3 ms·
I'm assuming that they're offering google apps, which you can sell as an affiliate (naming your price). But reading through the transcript, and listening to the
by samlev 15y ago
I'm assuming that they're offering google apps, which you can sell as an affiliate (naming your price). But reading through the transcript, and listening to the calls, they claim to be offering to "develop" a web site for the business, which I very much doubt google would ever do.
They have tools in google apps for making pages/simple sites, but everything about the call stinks of scam.
> Caller: Twenty one days. We're going to develop the website within twenty one days
When has google ever "developed websites" for independent companies?
Caller: XXXXX, and do you have a gmai account?*
Business owner: yes, I do have a gmail account.
Caller: Kindly give me your gmail account.
...
Caller: ... you will be given a personal password which you can use to log in and make changes in case you want to.
...
Caller: ... For photos, I will give you my gmail account so you can forward to me either the business logo or the photos you feel have nice looking clothes that can attract customers.
Yes, I've cherry-picked some of the transcript, but the point is that these are practices which aren't just against Google's "Do no evil" policy, but would be counter to how they would actually run. For a company like google, with their existing infrastructure, this would just be bad business.
Also, why ask for a gmail username, and then say later "Well we'll send you a username and password once we're done". It doesn't make any sense.
Oh well, I assume that at some point, Google will be forced to respond, will give a big "What the hell, guys, this wasn't us", and then everyone will look sheepish for a while until a year later where some blogger will stumble on it again, and try to expose the truth of "google being evil in africa".
- michaelcampbell 15y agoJust a pedantic nit; Google's code of conduct catchphrase is not "do no evil", it's "don't be evil". And I suspect they aren't, as a company. Even though these were Google employees, as Google has admitted, I doubt they were acting in accordance with anyone sufficiently high up in the corporate hierarchy.