CCU...gone? - Page 34

howdydudey · #**331** 10-11-2006, 03:20 PM

guess not this is in his terms:

A.1) You must be 13 years of age or older to participate. If you are between the ages of 13 to 17, you must obtain parental permission before using the CasinoCashUnlimited.com service.

FreeOffersNow · #**332** 10-11-2006, 04:10 PM

To those of you insisting that this "180" is a bad thing, last I knew, contemplation of a crime is not punishable in civil, nor criminal, court. I don't care what you think I was going to do - all that matters is what I decided to do in the end. As unfortunate as it is, it seems some of you would rather see me NOT pay. How much sense would it make for me to put the site back up (allowing all of you to obtain data which you otherwise would not have had) and spend hours verifying identification documents if I intended to run? About as much sense as it makes for Blowup Doll to go through all the trouble he's gone through even before payment is due, I suppose...especially when he doesn't even have a CasinoCashUnlimited account (unless, of course, his "wife" is a gnome, which would explain a lot).

Also, don't try to argue that gnoming is ok - it's not, everyone knows it's not, and that's final.

hedonist · #**333** 10-11-2006, 04:30 PM

Actually I hope you pay all but about 4 or 5 of the wrong people. That way maximum damage will be done to you. I wouldn't send this guy any ID at all. $250 is a small price to pay to see this piece of trash crying. Anyone think we should tell his daddy? LOL

howdydudey · #**334** 10-11-2006, 04:39 PM

[ QUOTE ]
To those of you insisting that this "180" is a bad thing, last I knew, contemplation of a crime is not punishable in civil, nor criminal, court. I don't care what you think I was going to do - all that matters is what I decided to do in the end. As unfortunate as it is, it seems some of you would rather see me NOT pay. How much sense would it make for me to put the site back up (allowing all of you to obtain data which you otherwise would not have had) and spend hours verifying identification documents if I intended to run? About as much sense as it makes for Blowup Doll to go through all the trouble he's gone through even before payment is due, I suppose...especially when he doesn't even have a CasinoCashUnlimited account (unless, of course, his "wife" is a gnome, which would explain a lot).

Also, don't try to argue that gnoming is ok - it's not, everyone knows it's not, and that's final.

[/ QUOTE ]

So any gnomes you find you are going to inform SIA and repay them correct?

Zag Nutz · #**335** 10-11-2006, 04:40 PM

I feel privileged to witness one of these "threads you'll never forget in the history of 2+2".

I had to read about pattern mapping after the fact, but in my mind this is so much better...

Blowup Doll · #**336** 10-11-2006, 04:51 PM

[ QUOTE ]
To those of you insisting that this "180" is a bad thing, last I knew, contemplation of a crime is not punishable in civil, nor criminal, court. I don't care what you think I was going to do - all that matters is what I decided to do in the end. As unfortunate as it is, it seems some of you would rather see me NOT pay. How much sense would it make for me to put the site back up (allowing all of you to obtain data which you otherwise would not have had) and spend hours verifying identification documents if I intended to run? About as much sense as it makes for Blowup Doll to go through all the trouble he's gone through even before payment is due, I suppose...especially when he doesn't even have a CasinoCashUnlimited account (unless, of course, his "wife" is a gnome, which would explain a lot).

Also, don't try to argue that gnoming is ok - it's not, everyone knows it's not, and that's final.

[/ QUOTE ]
Nice try in deflecting the blame, but you lose again. My wife is a real person and is your client. We would never initiate a lawsuit if we were gnoming, now would we? Not everyone here is a fool like you.

I'm glad to see you're paying up. Keep paying everyone you owe and you may pull out of this without too much legal damage.

Blowup Doll · #**337** 10-11-2006, 04:54 PM

Btw, for those of you who are reluctant to share your ID with a lying scam-artist like FON, you might work out a deal whereby you show your ID to a 2+2 mod, who can then verify it and tell FON that you are legit. I'm sure FON, who just wants to make sure everyone is on the up-and-up, will agree to that. Right, FON?

kiemo · #**338** 10-11-2006, 04:56 PM

[ QUOTE ]

Also, don't try to argue that gnoming is ok - it's not, everyone knows it's not, and that's final.

[/ QUOTE ]

Whom here is arguing that gnoming is ok?

You have essentially stated that every single person who signed up through you is assumed a gnome until they prove otherwise. The retort offered by the community here is: from your perspective - WHO CARES if they are a gnome, if you got paid then they should get paid.

If SIA or whomeever is denying you payment becuase they feel the account is gnome account then you have some leg to stand on with your I DONT PAY GNOMES stance. However that isnt the case here and you are poking at loopholes in order to avoid paying out as much money as possible.

FreeOffersNow · #**339** 10-11-2006, 05:08 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Btw, for those of you who are reluctant to share your ID with a lying scam-artist like FON, you might work out a deal whereby you show your ID to a 2+2 mod, who can then verify it and tell FON that you are legit. I'm sure FON, who just wants to make sure everyone is on the up-and-up, will agree to that. Right, FON?

[/ QUOTE ]

Question my motivation all you like, but this is not acceptable.

[ QUOTE ]
Nice try in deflecting the blame, but you lose again. My wife is a real person and is your client. We would never initiate a lawsuit if we were gnoming, now would we? Not everyone here is a fool like you.

I'm glad to see you're paying up. Keep paying everyone you owe and you may pull out of this without too much legal damage.

[/ QUOTE ]

Assuming I pay as promised (which I will), you (or anyone else here) have no legal grounds for suit. As such, I suggest that upon receipt of payment you go on your way. Otherwise, I'll see you[r wife] in court...assuming the suit isn't immediately dismissed as frivolous.

Additionally, the ID verification issue is not up for discussion - I have no obligation to explain anything further than that I am requiring ID verification to verify that all members pending payment have provided truthful and accurate information.

SoCalRugger · #**340** 10-11-2006, 05:12 PM

[ QUOTE ]
To those of you insisting that this "180" is a bad thing, last I knew, contemplation of a crime is not punishable in civil, nor criminal, court. I don't care what you think I was going to do - all that matters is what I decided to do in the end.

[/ QUOTE ]
If nobody had threatened legal action, you wouldn't have paid out a single cent. That's a fact. So even if you do pay everyone in the end, you're still a lying, scamming douchebag. Hopefully a lot of bad things happen to you in the future.