TranceaddicT

3 ms·

1.
by TranceaddicT 15y ago
He saw a flaw and abused it and publicized it for others to abuse for a while BEFORE he announced it to the world. Had he announced he had found a flaw (or better, contacted Jonathan that there was a flaw) his altruism would be real. And,
2.
by TranceaddicT 15y ago
<I don't think that the people who put money on the card have any claim to determine how the money is used.> Yes, they do. When any funds were contributed the presumptive use was that the funds were to help someone down the line ge
3.
by TranceaddicT 15y ago
Your argument with the dollars fails on two accounts. First, the "take a penny/leave a penny" concept has one MAJOR security guard that this experiment doesn't have ... a monitor. That monitor being a sales clerk. The second a MAJOR secu
4.
by TranceaddicT 15y ago
He has disabled commenting on the post. And, as such, now no one can even view the comments. He puts himself up on a pedestal only to be a fascist when criticized.
5.
by TranceaddicT 15y ago
Actually, the legality covering this issue is WIRE FRAUD.
6.
by TranceaddicT 15y ago
The unfortunate thing about structuring the card in that manner is that: 1) it's not the way the card is programmed to work and 2)the experiment was to provide a vehicle for those who can't to benefit from those who can. The moment the ind
7.
by TranceaddicT 15y ago
Too bad the altruism was a ruse.
8.
by TranceaddicT 15y ago
Guess Sam couldn't handle the heat. He cutoff commenting on his G+ thread. Hmmm, could he finally be realizing that he messed up and actually did wire fraud and stole money?