Too Much Media vs. NR Media....

[Jace]

Originally Posted by sarettah

So, it is ok for you to understand that there is more to it than the surface but it is not ok for Chris to realize that. Because Chris did not make that a primary function of the lawsuit he must be not want that, eh?

Anytime there's a problem with a sponsor program, the primary response for any responsible program owner is to make sure the affiliates link codes, payments are not compromised. Hell I get letter from sponsor programs when payments are late... and to think this has been going on for over a year and it's not their primary concern?

[Jace]

so back to your original question.. what is your personal stake in all this? "if he is on the side of the truth, then he should not be so one sided about it" which side are you on lol

[sarettah]

Originally Posted by Jace

so back to your original question.. what is your personal stake in all this? "if he is on the side of the truth, then he should not be so one sided about it" which side are you on lol

I am on neither side. I have read the deops, I have gone back and reviewed threads on GFY.

I find Chris and Tracy to be believeable. I find Blake to be less believable but not to the point of criminal and my opinion of Charles what's his face is quite low.

Haven't seen what Albright has to say beyond his posts. I find it very hard to believe that he did his postings to protect TMM or affiliates. He did his post (imho) because Chris told him to fuck off on the phone. He took what could have been resolved privately and threw it up on the boards and basically torpedoed someone elses's program over his own ego.

I don't think Chris and Tracy's non-solution to the problem is the best one but they are locked out of the program and can only get back in if they do it TMM's way which is bullshit.

[Jace]

Originally Posted by sarettah

He did his post (imho) because Chris told him to fuck off on the phone.

So that's how you respond when you have nothing to hide, rather then.. I'm on the road, lets chat when I get back...

[sarettah]

Originally Posted by Jace

So that's how you respond when you have nothing to hide, rather then.. I'm on the road, lets chat when I get back...

If the caller hits me wrong, hell yes. And you know that you would too.

If you had no knowledge of an issue and out of the blue someone calls and is nasty with you, are you friendly or pissed? Let's just say it's a bill collector. They call and say, hey, you owe $5000 on your visa, what you gonna do about it? But as far as you know, the visa has been paid on time, you gonna guarantee to be friendly with that guy? And fucking be honest about it.

[sarettah]

Chirs's version of the phonecall:

[Jace]

Originally Posted by sarettah

If the caller hits me wrong, hell yes. And you know that you would too.

If you had no knowledge of an issue and out of the blue someone calls and is nasty with you, are you friendly or pissed? Let's just say it's a bill collector. They call and say, hey, you owe $5000 on your visa, what you gonna do about it? But as far as you know, the visa has been paid on time, you gonna guarantee to be friendly with that guy? And fucking be honest about it.

I would get to the bottom of whatever the issue was, especially if it meant me owing people money...i HATE owing people money

[sarettah]

Originally Posted by Jace

I would get to the bottom of whatever the issue was, especially if it meant me owing people money...i HATE owing people money

Oh, ok. Yes, you are the level headed one aren't you? So, you wouldn't go off on someone accusing you of something?

Right.



All those that believe that, I got a bridge you might be interested in.

[Toby]

Originally Posted by sarettah

If the caller hits me wrong, hell yes. And you know that you would too.

If you had no knowledge of an issue and out of the blue someone calls and is nasty with you, are you friendly or pissed?....

And there is the rub in a nutshell. I don't believe that John's phone call in Aug 2006 was the first time that Chris had been made aware of the rebill problem. Blake's deposition details a number of occassions where Chris is involved in conversations about it and I don't think Blake lied about them in his deposition.

Ohhh, and for the record, I have no personal relationship with ANY of the parties involved in the lawsuit.

[sarettah]

Originally Posted by Toby

And there is the rub in a nutshell. I don't believe that John's phone call in Aug 2006 was the first time that Chris had been made aware of the rebill problem. Blake's deposition details a number of occassions where Chris is involved in conversations about it and I don't think Blake lied about them in his deposition.

Ohhh, and for the record, I have no personal relationship with ANY of the parties involved in the lawsuit.

Yeah, but Chris says there was a brief discussion at some point and that was all there was and he has the chat logs to back him up.

That is a telling point to me. Chris and Tracy have documentation. When Blake is asked if he does he does not say, well I would if I could get on the company's computer or something like that, he says, no. (period) He does not have documentation.

My personal feelings on this after doing all the fucking reading, and this is with a good deal of supposition thrown in, is something like this:

Chris, Tracy, Blake and Amy start a company. Blake is the tech guy. By accident, Blake puts in a wrong user/pass co on the CCB datalink. He finds that several months down the road and is like "Oh shit". So, he talks to TMM and finds out the data is not lost and tells them to start correcting it. He sees how fast the money is piling up and is again "Oh shit" and tells them to turn it off. Somewhere in there he tells Chris there is a problem but they do not go into detail, Chris asks is it being handled, Blake says yep and that is the end of it as far as conversation goes. Blake forgets that he put the issue on hold because of shows and shit. They get back to it months later and he turns the repull back on sees the same issue with it mounting up too quick, stops the process while he wrestles with what to about it.

Meanwhile, Chris and Tracy decide that Blake and Amy must go because of other issues. They do the split up and are unaware that the rebill issue is still sitting there until Chris gets his phone call from Albright. The call does not go well and within hours (literally) lawyers are involved and all action comes to a halt.

And then it sits because of the oh so fast speed of our legal system.

Like I say, a lot of supposition in there.

[Jace]

Originally Posted by sarettah

I don't think Chris and Tracy's non-solution to the problem is the best one but they are locked out of the program and can only get back in if they do it TMM's way which is bullshit.

How many time has TMM offered to unlock admin for them to get that resolved. But instead they get a noticed from NRM not to contact them directly?

[sarettah]

Originally Posted by Jace

How many time has TMM offered to unlock admin for them to get that resolved. But instead they get a noticed from NRM not to contact them directly?

Once you get lawyers involved it all goes to hell, you know that. And the lawyers were involved as soon as Albright's post went up.

[sarettah]

Originally Posted by Jace

Anytime there's a problem with a sponsor program, the primary response for any responsible program owner is to make sure the affiliates link codes, payments are not compromised. Hell I get letter from sponsor programs when payments are late... and to think this has been going on for over a year and it's not their primary concern?

Most sponsor problems have not been revealed to the program through a phone call to the program owner while they are driving home from a show by someone like Albright telling them he is going to start crediting a bunch of people for a problem that the owner was for all intents and purposes not aware of.

[Jace]

Originally Posted by sarettah

Most sponsor problems have not been revealed to the program through a phone call to the program owner while they are driving home from a show by someone like Albright telling them he is going to start crediting a bunch of people for a problem that the owner was for all intents and purposes not aware of.

Really what program does he own? 'someone like Albright' meaning what? Did Albright say he was gonna start crediting bunch of people?.. wow didn't know you were in the conversation... so who's taking shit out of context now?

[sarettah]

Originally Posted by Jace

Really what program does he own? 'someone like Albright' meaning what? Did Albright say he was gonna start crediting bunch of people?.. wow didn't know you were in the conversation... so who's taking shit out of context now?

That is from the deposition, I think Chris's.

[Sexyteaser]

Do you think there is traceable revenue on the stolen email addresses from the security leak?

Do you think that we will find that traffic, spam, re-directs are found on a adult site owned or operated by a TMM owner/employee?

Is there a potential class action law suit by customers who's email addresses were compromised and were not informed of this theft as soon as TMM became aware of it?

How many customers had a increase of spam or malware after signing up under a site managed by TMM and is there some relevancy connecting the two?

There has been new legal complaints filed daily on spam and malware across the country; this case is in Federal Court I don't think the case will go under the radar and the exposure and answers to the above questions will get answered.

Anyone know who the John/Jane Does are?

[sarettah]

Originally Posted by Shelleehale

Do you think there is traceable revenue on the stolen email addresses from the security leak?

Do you think that we will find that traffic, spam, re-directs are found on a adult site owned or operated by a TMM owner/employee?

Is there a potential class action law suit by customers who's email addresses were compromised and were not informed of this theft as soon as TMM became aware of it?

How many customers had a increase of spam or malware after signing up under a site managed by TMM and is there some relevancy connecting the two?

There has been new legal complaints filed daily on spam and malware across the country; this case is in Federal Court I don't think the case will go under the radar and the exposure and answers to the above questions will get answered.

Anyone know who the John/Jane Does are?

You are an idiot

[Jace]

btw, since the suit is about defamation, what in the original post was false exactly?

[sarettah]

Charles(TMM) version of the phone call

[Sexyteaser]

Originally Posted by Shelleehale

Anyone know who the John/Jane Does are?

03.18.2008 | SECOND AMENDED AND SUPPLEMENTAL COMPLAINT:
(“Plaintiffs”) for their First Supplemental and Amended Complaint (the “FSAC”), brings this hybrid action against defendants Too Much Media, LLC, John Albright, and Charles Berrebbi, Fred Schank and John Does 1-30, on knowledge as to Plaintiffs and their own acts, and as to other matters on information and belief, on behalf of NR Media, LLC and the proposed class defined herein, and in support thereof alleges the following...

Jace,

Do you know who the John Does are? It says 1-30 and this is a small tight industry... any idea?

[Jace]

Originally Posted by Shelleehale

Jace,

Do you know who the John Does are? It says 1-30 and this is a small tight industry... any idea?

is that for the class action? I would venture to guess no one will know for a while, if there are any at all, haha....j/k