Should Nats Be An Industry Watchdog?

[Jace]

Originally Posted by Toby

I say more power to 'em. Protect the integrity of their software.

I do know that my own numbers with Xclusive Cash were very disappointing compared to my numbers from similar sites. I have to now wonder what they really were.

I noticed another program that had their NATS admin suspended briefly late last month, and wondered why. Whatever the issue in that case it was resolved in a few hours.

in this case, I am 100% for NATS outting the offenders...oops, did I say offenders? shit, wrong word.....maybe

[Hammer]

I think it was unprofessional to post it on GFY, regardless of what happened.

[Hell Puppy]

They're protecting their brand, I understand that. Part of their branding, or positioning at least, is "no shaving".

If John says they told them to go fuck off when confronted, that doesn't offer a lot of other recourse.

Going public sends a message....dont use it if you're going to try to cheat and shave as a sponsor, and on the user side maybe another notch of confidence that NATS programs are clean and honest.

[taboo_gal]

I'd say NATs is definitely founded in their position and resulting action. However, to come out publicly with names is a bit much in my opinion. Whatever went down on the phone/behind closed doors is one thing, to air it is another. I feel that there is a time, place and manner in which examples can be made while remaining discreet and not risk anyone's reputation. Playing Devil's Advocate for a sec, it could have been something as simple and inadvertent as a changed option in the admin or a new recruit changing something they shouldn't have (though the innocent don't often use profanity and hang up on someone, but I am not "in the know" and am being diplomatic). In any case, they should protect their brand and the choice to suspend until rectified is warranted.

[Jace]

Someone pointed this out on that other board and I think even though it was a fake nick typing, he had a point

NATS surely has a team of kickass lawyers....I really doubt that they would out someone like this without talking to their laywers first

I personally am ALL for them outing people publicly that try and cheat, and honestly if there are people that don't like them outing cheaters it makes me think twice about the people against them doing that.

[taboo_gal]

Originally Posted by Jace

Someone pointed this out on that other board and I think even though it was a fake nick typing, he had a point

NATS surely has a team of kickass lawyers....I really doubt that they would out someone like this without talking to their laywers first

I personally am ALL for them outing people publicly that try and cheat, and honestly if there are people that don't like them outing cheaters it makes me think twice about the people against them doing that.

I've got no issue with outing cheaters if they truly are cheaters. Given the response nats was met with, I'd say it warranted in this instance.

[gonzo]

Originally Posted by taboo_gal

I'd say NATs is definitely founded in their position and resulting action. However, to come out publicly with names is a bit much in my opinion. Whatever went down on the phone/behind closed doors is one thing, to air it is another. I feel that there is a time, place and manner in which examples can be made while remaining discreet and not risk anyone's reputation. Playing Devil's Advocate for a sec, it could have been something as simple and inadvertent as a changed option in the admin or a new recruit changing something they shouldn't have (though the innocent don't often use profanity and hang up on someone, but I am not "in the know" and am being diplomatic). In any case, they should protect their brand and the choice to suspend until rectified is warranted.

Its about time you returned

[Toby]

As with all things on GFY you must read between the lines, figure out to to pay attention to and who to ignore, then distill it all down and let it age a bit.

Having carefully re-read some specifc posts by a couple of "new" nicks this is what appears to have take place:

1) Several months ago NR Media changes their CCBill login
2) That new login was never updated in the NATS admin
3) This is brought to the attention of TMM
4) TMM checks the numbers within the NATS admin and confirms a discrepency with CCBill numbers.
5) TMM attempts to contact NR Media to inquire about the issue and gets cursed and hung up on.

Given the apparent seriousness of the issue and the response by NR Media I don't think TMM had much choice but to go public given their prior statements about shaving.

[Jace]

Originally Posted by Toby

As with all things on GFY you must read between the lines, figure out to to pay attention to and who to ignore, then distill it all down and let it age a bit.

Having carefully re-read some specifc posts by a couple of "new" nicks this is what appears to have take place:

1) Several months ago NR Media changes their CCBill login
2) That new login was never updated in the NATS admin
3) This is brought to the attention of TMM
4) TMM checks the numbers within the NATS admin and confirms a discrepency with CCBill numbers.
5) TMM attempts to contact NR Media to inquire about the issue and gets cursed and hung up on.

Given the apparent seriousness of the issue and the response by NR Media I don't think TMM had much choice but to go public given their prior statements about shaving.

this is pretty much what I am getting out of all of it too

[taboo_gal]

Originally Posted by gonzo

Its about time you returned

No worries. I'm just fashionably late.