- Site menu:
- Latest Discussions
- Latest Newswire
- Archives
- Submit Story
- Story HOWTO
- Syndicate
- E-mail Alerts
Pay Pal is lying on the internet in their agreement. I have a Live Recording!
Yes thats right I caught PayPal in a direct lie. (Listen Live Here) First of all let me give a brief summery of my agony. |
|
|
Comments (39)
Hey ain't the only one this has happened to...
Similar situations have happened to other people, which is why I caution anyone who is a vendor online. Be careful, and if you do use PayPal for accepting credit cards, make sure that it is linked to a sole bank account with PayPal as the sole purpose. When you get a payment, send it to the account in question, then move it to another account that they don't have access to.
> When you get a payment, send it to the account in question, then move it to another account that they don't have access to.
Well, duh. I'm sorry, but this is standard practice. Anyone who doesn't do it is just asking for problems.
I'd go so far as to recommend folks use one such account for all of their automated transfers, for everyone from Pay Pal to their employer, and transfer funds out of it as soon as possible. In addition to outright fraud, legitimate mistakes can happen. You need to make sure they don't make it impossible for you to operate when they do.
Well, duh. I'm sorry, but this is standard practice. Anyone who doesn't do it is just asking for problems.
I'd go so far as to recommend folks use one such account for all of their automated transfers, for everyone from Pay Pal to their employer, and transfer funds out of it as soon as possible. In addition to outright fraud, legitimate mistakes can happen. You need to make sure they don't make it impossible for you to operate when they do.
What really gets to one from that Live Recording is the supervisor's audible claim that eBay and PayPal are two separate companies!
Yet clearly right there on the last line of PayPal's 'About PayPal' page is
Although the recent news story 'Phishers ease up on eBay, Paypal but move on to other sites' at http://technology.inquirer.net/infotech/infotech/view_articl... may be somewhat comforting for current PayPal customers, Barron's Online report 'Bidding Up eBay's Price' at http://online.barrons.com/article/SB119265470605762440.html?... shows just how _financially_ reliant eBay is on its PayPal division for sustainable revenue.
Should a secure, lower-cost, and more viable competitor to the eBay-PayPal racket arise -- such as perhaps Google Checkout https://checkout.google.com/support/ (?) -- then eBay's board members and the appropriate members of eBay's executive team overseeing PayPal would be more conducive to possibly re-evaluating their division's questionable policies..... such as those claimed here by the thenixedreport.
Quoting:Located in San Jose, California, PayPal was founded in 1998 and was acquired by eBay in 2002.(from http://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=p/gen/about-outside) Just how stupid does this supervisor expect PayPal's current customers to be???
Although the recent news story 'Phishers ease up on eBay, Paypal but move on to other sites' at http://technology.inquirer.net/infotech/infotech/view_articl... may be somewhat comforting for current PayPal customers, Barron's Online report 'Bidding Up eBay's Price' at http://online.barrons.com/article/SB119265470605762440.html?... shows just how _financially_ reliant eBay is on its PayPal division for sustainable revenue.
Should a secure, lower-cost, and more viable competitor to the eBay-PayPal racket arise -- such as perhaps Google Checkout https://checkout.google.com/support/ (?) -- then eBay's board members and the appropriate members of eBay's executive team overseeing PayPal would be more conducive to possibly re-evaluating their division's questionable policies..... such as those claimed here by the thenixedreport.
That's the problem, right now they're the only game in town, except for Google checkout. Having an ordinary merchant's credit card account with an institution that actually protects its customers is the safest, but it's expensive for small-timers.
This is amusing: http://www.auctionbytes.com/cab/abn/y06/m07/i06/s02
"eBay's Safe Payments policy states that a payment service must have a "substantial historical track record of providing safe and reliable financial and/or banking related services."
Ahem. Except PayPal.
This is amusing: http://www.auctionbytes.com/cab/abn/y06/m07/i06/s02
"eBay's Safe Payments policy states that a payment service must have a "substantial historical track record of providing safe and reliable financial and/or banking related services."
Ahem. Except PayPal.
I simply refuse to purchase anything that requires Paypal.
Like you all, I too have had a bad experience over the last couple of years with PayPal. In retrospect, it would have been much better to take tuxchick's advice first, and if failing this I just HAD to purchase something with PayPal, then afterwards take jdixon's.advice.
Unfortunately, you hit some of the current problems surrounding PayPal dead-on vainrveenr and tuxchick. Either/both of you, thenixedreport, and others (me too!) should seriously consider contributing updates to the Criticism section of the widely-read PayPal Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PayPal The no-holds-barred online advocacy group for those like ourselves negatively affected by PayPal, the Screw-PayPal site at http://www.screw-paypal.com/, really ought to also be mentioned within this PayPal Wikipedia as well. 2c here, but burned by Paypal for orders of magnitude greater than 2c :angry:
Unfortunately, you hit some of the current problems surrounding PayPal dead-on vainrveenr and tuxchick. Either/both of you, thenixedreport, and others (me too!) should seriously consider contributing updates to the Criticism section of the widely-read PayPal Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PayPal The no-holds-barred online advocacy group for those like ourselves negatively affected by PayPal, the Screw-PayPal site at http://www.screw-paypal.com/, really ought to also be mentioned within this PayPal Wikipedia as well. 2c here, but burned by Paypal for orders of magnitude greater than 2c :angry:
Just to be clear, the eBay-PayPal racket that is causing you all so much grief worked, and still does work like this :
1. eBay was among the first company to successfully start and effectively sell its online auction service with its unique and proprietary feedback system. Pierre Omidyar's eBay AuctionWeb was touted as among the first to use this Feedback system, via "feedback profiles" to greatly enhance trust and confidence on the part of the online buyer toward online sellers. BTW, this proprietary Feedback system is patented, essentially meaning that no other auction site can easily duplicate this trust mechanism.
2. The eBay trusted purchase system has generally worked! Since few other online auction sites could or can effectively compete with eBay's Feedback and Buyer Protection system (thinking of Yahoo's failed auction site as well as several others lesser known), the eBay _BUYER_ could arguably trust this system for online purchases. Note that this feedback system has predominately applied since its inception specifically for the benefit of the eBay _BUYER_ , and not necessarily for the benefit of the seller. AAMOF, sellers have seen their transaction fees and percentage costs paid to eBay continually increase in past years even before eBay acquired PayPal.
3. Enter PayPal three years after Pierre Omidyar's eBay AuctionWeb startup. Now the eBay buyer and seller could more quickly facilitate their online payment system. Trust on the _SELLER'S_ side of eBay transactions could be increased -- sellers could now essentially be guaranteed of payment through this up-front, instead of having to endure deadbeats with bounced personal checks/MO's, stolen/unsecured credit-card info, ... etc. IIRC, soon following this time period a) eBay started expanding its operations to Canada and the UK, and b) PayPal highly touted its services as being predominately designed for the benefit of the Consumer.
4. eBay acquired PayPal in 2002. Beyond just trust for the buyer and the seller, now the eBay-PayPal racket can OWN much of the transaction between the buyer and the seller. Since the 2002 M&A, there are now few online places to go to in order to buy or sell items so effectively auction-style or locally (okay, okay, so maybe Craigslist and some others lesser known). AAMOF, every eBay seller just about HAS to accept a payment account via PayPal, and some such sellers will now ONLY accept PayPal payment and nothing else. Since 2002, eBay has expanded worldwide to countries such as the one in Southeast Asia that thenixedreport reports on here.
5. As thenixedreport and tuxchick so avidly illustrate above, a huge drawback of this eBay-PayPal racket is that eBay and PayPal can change and refine their Terms and Conditions (TOS) and adjust fees exactly as they see fit. Oh, they might term such impending actions as "adjustments" to market conditions, but being unregulated entities, little is preventing the eBay-PayPal racket from actually carrying out such TOS-revisions and increased fees/percentages. These actions are purportedly alleged by eBay-PayPal to increase trust and protect both the buyer _AND_ the seller, but in effect such actions may reduce such trust there being notably absent effective recourse, as thenixedreport has found out. eBay's PayPal is predominantly protecting itself.
6. There is a major point worth emphasizing in the Barron's Online report brought above. Lacking any serious competition in its online business during the impending Holiday Retail Shopping Season, the eBay-PayPal teams could be less apt during this time to limit TOS agreements which could potentially hurt sales volume. As a jdixon "Well, duh'ism", PayPal does not want so many persons to realize the details of their more-limiting consumer service agreements (their TOS), nor do they wish to have negative incidents such as thenixedreport's widely reported in the news. Key factors that Increase revenue for ANY company are a combination of a higher sale's volume, higher costs passed on to the customer, reduced costs of producing the service or item, lowered legal costs ... etc. eBay's sales volume has been currently increasing as expressed in "higher [eBay] listings", and much of eBay's revenue comes from PayPal, as Barron's quotes
This has already all been documented online in areas besides the aforementioned Wikipedia and Screw-PayPal sites.
1. eBay was among the first company to successfully start and effectively sell its online auction service with its unique and proprietary feedback system. Pierre Omidyar's eBay AuctionWeb was touted as among the first to use this Feedback system, via "feedback profiles" to greatly enhance trust and confidence on the part of the online buyer toward online sellers. BTW, this proprietary Feedback system is patented, essentially meaning that no other auction site can easily duplicate this trust mechanism.
2. The eBay trusted purchase system has generally worked! Since few other online auction sites could or can effectively compete with eBay's Feedback and Buyer Protection system (thinking of Yahoo's failed auction site as well as several others lesser known), the eBay _BUYER_ could arguably trust this system for online purchases. Note that this feedback system has predominately applied since its inception specifically for the benefit of the eBay _BUYER_ , and not necessarily for the benefit of the seller. AAMOF, sellers have seen their transaction fees and percentage costs paid to eBay continually increase in past years even before eBay acquired PayPal.
3. Enter PayPal three years after Pierre Omidyar's eBay AuctionWeb startup. Now the eBay buyer and seller could more quickly facilitate their online payment system. Trust on the _SELLER'S_ side of eBay transactions could be increased -- sellers could now essentially be guaranteed of payment through this up-front, instead of having to endure deadbeats with bounced personal checks/MO's, stolen/unsecured credit-card info, ... etc. IIRC, soon following this time period a) eBay started expanding its operations to Canada and the UK, and b) PayPal highly touted its services as being predominately designed for the benefit of the Consumer.
4. eBay acquired PayPal in 2002. Beyond just trust for the buyer and the seller, now the eBay-PayPal racket can OWN much of the transaction between the buyer and the seller. Since the 2002 M&A, there are now few online places to go to in order to buy or sell items so effectively auction-style or locally (okay, okay, so maybe Craigslist and some others lesser known). AAMOF, every eBay seller just about HAS to accept a payment account via PayPal, and some such sellers will now ONLY accept PayPal payment and nothing else. Since 2002, eBay has expanded worldwide to countries such as the one in Southeast Asia that thenixedreport reports on here.
5. As thenixedreport and tuxchick so avidly illustrate above, a huge drawback of this eBay-PayPal racket is that eBay and PayPal can change and refine their Terms and Conditions (TOS) and adjust fees exactly as they see fit. Oh, they might term such impending actions as "adjustments" to market conditions, but being unregulated entities, little is preventing the eBay-PayPal racket from actually carrying out such TOS-revisions and increased fees/percentages. These actions are purportedly alleged by eBay-PayPal to increase trust and protect both the buyer _AND_ the seller, but in effect such actions may reduce such trust there being notably absent effective recourse, as thenixedreport has found out. eBay's PayPal is predominantly protecting itself.
6. There is a major point worth emphasizing in the Barron's Online report brought above. Lacking any serious competition in its online business during the impending Holiday Retail Shopping Season, the eBay-PayPal teams could be less apt during this time to limit TOS agreements which could potentially hurt sales volume. As a jdixon "Well, duh'ism", PayPal does not want so many persons to realize the details of their more-limiting consumer service agreements (their TOS), nor do they wish to have negative incidents such as thenixedreport's widely reported in the news. Key factors that Increase revenue for ANY company are a combination of a higher sale's volume, higher costs passed on to the customer, reduced costs of producing the service or item, lowered legal costs ... etc. eBay's sales volume has been currently increasing as expressed in "higher [eBay] listings", and much of eBay's revenue comes from PayPal, as Barron's quotes
Quoting:The higher listings led to $51 million of revenue upside, mainly in marketplace revenue and corresponding PayPal revenueBarron's Online thus estimates that the eBay-PayPal racket is currently focusing upon increasing sale's volume ("listings") worldwide rather than hiking up costs to its consumers.
This has already all been documented online in areas besides the aforementioned Wikipedia and Screw-PayPal sites.
I'm surprised that Ebay's ownership of PayPal hasn't attracted the interest of government regulators somewheres- it's so obviously a recipe for abuse. Oh wait, duh, not in the US. What was I thinking. But maybe in civilized countries, but then I guess it's a question of jurisdiction.
There are three things I can think of to get the attention of an abusive monopoly:
1. mass customer revolt 2. government intervention 3. some real competition
Other than that, about all you can do is keep yourself out of harm's way.
There are three things I can think of to get the attention of an abusive monopoly:
1. mass customer revolt 2. government intervention 3. some real competition
Other than that, about all you can do is keep yourself out of harm's way.
I know I have a case here because they admitted on the phone that they didn't expect me to read the agreement, they stated that I'm 100% protected from fraud threw FDIC insurance, and they were negligent in trying to protect me in any way such as trying to retrieve my stolen laptop, or getting me my money back from their government in Indonesia. Countries like Indonesia, Nigeria, and other scam countries should be charged every time that someone in their country is caught scamming someone outside their country. If they decided not to comply then all other countries should shut off their internet access.
So what do you think? Small claims court: I get my money back and keep quiet.
OR
Big time court where I ask for them to admit they made a mistake to everyone, get everyone's money back that has been wrongly charged or deceived, and make sure that people know that Pay Pal is a liability to their business and personal life?
So what do you think? Small claims court: I get my money back and keep quiet.
OR
Big time court where I ask for them to admit they made a mistake to everyone, get everyone's money back that has been wrongly charged or deceived, and make sure that people know that Pay Pal is a liability to their business and personal life?
Quoting:Small claims court...Unless you have a few million dollars to throw at this, big time court is out of the question. eBay/PayPal will pull out all the stops to avoid a media event.
OR
Big time court...
Also, I don't think you have an open and shut case, but that's just my personal opinion and, as always, IANAL.
Thanks NoDough. My question to you is if I could get some lawyers that would defend me and get commission off of the settlement and charge PayPal for their lawyer fees as well would they not want to try for the big time court?
Also I don't think I can get lawyers for a small claims case because the only lawyers who will defend me are big time lawyers and they won't make any money off of it unless I give them about 100% of what I get from PayPal and PayPal probably won't end up paying for my lawyer fees in this kind of case any way will they?
Also I don't think I can get lawyers for a small claims case because the only lawyers who will defend me are big time lawyers and they won't make any money off of it unless I give them about 100% of what I get from PayPal and PayPal probably won't end up paying for my lawyer fees in this kind of case any way will they?
I'm venturing off into an arena in which I have a little experience, but not much. So, keep in mind that I may be full of it.
In order to defend you they are probably going to want a percentage of a large award. It's not likely that they will want to take the case for legal fees chargeable to the defense because that would end up in dispute and then they would have to file yet another suit against the defense to receive their pay. Also, they will want an open-and-shut case because they won't want to risk doing all that work and receiving absolutely nothing for it.
As always, IANAL. You may want to get dinotrac and/or jdixon to chime in here as they are both imminently more qualified on legal matters.
Quoting:My question to you is if I could get some lawyers that would defend me and get commission off of the settlement and charge PayPal for their lawyer fees as well would they not want to try for the big time court?The answer, of course, is, "Yes." However, that's an awfully big 'IF'.
In order to defend you they are probably going to want a percentage of a large award. It's not likely that they will want to take the case for legal fees chargeable to the defense because that would end up in dispute and then they would have to file yet another suit against the defense to receive their pay. Also, they will want an open-and-shut case because they won't want to risk doing all that work and receiving absolutely nothing for it.
Quoting:Also I don't think I can get lawyers for a small claims case...The states that I am familiar with do not allow professional representation in small claims court. YMMV.
As always, IANAL. You may want to get dinotrac and/or jdixon to chime in here as they are both imminently more qualified on legal matters.
The no-holds-barred online advocacy group for those like ourselves negatively affected by PayPal, is the Screw-PayPal site at http://www.screw-paypal.com
My using the LXer tags with punctuation just after the url may have caused this not to appear correctly before.
The appropriate section of the Screw-PayPal site worth perusing before further considering legal action might very well be the Resources: Problems and Complaints section at http://www.screw-paypal.com/resources/resources.html 4c
The appropriate section of the Screw-PayPal site worth perusing before further considering legal action might very well be the Resources: Problems and Complaints section at http://www.screw-paypal.com/resources/resources.html 4c
> You may want to get dinotrac and/or jdixon to chime in here as they are both imminently more qualified on legal matters.
Dino is more qualified on legal matters. I am at best a semi-informed layman. In court, nothing I say should be taken seriously without a lawyer's confirmation.
Which doesn't keep me from having strong opinions on matters. :)
Dino is more qualified on legal matters. I am at best a semi-informed layman. In court, nothing I say should be taken seriously without a lawyer's confirmation.
Which doesn't keep me from having strong opinions on matters. :)
I like screw-paypal.com. It seems they are knowledgeable about the subject. I think the small claims court is the way to go. I need time to gather all my evedence and find a way to properly submit it and supena the BBB for the 5200 complaints against PayPal in the last 3 years.
> I think the small claims court is the way to go.
Speaking as somebody with nearly NO knowledge of this case, I would add the following:
1. The court you go into is determined by the level of damages sought in most (if not all) jurisdictions. Where I live, if the claim is less than $5,000 US, it goes to small claims. There are some asterisks and exceptions, but, by and large, you can safely presume that small claims court is, umm, where you'll take your small claim.
2. One can, of course, pump up the complaint and seek damages sufficient to get out of small claims court, but you'll need some reasonable -- not necessarily correct, but legally defensible -- basis for doing that.
3. Class actions are one way to get out of small claims and to get the attention of a big player -- not to mention attract a high-powered law firm smelling big money.
You have to fit the parameters of a class action (I'll bet this would) and there has to be serious money on the other side (Hey! We're talking ebay. I'll bet there's some serious money rolling around).
The downside to class actions is that they tend to deliver more psychic gain than real. They take a long time and they make the lawyers rich. The actual victims get a coupon or a discount or some ridiculous token while the lawyers pick out which Pacific island they are going to buy with their cut of the fees.
Speaking as somebody with nearly NO knowledge of this case, I would add the following:
1. The court you go into is determined by the level of damages sought in most (if not all) jurisdictions. Where I live, if the claim is less than $5,000 US, it goes to small claims. There are some asterisks and exceptions, but, by and large, you can safely presume that small claims court is, umm, where you'll take your small claim.
2. One can, of course, pump up the complaint and seek damages sufficient to get out of small claims court, but you'll need some reasonable -- not necessarily correct, but legally defensible -- basis for doing that.
3. Class actions are one way to get out of small claims and to get the attention of a big player -- not to mention attract a high-powered law firm smelling big money.
You have to fit the parameters of a class action (I'll bet this would) and there has to be serious money on the other side (Hey! We're talking ebay. I'll bet there's some serious money rolling around).
The downside to class actions is that they tend to deliver more psychic gain than real. They take a long time and they make the lawyers rich. The actual victims get a coupon or a discount or some ridiculous token while the lawyers pick out which Pacific island they are going to buy with their cut of the fees.
Well I’m getting help and support. I got some nice replys to my posts here http://screw-paypal.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=461#461 and here http://screw-paypal.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=459#459 .
Fellow PayPal victims need to use my recording.
2 earlier comments in the full thread.
Quoting:I mean they have done such a bang up job of regulating things so far I can see why that would be attractive.
The thing is the US Government does very little to regulate the market, except to create laws that pander to the largest and most monopolistic corporations, so perhaps a government agency that actually monitors and controls this aspect of the market would be good. On the other hand this too would all too likely be corrupted, so it's probably a bad idea until something is done to reduce corruption.
Quoting:...until something is done to reduce corruption.Great. And while we are modifying human nature, maybe we can stop war, murder, rape, etc. Unfortunately human nature isn't so easily modified.
Power corrupts. If you centralize power (government regulation) corruption will follow. The only thing you can do to reduce corruption is to distribute power over a large group so that everyone has a little, but no one has a lot. That is one of the base tenets of the free market. (Oh yeah. And also of a little thing called FOSS.)
Quoting:The thing is the US Government does very little to regulate the market, except to create laws that pander to the largest and most monopolistic corporations...Which is still government using its power to manipulate the free market.
Quoting:The only thing you can do to reduce corruption is to distribute power over a large group so that everyone has a little, but no one has a lot.
That's the point of Democracy.
> That's the point of Democracy.
True Democracy gives you tyranny by the majority, so even it's not a perfect solution. :(
A limited Democracy seems to be the best system we've found, but even it seems to have a limited lifespan, somewhere on the order of 200-500 years historically speaking.
True Democracy gives you tyranny by the majority, so even it's not a perfect solution. :(
A limited Democracy seems to be the best system we've found, but even it seems to have a limited lifespan, somewhere on the order of 200-500 years historically speaking.
I don't think that what we are dealing with is human nature here. I think that the present day standard of what morality is has been scued and affected by the Devil himself. I don't think it's in human nature to do as Micro$oft does or any of the big companies that take advantage of people. Normally in a society where there are good people and in that society about a 10th are bad even the bad people have respect. Our society has about 1 10th of people that are good and pure. People that live according to the standards that our country was founded on. The standards of Jesus Christ.
Thats just what I believe. Not that we need to force Christianity on everyone.
Thats just what I believe. Not that we need to force Christianity on everyone.
>Not that we need to force Christianity on everyone.
No, but a little more "Love thy neighbor" and "that which you do for the least among you, you do for me" and stuff like that...wouldn't be terribly tragic.
No, but a little more "Love thy neighbor" and "that which you do for the least among you, you do for me" and stuff like that...wouldn't be terribly tragic.
> "that which you do for the least among you, you do for me"
Which unfortunately usually requires money. And when the government takes 50% of what you make (28% federal income tax, 7% fica, 6% state income tax, and 5% state sales tax, just for starters where I live and at my income level), mostly in the name of providing for those same people, how much do you have left over to give?
Which unfortunately usually requires money. And when the government takes 50% of what you make (28% federal income tax, 7% fica, 6% state income tax, and 5% state sales tax, just for starters where I live and at my income level), mostly in the name of providing for those same people, how much do you have left over to give?
>7% fica
Bad news..but that is only have the story. You actually pay 15.3%. The other half is called employer's contribution, but you actually pay. It just doesn't show up on your paycheck so you can't as easily see how much you're being gouged for SS.
Bad news..but that is only have the story. You actually pay 15.3%. The other half is called employer's contribution, but you actually pay. It just doesn't show up on your paycheck so you can't as easily see how much you're being gouged for SS.
> You actually pay 15.3%.
Yeah, I know that Dino. But that gets complicated for folks to follow, and there's no reason to confuse them about the matter.
Yeah, I know that Dino. But that gets complicated for folks to follow, and there's no reason to confuse them about the matter.
>there's no reason to confuse them about the matter.
More accurately, I guess, there is no reason to disturb their current state of confusion.
Except that, Social Security will become an issue again sooner than later -- especially with Boomers starting to retire -- and those poor confused people will think they're only paying half as much as they are. They will think that SS tax increases are half of what they actually are.
Sigh.
More accurately, I guess, there is no reason to disturb their current state of confusion.
Except that, Social Security will become an issue again sooner than later -- especially with Boomers starting to retire -- and those poor confused people will think they're only paying half as much as they are. They will think that SS tax increases are half of what they actually are.
Sigh.
Quoting:People that live according to the standards that our country was founded on. The standards of Jesus Christ.
Purile rubbsh. The US was founded on the principles of free trade.
And also on the separation of church and state:
"Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties"
Thomas Jefferson 1802 (Letter to Danbury Baptists)
"Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties"
Thomas Jefferson 1802 (Letter to Danbury Baptists)
Did Jesus lose money with his paypal account?
Did Thomas Jefferson lose money selling to some scam artist in Nigeria?
What does paypal or any of this have to do with Linux and Linux news?
Lets get on topic or drop the thread. I'm sure there are online venues for politics, religion and paypal.
I'm not arguing that you are not entitled to your own beliefs and opinions on a wide range of topics, but LXer is not the place for these specific topics.
Did Thomas Jefferson lose money selling to some scam artist in Nigeria?
What does paypal or any of this have to do with Linux and Linux news?
Lets get on topic or drop the thread. I'm sure there are online venues for politics, religion and paypal.
I'm not arguing that you are not entitled to your own beliefs and opinions on a wide range of topics, but LXer is not the place for these specific topics.
>Purile rubbsh. The US was founded on the principles of free trade.
Pure rubbish. Sounds like you need to do a little readin', child.
Pure rubbish. Sounds like you need to do a little readin', child.
Eh hem....... Back on topic.....
Justin, are there any updates?
Justin, are there any updates?
Well I'm going to call the state Insurance comissioner when they are open and see what they will do. Meanwhile I’m getting help and support. I got some nice replies to my posts here http://screw-paypal.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=461#461 and here http://screw-paypal.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=459#459 .
Thanks for your support here to.
Thanks for your support here to.
Quoting:Sounds like you need to do a little readin', child.
Sounds like you need to stop believing in fairy tales.
tracyanne I seem to have a bunch of legal consultants that are all telling me that I have a big case against PayPal. Even some tell me I can take them to court in my home town.
The whole point is that PayPal uses plenty of FOSS. Can you see how this is related now? Imagine the fear-mongering that can ensue because of this.
Quoting:tracyanne I seem to have a bunch of legal consultants...Justin, I think Tracyanne was responding to Dino's post above.
Post a comment
A free account is needed to post. Write your comment here first: your text is kept in this browser while you sign up or log in, and is waiting for you when you come back.
Your message:Markdown: **bold**, *italic*, [text](https://link), - lists, > quotes, $x^2$ for math. Formatting help
Sign up and post (it is free) or Log in and post