[citanul]

this is not necessarilly true.

i know an affiliate who was giving people more money than he was taking in, or at least 100% of the money he was taking in, in order to build up his business so he could get to higher tiers of affiliate revenue. unfortunately for him, the month he was finally going to meet the requirements to be profitable was also the month the skins broke up. he gave all the money to his affiliates, but never turned a profit. so i guess i have a problem with M(in) > M(out). it should be more like M(in)>=M(out).

or something.

personally i have a huge problem with the concept that a person should be allowed to have backup screen names that they can run and hide to when they either become disgraced, defraud a community, or whatever. i know that a lot of people would have chosen to ban the buster account, and maybe it was banned eventually, and if the reason it "he's a slimeball fraud etc" then it's him, not his account that that accusation should be made of. (i know many of my posts here sidle towards "i think that mods should have the ability to figure out who posts under what screen name, via ip check if htat's the only way," but that's because i'm totally intolerant of assholes.

c