question to nats/tmm

[TeenCat]

can you please show adult business some respect and disable all sobv licences? and how can the guy start new everbucks running on nats? i think you have power to shut him down, why dont you? scared of lawsuits or what? he fucks all of us, can you do something for us when you are alive from adult business? or is that so hard and impossible? just an vacation idea ... wish you best with your sites everyone!

[Robbie]

Originally Posted by TeenCat

can you please show adult business some respect and disable all sobv licences? and how can the guy start new everbucks running on nats? i think you have power to shut him down, why dont you? scared of lawsuits or what? he fucks all of us, can you do something for us when you are alive from adult business? or is that so hard and impossible? just an vacation idea ... wish you best with your sites everyone!

For all you know...that guy may have bought the one time fee. You can actually BUY it and not license it, which is what a lot of people do. Then they tweak it out exactly the way they want it. So if that guy did that...TMM wouldn't be able to do anything about it.

And quite frankly...even if he is licensing it, I'm not sure it's any of TMM's business what the guy does with it. You can make the moral argument of course. But I'm unaware of very many companies who actually run their business on "morals" in any industry.

Just saying...why would TMM even consider fucking with their customer? Neither they or any of us have any power over what another man does with his business. That's just the way the world works.

[TeenCat]

thank you for reply. i know i am a dreamer, but it is something like nats is supporting scam now, if their software allow people to signup, send sales, but not get paid and got accounts deleted, how it clearly is now. they dont have anything like "we close licences for fraud" in their tos? maybe they can put it there to help us, hard working webmasters, in future ... but just my vacations

[Pornopat]

Originally Posted by Robbie

For all you know...that guy may have bought the one time fee. You can actually BUY it and not license it, which is what a lot of people do. Then they tweak it out exactly the way they want it. So if that guy did that...TMM wouldn't be able to do anything about it.

And quite frankly...even if he is licensing it, I'm not sure it's any of TMM's business what the guy does with it. You can make the moral argument of course. But I'm unaware of very many companies who actually run their business on "morals" in any industry.

Just saying...why would TMM even consider fucking with their customer? Neither they or any of us have any power over what another man does with his business. That's just the way the world works.

Let me give you an economic reason.

They should close them down because they give TMM a bad image. There was a time when the affiliate preferred signing up with NATS programs because they knew they would not get shaved. An honest reputation that has now turned into crap because of programs like sobv who do not shave but simply refuse to pay out.

With Gentlecash we use nats but the advantage towards affiliates is gone. So less affliates will sign up ergo NATS is worth less. It makes me want to try out less expensive options.

[iSpyCams]

I thought TMM had stated at one point that they would pull the license of any NATS program found shaving or scamming affiliates.

I wouldn't be able to link to that, or find it in a hurry, but it was part of my decision to invest in NATS, the idea that it was designed to inspire affiliate confidence.

[area51 - BANNED FOR LIFE]

you could give the same argument to isprime for continually hosting them

[Robbie]

Originally Posted by Pornopat

Let me give you an economic reason.

They should close them down because they give TMM a bad image. There was a time when the affiliate preferred signing up with NATS programs because they knew they would not get shaved. An honest reputation that has now turned into crap because of programs like sobv who do not shave but simply refuse to pay out.

With Gentlecash we use nats but the advantage towards affiliates is gone. So less affliates will sign up ergo NATS is worth less. It makes me want to try out less expensive options.

That's a very good point. I would play devil's advocate to it by saying:
NATS is a great software to run your affiliate program. I for one wouldn't be influenced as an affiliate one way or another by what some crook did when using that software. I've never made a decision to promote a program based on their backend. Matter of fact the only thing I've ever considered was whether or not I felt the sites were good.

And as a paysite owner, again...NATS is great. And again I won't be influenced by what a crook did or didn't do. It's none of my business. And my best affiliates don't really care either.

And lastly...what if (like so many bigger programs do) he outright BOUGHT his copy of NATS? In that case there is no way for TMM to pull it (even if they wanted to)

Anyway, that's the counter-argument. In my personal opinion...I don't think that NATS is relevant to the situation anyway. They shouldn't be held responsible for it in any way at all. Just like the hosting company shouldn't be either, or the people providing content, etc.

Any "blame" here belongs to the guy who actually makes the decisions. And apparently he feels just fine with the way he is running his business. And with us affiliates getting weaker and weaker with no traffic, he may be right. Only time will tell. Hopefully, he is wrong. But you can spit in one hand and "hope" in the other and you'll see which one fills up first.

[cambaby]

Everyone is scrubbing everyones back, dont kid yourselves.

[Stephen]

I understand the sentiment, but it's like bitching at Ford because the drunk that just plowed into you was driving a new F-150

[kada]

this has nothin to do with nats

[Nicky]

Originally Posted by pompousjohn

I thought TMM had stated at one point that they would pull the license of any NATS program found shaving or scamming affiliates.

This rings a little bell with me too, not 100% sure though.