Referral rates at team1players and agroupeffort Options

[strolly]

It was clicksor not bidvertiser. And I have replied to this already. We receive the revenue from the clicks we make. Even if we dont recieve a point to do it.

And yes, I believe Mike will pay us. Our point conversion may drop, we may end up with less mails. But I don't think he is out to scam us. We recieve 75% of the earnings we make. If he loses ways for us to earn, or earnings will go down. We are all losing money... not just him.

Carole from mec co op promised the same she scammed us and then closed the site and made us join her new site or we lost our earnings. Then when we joined her new site she gave us one lousy referal which earnt like 60 cents in 6 months and we still were expected to search on her new site.
I dont think you understand they are cheats they dont give a ###### about you or the time and effort you put in they care about themselves.

[Guest_priestes_*]

Which part Trafficz ToS he is breaking?

g. not generate traffic to Parked Domains or clicks on Search Results by any of the following methods: listings on newsgroups or discussion boards (with the exception of “domain for sale” postings), bulk emails, ICQ postings, chatroom/IRC postings, iframes, zero pixel frames, hitbots, clickbots, spiders, CGI scripts, Java scripts, or any other similar method.


2.6 Client shall not intentionally post misleading information with regard to Parked Domains. Client shall not act, either directly or indirectly, to encourage or require End Users, either willingly or unwillingly, to click on Search Results listings and/or to generate Click-Throughs through any means which could be reasonably interpreted as coercive, incentivized, misleading, malicious or otherwise fraudulent in nature. Client agrees that TrafficZ may ignore or credit back Estimated Click-Through Revenue which TrafficZ, in its sole and absolute discretion, believes is questionable in nature or otherwise of low quality in nature or source.

http://www.trafficz.com/tos.php

This post has been edited by priestes: Jul 13 2006, 05:50 PM

[Shadowette]

Awww shadowette even in the land of the free we can do what we want as long as it doesn't break the law or hurt others. And you can continue clicking away happily no one is stopping you but the attitude reminds me much of my granddaughter when she has run out of ways to try and convince me why she should be allowed to do something she resorts to I can do it if I want to. But for ever action there is a consequence whether it be now or later.

And I am sure I will take that consequence and roll with it, just like I always have (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

I think the little edited has backfired, and a new gang has formed and is fighting back. Now I hope you all enjoy it as much as you enjoyed edited

This post has been edited by sophieca: Jul 13 2006, 06:03 PM

[Guest_wagdoll_*]

Which part Trafficz ToS he is breaking?

2.2 Upon the Effective Date and throughout the Term of this Agreement, Client agrees to:

f. not redirect traffic to Parked Domains, including traffic redirected from non-parked domains and/or purchased traffic such as pop-under or exit traffic, without the prior written approval of TrafficZ.

g. not generate traffic to Parked Domains or clicks on Search Results by any of the following methods: listings on newsgroups or discussion boards (with the exception of ?domain for sale? postings), bulk emails, ICQ postings, chatroom/IRC postings, iframes, zero pixel frames, hitbots, clickbots, spiders, CGI scripts, Java scripts, or any other similar method.

2.6 Client shall not intentionally post misleading information with regard to Parked Domains. Client shall not act, either directly or indirectly, to encourage or require End Users, either willingly or unwillingly, to click on Search Results listings and/or to generate Click-Throughs through any means which could be reasonably interpreted as coercive, incentivized, misleading, malicious or otherwise fraudulent in nature. Client agrees that TrafficZ may ignore or credit back Estimated Click-Through Revenue which TrafficZ, in its sole and absolute discretion, believes is questionable in nature or otherwise of low quality in nature or source.

[ann44]

And I am sure I will take that consequence and roll with it, just like I always have (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

I think the little editedhas backfired, and a new gang has formed and is fighting back. Now I hope you all enjoy it as much as you enjoyed edited others.

Yeah and my guess is that you and I wont be the only ones to be called stupid female dogs in heat

This post has been edited by sophieca: Jul 13 2006, 06:04 PM

[Guest_Essperanza_*]

I am FOR doing whatever I want to do. We are entitled to do what we want to do, and honestly and quite frankly, there isn't a thing in this world you or the other [Edit] can do about it.

In the end it's all about morals or the lack thereof. "Thou shalt not steal" doesn't mean a thing anymore and the credo is "thou shalt rob everyone blind unless thou shalt get caught".
What is new in all this is the shamelessness you expose here in admitting you're prefectly happy stealing from others AND in making others believe that this is okay.
I wonder if you would have the guts to openly confess to being a thief if there was any chance to be penalised like when stealing from your corner shop. But I sincerely doubt it.

This post has been edited by ssink: Jul 13 2006, 06:18 PM

[Shadowette]

In the end it's all about morals or the lack thereof. "Thou shalt not steal" doesn't mean a thing anymore and the credo is "thou shalt rob everyone blind unless thou shalt get caught".
What is new in all this is the shamelessness you expose here in admitting you're prefectly happy stealing from others AND in making others believe that this is okay.
I wonder if you would have the guts to openly confess to being a thief if there was any chance to be penalised like when stealing from your corner shop. But I sincerely doubt it.

I'm not a hypocrite, I don't deny what I do. I'd rather be honest than be a hypocrite (IMG:style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gif)

[bridgitte]

hi!
i just have to add my 2 cents in. i have been a member of team1players for over a month.
they are a wonderful site. i found them friendly, informative and helpful. the most amazing thing...they pay.
they pay well.
not once have i been forced to search or even felt like i had to.
actually, i did less searches for them than most other sites and strangely enough, i got paid more from them, than most other ptr sites i am a member of.

many times, in ptr, i feel the good paying honest programs get unfair treatment <jealousy?> and the sorry no paying scamming sites get left alone.
this does not make sense to me and is unfair.

a suggestion or advice on how to be a team1player is not a search solicitation in my book.
it is telling you about the site you joined and how it works.
period.
anyway, that is how i view it.

i love team1players and i hope they will ignore all this and soon it will stop when people realise they are only doing their job.
informing members.
if you do not explain to a member what to do with the link that they are sent, how do they know what is required? they don't.

one last thing,

to those who have not joined this great site, you are missing out. they are easy to use and one of the best ptrs i have ever joined.

thanks for reading.
bridgitte

[bellestraker]

Does anyone really believe that these bash sessions do anything?

It has been said a couple times in this thread that it is the PO who broke the terms.

I would think that it would be mainly the PO that people shoud be taking this up with...but then again we are back to that good old double standard where it is OK for some PO's to break some TOS ( in fact they are applauded ) but another PO is bashed no end for the immoral and unethical act of breaching TOS.

I sure wish someone could explain which tos it is OK for PO's to break and which it is immoral and unethical to do so.

Although I agree that click fraud is wrong I am sure that I am not alone in finding the entire double standard a poor platform to teach ethics from.

Maybe without that people would start to listen.

Have a good one

Belle

[trulyfair]

hi!
i just have to add my 2 cents in. i have been a member of team1players for over a month.
they are a wonderful site. i found them friendly, informative and helpful. the most amazing thing...they pay.
they pay well.
not once have i been forced to search or even felt like i had to.
actually, i did less searches for them than most other sites and strangely enough, i got paid more from them, than most other ptr sites i am a member of.

many times, in ptr, i feel the good paying honest programs get unfair treatment <jealousy?> and the sorry no paying scamming sites get left alone.
this does not make sense to me and is unfair.

a suggestion or advice on how to be a team1player is not a search solicitation in my book.
it is telling you about the site you joined and how it works.
period.
anyway, that is how i view it.

i love team1players and i hope they will ignore all this and soon it will stop when people realise they are only doing their job.
informing members.
if you do not explain to a member what to do with the link that they are sent, how do they know what is required? they don't.

one last thing,

to those who have not joined this great site, you are missing out. they are easy to use and one of the best ptrs i have ever joined.

thanks for reading.
bridgitte

PTR means PAID TO READ, not paid to search, but it seems to be all fine and dandy, in your eyes, because they pay?

Now where did I hear that line before? LOL (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nausea.gif)

[ann44]

Does anyone really believe that these bash sessions do anything?

It has been said a couple times in this thread that it is the PO who broke the terms.

I would think that it would be mainly the PO that people shoud be taking this up with...but then again we are back to that good old double standard where it is OK for some PO's to break some TOS ( in fact they are applauded ) but another PO is bashed no end for the immoral and unethical act of breaching TOS.

I sure wish someone could explain which tos it is OK for PO's to break and which it is immoral and unethical to do so.

Although I agree that click fraud is wrong I am sure that I am not alone in finding the entire double standard a poor platform to teach ethics from.

Maybe without that people would start to listen.

Have a good one

Belle

You hit the nail on the head again.Whatever is justified for one should be justified for all.

[Guest_priestes_*]

I'm not a hypocrite, I don't deny what I do. I'd rather be honest than be a hypocrite (IMG:style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gif)

I am sorry but I had a good laugh thank you shadowette.

hon?est (nst)
adj.
1. Marked by or displaying integrity; upright: an honest lawyer.
2. Not deceptive or fraudulent; genuine: honest weight.
3. Equitable; fair: honest wages for an honest day's work.
4.
a. Characterized by truth; not false: honest reporting.
b. Sincere; frank: an honest critique.
5.
a. Of good repute; respectable.
b. Without affectation; plain: honest folk.
6. Virtuous; chaste.

This post has been edited by priestes: Jul 13 2006, 06:24 PM

[rewards]

did a google search on click fraud and found this:

Google CEO on click fraud: 'let it happen'

Link: http://blogs.zdnet.com/micro-markets/?p=219

[Guest_priestes_*]

did a google search on click fraud and found this:

Google CEO on click fraud: 'let it happen'

Link: http://blogs.zdnet.com/micro-markets/?p=219

Google CEO might have that attitude but the folks who sued google for click fraud didnt feel the same way. And many are still not happy with the settlement.

[ann44]

I am sorry but I had a good laugh thank you shadowette.

hon?est (nst)
adj.
1. Marked by or displaying integrity; upright: an honest lawyer.
2. Not deceptive or fraudulent; genuine: honest weight.
3. Equitable; fair: honest wages for an honest day's work.
4.
a. Characterized by truth; not false: honest reporting.
b. Sincere; frank: an honest critique.
5.
a. Of good repute; respectable.
b. Without affectation; plain: honest folk.
6. Virtuous; chaste.

Well,that first higlight excludes all of the ptr police farce.

The second highlight excludes the most vigalant from the aforementioned group.

Its all well and good to defend something you believe in,its gives pourpose to living.However,most of the anti click fraud group has gone beyond defending and educating to hounding,stalking,nagging,name calling,bullying,threatening and continuously attempting to force your cause and views down your opposers throats.Its old and no one is listening.Time for a new approach?

edited to add a letter

This post has been edited by ann44: Jul 13 2006, 08:23 PM