciate you offering to help but look what I had to do to get your attention. I know beyond a doubt that I'll get my money back...either from CCBill or from Visa, but the average person who get's ripped off by this website just has to live with that right?

There's a problem somewhere in your system that allows you guys to keep peoples money even though they've been ripped off by a site - and that to me seems like a pretty serious problem that should be looked into.

man, stop bitching its just 20 bucks. People get ripped off all day, everyday. Get over it. Say fuck the site and move on, damn

Kimmykim · 02-09-2005, 05:58 PM

WOOOOHOOOOO! Dean, I love ya, but honey, CCBill is a processor, not the fucking internet police.

If a site has legal content they've paid for, and it meets the card association requirements for processing, that is what they are here to monitor.

Just because some jerkoff markets his crappy site the same way that 90% of the sites out there are marketed, does not make CCBill the bad guy. Nor does it make them responsible for what people are marketing beyond the two things I mentioned in the last paragraph.

It is NOT, and SHOULD NOT be a processors job to police sites for marketing efforts. If the site in question sucks so badly then I'm sure they get lots of chargebacks and will do themselves in without anyone else playing mommy or daddy to them. That's the nature of the chargeback penalties game.

DeanCapture · 02-09-2005, 05:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Undisputed1

man, stop bitching its just 20 bucks. People get ripped off all day, everyday. Get over it. Say fuck the site and move on, damn

Fuck you - I've already gotten a refund and moved on - maybe you should have read the entire thread before you opening your fucking trap! $20 is $20 and I'm not going to "move on"...and if you don't like it - so fucking what?

Undisputed1 · 02-09-2005, 06:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeanCapture

Fuck you - I've already gotten a refund and moved on - maybe you should have read the entire thread before you opening your fucking trap! $20 is $20 and I'm not going to "move on"...and if you don't like it - so fucking what?

what a cheap bastard, you live at home with you mom, so you dont have to pay rent dont you? Get the fuck outta here. 20 bucks....you should be shame, fucking dumbass

If I dont like it? I dont give a mutha fuck. I know you are a fucking idiot. I bet you don't like that either do ya

DeanCapture · 02-09-2005, 06:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kimmykim

WOOOOHOOOOO! Dean, I love ya, but honey, CCBill is a processor, not the fucking internet police.

If a site has legal content they've paid for, and it meets the card association requirements for processing, that is what they are here to monitor.

Just because some jerkoff markets his crappy site the same way that 90% of the sites out there are marketed, does not make CCBill the bad guy. Nor does it make them responsible for what people are marketing beyond the two things I mentioned in the last paragraph.

It is NOT, and SHOULD NOT be a processors job to police sites for marketing efforts. If the site in question sucks so badly then I'm sure they get lots of chargebacks and will do themselves in without anyone else playing mommy or daddy to them. That's the nature of the chargeback penalties game.

Kimmy - CCBill should be aware that an adult website is not delivering what is promised. Apparently CCBill agreed with me because my refund has been taken care of and the owner of the website has been contacted in regards to this issue. Whether anything else is done about it is not for me to say.

It cracks me up how many fuckers on this board think that I should have just accepted the fact that I got ripped for $20 and moved on. I do alright in this biz but I'm not going to just give $20 to an adult webmaster who is ripping people off. If you want to throw away $20 for shits and giggles, go ahead. But don't fucking expect everyone else to.

Kimmykim · 02-09-2005, 06:19 PM

CCBill, I'll say this once again, is not the mommy or the daddy here. They are the credit card processor.

Frankly I can't imagine why ANY processing company would ever create a situation where they are liable for not only the site owners meeting the limits of the law and the card association standards but for the fact that most web sites are crap.

That makes no sense whatsoever. Next thing you know the FTC will start trying to hold processors that cut affiliate checks for their clients liable for the actions of the affiliates. Oh wait, they are already trying to hold the programs themselves liable for it, why not the processors?

All you people wishing for all these rules and monitoring and so on are not looking at the bigger picture here. The laws of economics and business will sort out the crap in its own good time. Sites that truly suck wont get rebills, they will get enough chargebacks to have issues and then they won't be in business.

Doctor Dre · 02-09-2005, 06:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeanCapture

No trail - it was $19.95 for 30 days....here's CCBill response:
---------

Dear Customer,

I have canceled the account from re billing, although I cannot issue any credits for the account it is canceled and you have access for the amount of days that were purchased, the subscription becomes non-refundable once the submit button has been pressed. It states all that in the terms and conditions.

Regards,

Nick N.
Customer Support
---------

I'm sure it does NOT state in the terms that even though an adult webmaster has a website that rips people off by not giving them what is promised on the tours - that people will have to live with that.

This particular website had a tour (and a sample movie) that promised high-quality mpeg movies featuring certain talent and upon entering the members area the only thing that was there was some picture galleries and a plugin to "gotjizz.com". I explained this to CCBill but apparently they don't give a shit about it. It's really not about the money as much as it's about CCBill letting this webmaster fuck people out of their money.

It's sad ccbill allow the site to process credit cards .

It's right that you cannot get a refound for any reason thought ... or surfers would abuse that too much

Doctor Dre · 02-09-2005, 06:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bansheelinks

an awful lot of whining for $20 imo

It's not really about the 20

Undisputed1 · 02-09-2005, 06:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doctor Dre

It's not really about the 20

well, I kinda understand that poor fellows point of view now. Its about the principles, If they say they are offering something, offer the shit. Dont fucking lie about.

DeanCapture · 02-09-2005, 06:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doctor Dre

It's sad ccbill allow the site to process credit cards .

It's right that you cannot get a refound for any reason thought ... or surfers would abuse that too much

Dre - I understand that perhaps CCBill didn't know this site was a rip off and so that's fine. I did let them know and asked for a refund. In fact, I asked for a refund twice and was rejected twice. It wasn't until I came to the board that CCBill actually took an interest in my case and I got what I rightly deserved....a refund.

Apparently, by some of the responses in this thread, it's ok for adult webmasters to rip people off and it's ok if CCBill wants to keep the money and refuse refunds. I could have contacted Visa and taken care of it myself but I wanted to give CCBill every opportunity to do the right thing - which eventually they did. Kinda sucks for all the other people who regularly get ripped off by adult websites and get no help from CCBill but I guess that's the way it goes in this business.

DeanCapture · 02-09-2005, 06:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Undisputed1

well, I kinda understand that poor fellows point of view now. Its about the principles, If they say they are offering something, offer the shit. Dont fucking lie about.

My thoughts exactly

xenigo · 02-09-2005, 06:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kimmykim

WOOOOHOOOOO! Dean, I love ya, but honey, CCBill is a processor, not the fucking internet police.

If a site has legal content they've paid for, and it meets the card association requirements for processing, that is what they are here to monitor.

Just because some jerkoff markets his crappy site the same way that 90% of the sites out there are marketed, does not make CCBill the bad guy. Nor does it make them responsible for what people are marketing beyond the two things I mentioned in the last paragraph.

It is NOT, and SHOULD NOT be a processors job to police sites for marketing efforts. If the site in question sucks so badly then I'm sure they get lots of chargebacks and will do themselves in without anyone else playing mommy or daddy to them. That's the nature of the chargeback penalties game.

You're right, they're not the internet police. But they are the police of the sites they bill for. For instance, they approve the sites to make sure they deliver what is promised. In this case, they are billing for something that isn't being delivered. This is what they supposedly protect people against. I think it's a mistake to support sites that abuse the surfers because these are the sites that hurt the entire industry. Or are you taking this stance because these are the types of sites you run? ::2cents

DeanCapture · 02-09-2005, 06:44 PM

Just a quick thanks to Mark @ CCBill for taking care of the situation. I wished it could have been remedied sooner and in a more private way, but after two refund refusals via email, I did what I thought was best.

I know that CCBill is a good company and they are good to their clients, but they do have some problems that need to be addressed. They shouldn't always assume that adult webmasters are always in the right and that the person who signed up for the site is always in the wrong. That's just not always the case.

Bansheelinks · 02-09-2005, 06:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeanCapture

Just a quick thanks to Mark @ CCBill for taking care of the situation. I wished it could have been remedied sooner and in a more private way, but after two refund refusals via email, I did what I thought was best.

by coming on the board and making a great big stink because the site didn't have a girl featured on a tour?

thats my point Dean.........if you had good judgement you could have handled it privately and as i said before, e-mailed the website in question. instead you went into a public rant and wanted whine with your meal. i see your point about being ripped off, no doubt, but you handled it poorly.

SykkBoy · 02-09-2005, 06:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kimmykim

WOOOOHOOOOO! Dean, I love ya, but honey, CCBill is a processor, not the fucking internet police.

If a site has legal content they've paid for, and it meets the card association requirements for processing, that is what they are here to monitor.

Just because some jerkoff markets his crappy site the same way that 90% of the sites out there are marketed, does not make CCBill the bad guy. Nor does it make them responsible for what people are marketing beyond the two things I mentioned in the last paragraph.

It is NOT, and SHOULD NOT be a processors job to police sites for marketing efforts. If the site in question sucks so badly then I'm sure they get lots of chargebacks and will do themselves in without anyone else playing mommy or daddy to them. That's the nature of the chargeback penalties game.

I totally agree
this problem could also have been resolved byemailing the site owner in question...

if there was a specific girl in a tour that's not in the member's area, sometimes it's a simple oversite (maybe the girl was given to the designer for use on the tour and for some reason, she wasn't added to the member's area content) that can be corrected with an email.

We're constantly dealing with people who've typed in their password wrong, had other errors that are easily remedied by an email from a customer. I'd be highly pissed if ccbill or epoch or any processor just gave a refund for no reason or over something that could have been so eaily remedied by us.

I even had a webmaster berate me on ICQ. He did a test signup and swore up and down he couldn't access the member's area and that we were a bunch of fucking crooks ripping people off and it turned out, he was mistyping his password....after an hour or so of him calling me a cocksucker and me biting my tongue to refrain from calling him a fuckface, we figured out the problem and suddenly he was kissing my ass...

Dean, as someone who only takes pics for a living, I'll assume you've never had to deal with this kind of thing, so will chalk it up to lack of experience. When you deal with simple human error day in and day out, you start to see things a little differently...

bangman · 02-09-2005, 06:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeanCapture

If he scammed me - he'll scam others - end of fucking story!

Then tell us the name of the site/sponsor so we don't get fucked.

SureFire · 02-09-2005, 07:19 PM

Dean, glad you got your money back but I have feeling it is only because you came here and posted.

The average surfer really has no recourse and just eats the 20.00 dollars. If you were thinking about the surfer (and/or members here that promote sites), you would have posted the site name, IMO.

Think about the surfer, they write an email to ccbill and don?t get a refund. They write an email to the webmaster of the site asking for a refund?50/50 chance. And if they don?t get a credit, then they have to call their cc company explaining to a nice corporate bank rep that they were mislead on a porn site tour and the members area didn?t meet their expectations, so they want to dispute this charge. Or just lie to save the embarrassment that they were surfing for porn.

I am sure many posters here have joined pay sites and were disappointed, but they don?t come here blaming the billing processor and threatening a charge back.

BTW, you can write off joining pay sites on your taxes!

DeanCapture · 02-09-2005, 07:23 PM

This is my last post for all you fucking idiots who do not have a fuckin clue. I didn't contact the website owner because all he's going to do is refund my money. He's not going to change anything with his tour/site and he will continue to rip people off. Now, how the fuck is this a solution to this problem?

If you run a legit program and work hard to supply your members with fresh content that they appreciate - you should understand why I did this. If your a fucking rip-off artist looking to swindle surfers out of their hard earned dollar then your probably pissed that CCBill eventually gave me a refund because now your fucking worried that they'll refund your fucking members when your members complain about your shitty fucked up members area! Is that about the size of it?

Regardless of what any of you people think - CCBill agreed with me that the website showed bad faith in presenting what it promised in it's tour and I got a refund. I could give a shit if you have a problem with how I handled this. The bottom line is that CCBill did what was right and refunded the money and contacted the webmaster about this problem.

So all you haters can suck ass! I'm finished with this thread

SureFire · 02-09-2005, 07:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeanCapture

This is my last post for all you fucking idiots who do not have a fuckin clue. I didn't contact the website owner because all he's going to do is refund my money. He's not going to change anything with his tour/site and he will continue to rip people off. Now, how the fuck is this a solution to this problem?

If you run a legit program and work hard to supply your members with fresh content that they appreciate - you should understand why I did this. If your a fucking rip-off artist looking to swindle surfers out of their hard earned dollar then your probably pissed that CCBill eventually gave me a refund because now your fucking worried that they'll refund your fucking members when your members complain about your shitty fucked up members area! Is that about the size of it?

Regardless of what any of you people think - CCBill agreed with me that the website showed bad faith in presenting what it promised in it's tour and I got a refund. I could give a shit if you have a problem with how I handled this. The bottom line is that CCBill did what was right and refunded the money and contacted the webmaster about this problem.

So all you haters can suck ass! I'm finished with this thread

Did they close the site down or did they just refund your 20.00. I know you are done with this thread. But, I think you could answer this question

tony286 · 02-09-2005, 07:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xenigo

You're right, they're not the internet police. But they are the police of the sites they bill for. For instance, they approve the sites to make sure they deliver what is promised. In this case, they are billing for something that isn't being delivered. This is what they supposedly protect people against. I think it's a mistake to support sites that abuse the surfers because these are the sites that hurt the entire industry. Or are you taking this stance because these are the types of sites you run? ::2cents

I agree with you and disagree with Kimmy, customers getting screwed and processors not dealing with these problems effectly just collecting their fees is why we are at 1% cb and who knows when Visa will pull out of adult totally. The processor owes it to their customers who do the right thing, to get rid of the bad apples. Also not giving what you promise is fraud which I m pretty sure is against credit card rules which makes it something the processor has to deal with.

DWB · 02-09-2005, 07:49 PM

Dude... send a fucking mail to the site owner. If he has half a brain he will refund you. If he does not, then go for the but sack with ccbill and/or visa.

Giving refunds, for whatever reason is part of the job if you run a site. It's better than a chargeback.

tony286 · 02-09-2005, 07:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DirtyWhiteBoy

Dude... send a fucking mail to the site owner. If he has half a brain he will refund you. If he does not, then go for the but sack with ccbill and/or visa.

Giving refunds, for whatever reason is part of the job if you run a site. It's better than a chargeback.

I think Deans point was not the twenty dollars it was a site fucking customers, it effects us all when a customer has bad experience.

imafuckingaussie · 02-09-2005, 07:56 PM

I dont get it, there must be shit loads of sites that dont deliver what is promised. Why is this such a big deal cos one webmaster bought a membership and didnt get the chick he saw on the tour. There must be massive ammounts of sites that dont deliver what they say on the tour.

tony286 · 02-09-2005, 07:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by imafuckingaussie

I dont get it, there must be shit loads of sites that dont deliver what is promised. Why is this such a big deal cos one webmaster bought a membership and didnt get the chick he saw on the tour. There must be massive ammounts of sites that dont deliver what they say on the tour.

and you dont see that as a problem ?????

CybermedAndy · 02-09-2005, 08:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fletch XXX

great fucking band

F*cking Word

TDF · 02-09-2005, 08:03 PM

AND STILL we dont know what the site is

Sly · 02-09-2005, 08:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tony404

and you dont see that as a problem ?????

I have a solution.

CCBill and Epoch should raise their processing rates to 20-25%. The money earned from the higher rates will allow the respective companies to setup large teams of employees to monitor TGPs, free sites, search engines, and email marketing campaigns to ensure that everything they're doing is completely legitimate. If a TGP gallery features Sally but Sally cannot easily be found inside the paysite, that paysite should be immediately suspended until a proper investigation takes place. If Sally is found during the investigation, the paysite should be "turned back on". If Sally is not found, the processing account should be terminated and all revenues should be forfeited to the scammed members.

This idea WILL work! Who's in!?

SureFire · 02-09-2005, 08:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tony404

and you dont see that as a problem ?????

guess you didn't read my post

tony286 · 02-09-2005, 08:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sly

I have a solution.

CCBill and Epoch should raise their processing rates to 20-25%. The money earned from the higher rates will allow the respective companies to setup large teams of employees to monitor TGPs, free sites, search engines, and email marketing campaigns to ensure that everything they're doing is completely legitimate. If a TGP gallery features Sally but Sally cannot easily be found inside the paysite, that paysite should be immediately suspended until a proper investigation takes place. If Sally is found during the investigation, the paysite should be "turned back on". If Sally is not found, the processing account should be terminated and all revenues should be forfeited to the scammed members.

This idea WILL work! Who's in!?

stop you know what we are talking about promising 50,000 pics and there are 500 . 5000 movies maybe there are 100. No if they took some of the money from big parties and limos. They could afford one person whose only job to surf clients sites, you dont need a large team. its a spot check you never know when that person will hit your site. People start getting shut down and words gets out acts will start cleaning up real quick.

sumphatpimp · 02-09-2005, 08:21 PM

this thread WAS worth the price of addmission.

SureFire · 02-09-2005, 08:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tony404

stop you know what we are talking about promising 50,000 pics and there are 500 . 5000 movies maybe there are 100. No if they took some of the money from big parties and limos. They could afford one person whose only job to surf clients sites, you dont need a large team. its a spot check you never know when that person will hit your site. People start getting shut down and words gets out acts will start cleaning up real quick.

Putting this in perceptive: I go a buy a pair of shoes in a store and the sales rep promises me that my feet will feel better and they don?t. Instead of contacting the store, I contact the billing processor asking for a refund. Never tried it, but I am sure they would ask if I contacted about the store about this. I just say no but they lied to me so I want my money back. Kind of sure they would laugh at me.

I know the internet is a little different but WTF, for one to make such a fuss without even contacting the site owner. Who knows, since the site was never mentioned that might meet the needs of some surfers and not a professional in this business?

Sly · 02-09-2005, 09:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SureFire

Putting this in perceptive: I go a buy a pair of shoes in a store and the sales rep promises me that my feet will feel better and they don?t. Instead of contacting the store, I contact the billing processor asking for a refund. Never tried it, but I am sure they would ask if I contacted about the store about this. I just say no but they lied to me so I want my money back. Kind of sure they would laugh at me.

I know the internet is a little different but WTF, for one to make such a fuss without even contacting the site owner. Who knows, since the site was never mentioned that might meet the needs of some surfers and not a professional in this business?

In my opinion, your analogy is dead on. Have you ever been to Wal-Mart or Target after Christmas? Imagine how pissed off the banks would be if those customers started calling them instead of the store about bad products.

nicchick · 02-09-2005, 10:37 PM

First you wrote "the members area was totol shit. Nothing that was promised on the tour was in the members area....what a fucking rip-off. I just don't see how webmasters can get away with shit like this?" and then you go on " I can tell you that it is part of a program that belongs to a highly respected member of this community."
If what you say is true than this "Highly respected member" should be exposed.
Quit acting like some bitchy little drama queen - grow some balls and name the site or shut the fuck up.

venus · 02-09-2005, 11:19 PM

then why complain about it, if you find a rip off site bust them out, if you are not going to then its just more fake drama.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeanCapture

I have no intention of naming the site at this time. However, I can tell you that it is part of a program that belongs to a highly respected member of this community.
.

OG LennyT · 02-09-2005, 11:41 PM

you are a clown sir... nuff said

02-09-2005, 01:23 PM	#51
GotGauge Confirmed User Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: USA Posts: 3,072	"None of the girls found on the tour or the sample video clip are in the website" Did it Promise that the girls on the tour were inside?? What about all the Galleries of people who BUY content to promote sites, those girls will not be inside... Yes, I understand it was the TOUR, but the same thing can be said. See a girl on a gallery, with a link to that site, the girl shold be inside? __________________ ICQ 22264474 [email protected]

02-09-2005, 05:51 PM	#55
killshot Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: OGG / PDX Posts: 456	Some people will probably hate me for this But I really do stand by my reviews here http://awfulporn.com Lots of websites out there that don't have what is promised __________________

02-09-2005, 06:44 PM	#68
DeanCapture Haters & Trolls SUCK! Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 9,275	Just a quick thanks to Mark @ CCBill for taking care of the situation. I wished it could have been remedied sooner and in a more private way, but after two refund refusals via email, I did what I thought was best. I know that CCBill is a good company and they are good to their clients, but they do have some problems that need to be addressed. They shouldn't always assume that adult webmasters are always in the right and that the person who signed up for the site is always in the wrong. That's just not always the case. __________________ Twitter: @DeanCapture Instagram: @TheDeanCapture DeanCapture "at" Gmail.com

02-09-2005, 07:23 PM	#73
DeanCapture Haters & Trolls SUCK! Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 9,275	This is my last post for all you fucking idiots who do not have a fuckin clue. I didn't contact the website owner because all he's going to do is refund my money. He's not going to change anything with his tour/site and he will continue to rip people off. Now, how the fuck is this a solution to this problem? If you run a legit program and work hard to supply your members with fresh content that they appreciate - you should understand why I did this. If your a fucking rip-off artist looking to swindle surfers out of their hard earned dollar then your probably pissed that CCBill eventually gave me a refund because now your fucking worried that they'll refund your fucking members when your members complain about your shitty fucked up members area! Is that about the size of it? Regardless of what any of you people think - CCBill agreed with me that the website showed bad faith in presenting what it promised in it's tour and I got a refund. I could give a shit if you have a problem with how I handled this. The bottom line is that CCBill did what was right and refunded the money and contacted the webmaster about this problem. So all you haters can suck ass! I'm finished with this thread __________________ Twitter: @DeanCapture Instagram: @TheDeanCapture DeanCapture "at" Gmail.com

02-09-2005, 07:56 PM	#78
imafuckingaussie Confirmed User Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: In the fucking outback Posts: 1,497	I dont get it, there must be shit loads of sites that dont deliver what is promised. Why is this such a big deal cos one webmaster bought a membership and didnt get the chick he saw on the tour. There must be massive ammounts of sites that dont deliver what they say on the tour. __________________ You can get it ploughing a paddock, you can get it makin some porn sites, matter of fact I've got it now. For a hard earned thrist, you need a big cold beer.

02-09-2005, 05:33 PM	#53
Bansheelinks Confirmed User Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 6,023	an awful lot of whining for $20 imo

02-09-2005, 05:58 PM	#57
Kimmykim bitchslapping zebras!!!!! Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: In a shack by the beach Posts: 16,015	WOOOOHOOOOO! Dean, I love ya, but honey, CCBill is a processor, not the fucking internet police. If a site has legal content they've paid for, and it meets the card association requirements for processing, that is what they are here to monitor. Just because some jerkoff markets his crappy site the same way that 90% of the sites out there are marketed, does not make CCBill the bad guy. Nor does it make them responsible for what people are marketing beyond the two things I mentioned in the last paragraph. It is NOT, and SHOULD NOT be a processors job to police sites for marketing efforts. If the site in question sucks so badly then I'm sure they get lots of chargebacks and will do themselves in without anyone else playing mommy or daddy to them. That's the nature of the chargeback penalties game.

02-09-2005, 06:19 PM	#61
Kimmykim bitchslapping zebras!!!!! Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: In a shack by the beach Posts: 16,015	CCBill, I'll say this once again, is not the mommy or the daddy here. They are the credit card processor. Frankly I can't imagine why ANY processing company would ever create a situation where they are liable for not only the site owners meeting the limits of the law and the card association standards but for the fact that most web sites are crap. That makes no sense whatsoever. Next thing you know the FTC will start trying to hold processors that cut affiliate checks for their clients liable for the actions of the affiliates. Oh wait, they are already trying to hold the programs themselves liable for it, why not the processors? All you people wishing for all these rules and monitoring and so on are not looking at the bigger picture here. The laws of economics and business will sort out the crap in its own good time. Sites that truly suck wont get rebills, they will get enough chargebacks to have issues and then they won't be in business.

02-09-2005, 07:19 PM	#72
SureFire Confirmed User Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: internet Posts: 4,398	Dean, glad you got your money back but I have feeling it is only because you came here and posted. The average surfer really has no recourse and just eats the 20.00 dollars. If you were thinking about the surfer (and/or members here that promote sites), you would have posted the site name, IMO. Think about the surfer, they write an email to ccbill and don?t get a refund. They write an email to the webmaster of the site asking for a refund?50/50 chance. And if they don?t get a credit, then they have to call their cc company explaining to a nice corporate bank rep that they were mislead on a porn site tour and the members area didn?t meet their expectations, so they want to dispute this charge. Or just lie to save the embarrassment that they were surfing for porn. I am sure many posters here have joined pay sites and were disappointed, but they don?t come here blaming the billing processor and threatening a charge back. BTW, you can write off joining pay sites on your taxes!

02-09-2005, 07:49 PM	#76
DWB Registered User Industry Role: Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Encrypted. Access denied. Posts: 31,779	Dude... send a fucking mail to the site owner. If he has half a brain he will refund you. If he does not, then go for the but sack with ccbill and/or visa. Giving refunds, for whatever reason is part of the job if you run a site. It's better than a chargeback.

02-09-2005, 08:03 PM	#81
TDF Triple OG nigga on GFY Industry Role: Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: in the BP4L family compound Posts: 27,296	AND STILL we dont know what the site is __________________ Sig heil

02-09-2005, 08:21 PM	#85
sumphatpimp Confirmed User Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 5,235	this thread WAS worth the price of addmission.

02-09-2005, 10:37 PM	#88
nicchick Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2003 Posts: 316	First you wrote "the members area was totol shit. Nothing that was promised on the tour was in the members area....what a fucking rip-off. I just don't see how webmasters can get away with shit like this?" and then you go on " I can tell you that it is part of a program that belongs to a highly respected member of this community." If what you say is true than this "Highly respected member" should be exposed. Quit acting like some bitchy little drama queen - grow some balls and name the site or shut the fuck up.

02-09-2005, 11:41 PM	#90
OG LennyT Wall Street Pimp Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Phoenix, AZ Posts: 14,345	you are a clown sir... nuff said __________________ Tradeking - my online broker \| 4.95 a trade \| make real $$