T-Mobile Settles FCC Cramming Charges for $90 Million
All carriers were doing this
Why is TM's settlement so high compared to much bigger ATT?
At the peak of this cramming, there were 100s of complaints on TM's own company sponsored user forum. I was surprised that TM allowed the victims to expose what was going on - on their own web site. The complaints dealt with CS reps not dealing with the problem once the victims realized they were being crammed.
At the peak of this cramming, there were 100s of complaints on TM's own company sponsored user forum. I was surprised that TM allowed the victims to expose what was going on - on their own web site. The complaints dealt with CS reps not dealing with the problem once the victims realized they were being crammed.
...
But some on these forums would have us believe this is all a case of customers trying to get something for free and that no wrong doing took place on the part of any of these carriers.
I guess they have found a platform for their disinformation on these forums, but justice moves forward despite them.
I can't speak to whether or not the fines are appropriate, but I am glad that none of the big four were let off the hook for this unethical practice.
I guess they have found a platform for their disinformation on these forums, but justice moves forward despite them.
I can't speak to whether or not the fines are appropriate, but I am glad that none of the big four were let off the hook for this unethical practice.
...
Zpike said:
But some on these forums would have us believe this is all a case of customers trying to get something for free and that no wrong doing took place on the part of any of these carriers.
I guess they have found a platform for their disinformation on these forums, but justice moves forward despite them.
I can't speak to whether or not the fines are appropriate, but I am glad that none of the big four were let off the hook for this unethical practice.
Speaking of disinformation: Find one person who said any of this.
Justice isn't really moving forward if there was no actual evidence of wrong doing. The only evidence presented so far at this point in all of these fines is a large number of ...
(continues)
...
But these cases aren't about in app purchases as you keep suggesting. You pretend to have the definitive understanding of these cases, but yet you don't even know what they are about. Have fun arguing your irrelevant points.
>>The only evidence presented so far at this point in all of these fines is a large number of complaints. In each case the FCC has pointed out that these fines are based solely on the number of complaints and not whether or not the complaints were really valid.
Really? Where did they say that? Evidence please.
>>The only evidence presented so far at this point in all of these fines is a large number of complaints. In each case the FCC has pointed out that these fines are based solely on the number of complaints and not whether or not the complaints were really valid.
Really? Where did they say that? Evidence please.
...
Zpike said:
But these cases aren't about in app purchases as you keep suggesting. You pretend to have the definitive understanding of these cases, but yet you don't even know what they are about. Have fun arguing your irrelevant points.
>>The only evidence presented so far at this point in all of these fines is a large number of complaints. In each case the FCC has pointed out that these fines are based solely on the number of complaints and not whether or not the complaints were really valid.
Really? Where did they say that? Evidence please.
You have zero evidence to support your claim and your response is to demand I prove something in your stead?
"In App purchases" are irrelevant. This is rea...
(continues)
...
cainthecavebear said:...
You have zero evidence to support your claim and your response is to demand I prove something in your stead?
"In App purchases" are irrelevant. This is really about 3rd party developers and in carrier billing.
Since we have already proved that this is all as a response to "cramming", I was assuming that you knew what that was. "Cramming" is always a result of 3rd party software. Therefore, unless you and/or the FCC have some sort of evidence that supports the idea that there was some sort of conspiracy between the carriers and the 3rd party app developers, then these fines are garbage.
The fact that the FCC is not going after the app developers for making so-called fraudulent software inst
(continues)
...
>>You have zero evidence to support your claim
You got that one backwards.
>> your response is to demand I prove something in your stead?
You're the one claiming these cases are about something quite different than that which is stated by the FCC. So, yes, the burden of proof is on you. And besides, I asked you for proof of your ridiculous assertions first. Since you refused, I'm simply asking again.
>>"In App purchases" are irrelevant.
Thanks for finally admitting that. Can you stop bringing them up now?
>>Since we have already proved that this is all as a response to "cramming"
Interesting choice of words there. No one needs to prove that the topic of a discussion is itself.
>> "Cramming" is always a result of 3rd...
(continues)
You got that one backwards.
>> your response is to demand I prove something in your stead?
You're the one claiming these cases are about something quite different than that which is stated by the FCC. So, yes, the burden of proof is on you. And besides, I asked you for proof of your ridiculous assertions first. Since you refused, I'm simply asking again.
>>"In App purchases" are irrelevant.
Thanks for finally admitting that. Can you stop bringing them up now?
>>Since we have already proved that this is all as a response to "cramming"
Interesting choice of words there. No one needs to prove that the topic of a discussion is itself.
>> "Cramming" is always a result of 3rd...
(continues)
...
Zpike said:
...
1. In the case of the carriers, The FCC and the FTC are working together on investigations to prove their guilt. No one is asking the carriers to prove anything. That's how it works.
...
Funny, but no, I don't have to prove their guilt. I simply must believe the evidence the FCC and the FTC have presented.
...
So are they still investigating or have they presented the evidence? Got a link where I can take a look at their evidence?
These lawsuits just seem like BS to me because I have been in cell phone sales for over 10 years now and have seen when customers come in with with both proper and improper charges on the bill. The majority of the time when the charges are valid (usu ...
(continues)
...
1. In the case of the carriers, The FCC and the FTC are working together on investigations to prove their guilt. No one is asking the carriers to prove anything. That's how it works.
...
Funny, but no, I don't have to prove their guilt. I simply must believe the evidence the FCC and the FTC have presented.
...
So are they still investigating or have they presented the evidence? Got a link where I can take a look at their evidence?
These lawsuits just seem like BS to me because I have been in cell phone sales for over 10 years now and have seen when customers come in with with both proper and improper charges on the bill. The majority of the time when the charges are valid (usu ...
(continues)
...
This website outlines much of what the FTC is doing about cramming. There's a lot of detail about how the cramming schemes worked. The FCC has a similar website, but there's not as much stuff out there. I honestly found the FTC website more informative, so I've included that link. But I can give you the FCC link as well if you want it.
http://www.ftc.gov/news-events/media-resources/mobil ... »
>>A big part of the problem is these kids that subscribe to these services and lie to their parents about it and they believe them. Had too many customers come in my store with "billing issues" and when I tell them the phone number X subscribed to X service their response is "oh no that's my son's line and he knows not to ...
(continues)
http://www.ftc.gov/news-events/media-resources/mobil ... »
>>A big part of the problem is these kids that subscribe to these services and lie to their parents about it and they believe them. Had too many customers come in my store with "billing issues" and when I tell them the phone number X subscribed to X service their response is "oh no that's my son's line and he knows not to ...
(continues)
...
Nice link. Just like the rest of your argument there is a lack of evidence of conspiracy to defraud. The FTC lawsuits are based soley on complaints not evidence of wrong doing. What you, the FCC, and the FTC are claiming is that customer complaints equate to facts and evidence. Keep in mind that a bill showing a charge does not equal fraudulent charge. Now, you can come back with your dead horse that you just won't stop beating, but save yourself the trouble. You, your batarangs, and your dead horse would probably be more at home on a FCC fansite.
...
>> The FTC lawsuits are based soley on complaints not evidence of wrong doing.
That's patently false. You obviously didn't bother to read anything on the site. You should stop with your disinformation and ad hominem. It isn't getting you anywhere.
That's patently false. You obviously didn't bother to read anything on the site. You should stop with your disinformation and ad hominem. It isn't getting you anywhere.
...
Provide your evidence. I read the site. I read the reports. The FCC report states exactly that its findings were bas3d on complaints. Provide your evidence or shut up. Ad hominem? Don't act like some dark avenger for justice and no one will call you on it. I know you like to promote yourself as some sort of bastion of truth and justice. You're not.
Anywho... If you would like to provide evidence, do so. All of this other garbage is your attempt to distract from the reality that you have no evidence and no proof. As has already been pointed out, you and your justice league have the burden of proof because it is you and the FCC making the accusations. What part of that don't you understand? Stop pretending that the accused has to prove inn...
(continues)
Anywho... If you would like to provide evidence, do so. All of this other garbage is your attempt to distract from the reality that you have no evidence and no proof. As has already been pointed out, you and your justice league have the burden of proof because it is you and the FCC making the accusations. What part of that don't you understand? Stop pretending that the accused has to prove inn...
(continues)
...
>>Provide your evidence.
I already did. Offer a refutation if you can.
>> I read the site. I read the reports. The FCC report states exactly that its findings were bas3d on complaints.
Oh then you should have no problem directing me to the exact document and quote where this is said. Since your reading comprehension is so low, I would prefer to read it for myself. Name the document and paragraph where your supposed quote can be found.
>>Ad hominem?
Yes.
>> Don't act like some dark avenger for justice and no one will call you on it.
See.
>> I know you like to promote yourself as some sort of bastion of truth and justice. You're not.
More ad hominem.
>>Anywho... If you would like to provide evidence, do so.
I ...
(continues)
I already did. Offer a refutation if you can.
>> I read the site. I read the reports. The FCC report states exactly that its findings were bas3d on complaints.
Oh then you should have no problem directing me to the exact document and quote where this is said. Since your reading comprehension is so low, I would prefer to read it for myself. Name the document and paragraph where your supposed quote can be found.
>>Ad hominem?
Yes.
>> Don't act like some dark avenger for justice and no one will call you on it.
See.
>> I know you like to promote yourself as some sort of bastion of truth and justice. You're not.
More ad hominem.
>>Anywho... If you would like to provide evidence, do so.
I ...
(continues)
...
You offered no evidence. Claiming you agree with the FCC is not evidence. Quit lying. Quit pretending you are some victim of ad hominem attacks. Quit pretending you are doing anything besides harassing people who don't agree with you.
...
Zpike said:
*Rolls eyes*
*Yawns*
*Moves along*
I get it now.
"Ad hominem" means no one called you names.
"Strawman" means someone used your stated opinion against you.
"Cramming" doesn't mean what the FCC and FTC says it means, it falls only in your narrow definition.
And now "moves along" means continues to badger, troll and harass.
It's like you have the internet troll dictionary at your desk there.
On the bright side, at least you are (hopefully) learning that it is pointless to cram your uneducated, biased, and baseless opinion on others(even if you are still insistant on getting in the last word).
...
Am I the only one who noticed he is claiming he doesn't have to provide facts, evidence or proof because he agrees with the FCC and FTC who have not provided any evidence?
I am the first guy on the planet to stand up for people when they get screwed over but this guy's total disregard of facts or evidence to support his crusade against any company that makes more than he does is bordering on obsurd.
I fully expect this cat to picket funerals of wireless employees ala Westborough Baptist Church.
I am the first guy on the planet to stand up for people when they get screwed over but this guy's total disregard of facts or evidence to support his crusade against any company that makes more than he does is bordering on obsurd.
I fully expect this cat to picket funerals of wireless employees ala Westborough Baptist Church.
...
>>Am I the only one who noticed he is claiming he doesn't have to provide facts, evidence or proof because he agrees with the FCC and FTC who have not provided any evidence?
Actually, I HAVE done so. And the FTC and FCC DO have evidence.
Am I the only one who noticed that you are trying to alter reality and have refused countless requests to prove your bizarre interpretation of the facts?
>>I am the first guy on the planet to stand up for people when they get screwed over
You seem to be sitting your hands right now.
>>but this guy's total disregard of facts or evidence to support
It is you who have presented no evidence, not me.
>>his crusade against any company that makes more than he does is bordering on obsurd.
H...
(continues)
Actually, I HAVE done so. And the FTC and FCC DO have evidence.
Am I the only one who noticed that you are trying to alter reality and have refused countless requests to prove your bizarre interpretation of the facts?
>>I am the first guy on the planet to stand up for people when they get screwed over
You seem to be sitting your hands right now.
>>but this guy's total disregard of facts or evidence to support
It is you who have presented no evidence, not me.
>>his crusade against any company that makes more than he does is bordering on obsurd.
H...
(continues)
...
So, your argument is "I know you are but what am I?" ? Did I walk in on a Twilight Zone episode? Lol. How funny.
Just so we avoid you having a mental breakdown over something on a forum, let's just agree you and I will never agree on this so there is no need for you to shove your opinion on me anymore. Thanks.
Just so we avoid you having a mental breakdown over something on a forum, let's just agree you and I will never agree on this so there is no need for you to shove your opinion on me anymore. Thanks.
...
Not one example of ad hominem in my post actually. No name calling. You would need to provide an argument before you can claim I am running away from anything. Odd that you would claim I am running away when I make a statement to just let it die. More proof that you are only here to fight and beat dead horses. Ad hominem? More like ad nauseum.
...
No. You are wrong. Get over it. If you still want to argue your painfully obvious misconceptions and uninformed notions of reality, go find a concrete wall to debate. It is becoming rather obvious that your opinion matters more than reality or facts. I will stick to reality and facts. You stick to spandex and dark justice, Batman.
...
>>No. You are wrong. Get over it.
Haha. Nice refutation of the facts there. Label me as wrong rather than refute them.
>>Get over it. If you still want to argue your painfully obvious misconceptions and uninformed notions of reality, go find a concrete wall to debate.
The silence of a wall would be preferable to your ignorant lies.
>> It is becoming rather obvious that your opinion matters more than reality or facts.
Right, because you know I'm presenting facts and you're presenting unfounded opinions. You are yet to produce one single piece of proof of anything you have said other than your own weak word. I have asked you over and over to back up your statements with proof and instead you dismiss those requests and simply ...
(continues)
Haha. Nice refutation of the facts there. Label me as wrong rather than refute them.
>>Get over it. If you still want to argue your painfully obvious misconceptions and uninformed notions of reality, go find a concrete wall to debate.
The silence of a wall would be preferable to your ignorant lies.
>> It is becoming rather obvious that your opinion matters more than reality or facts.
Right, because you know I'm presenting facts and you're presenting unfounded opinions. You are yet to produce one single piece of proof of anything you have said other than your own weak word. I have asked you over and over to back up your statements with proof and instead you dismiss those requests and simply ...
(continues)
...
It's not my fault your arguments are reduced to that. Show some maturity and make a good argument.
...
You have no argument. You have nothing but a ridiculous claim of superiority. Keep beating that dead horse. I've said my arguments which you casually dismiss as uneducated. You don't like my opiniin? Kick rocks then.
...
*Snores while sleeping*
*Wakes up suddenly*
What you're still here?
*Falls back to sleep*
*Wakes up suddenly*
What you're still here?
*Falls back to sleep*
...
Speaking of ad hominem, ignorant lies? How painfully unclever of you to disguise your own ad hominem attacks. As far as I can tell, that is your entire playbook- Ignorant lies and verbal beratings. You have yet to present even one fact even after repeated requests fro,more than just myself and each time your response is "You first". Yeah, you go man. You do the Avengers proud.
...
>>Speaking of ad hominem, ignorant lies?
Of which of my statements are you speaking?
>>How painfully unclever of you to disguise your own ad hominem attacks.
Which ones would those be?
>>As far as I can tell, that is your entire playbook- Ignorant lies and verbal beratings.
You really get a kick out of doing something and then accusing me of it, don't you. Have fun with that.
>>You have yet to present even one fact
That is a lie. I have presented a plenty of facts which you have ignored. Furthermore, you dismissed the entire FTC website with absolutely no explanation.
>>even after repeated requests fro,more than just myself
The only other person who asked me for anything was Brad K. I gave him what he asked for ...
(continues)
Of which of my statements are you speaking?
>>How painfully unclever of you to disguise your own ad hominem attacks.
Which ones would those be?
>>As far as I can tell, that is your entire playbook- Ignorant lies and verbal beratings.
You really get a kick out of doing something and then accusing me of it, don't you. Have fun with that.
>>You have yet to present even one fact
That is a lie. I have presented a plenty of facts which you have ignored. Furthermore, you dismissed the entire FTC website with absolutely no explanation.
>>even after repeated requests fro,more than just myself
The only other person who asked me for anything was Brad K. I gave him what he asked for ...
(continues)
...
Zpike said:
>>Speaking of ad hominem, ignorant lies?
Of which of my statements are you speaking?
Every statement where you claimed I was a liar and uneducated.
>>How painfully unclever of you to disguise your own ad hominem attacks.
Which ones would those be?
See above.
>>As far as I can tell, that is your entire playbook- Ignorant lies and verbal beratings.
You really get a kick out of doing something and then accusing me of it, don't you. Have fun with that.
You are the only one doing that and you seem to be having lots of fun doing it.
>>You have yet to present even one fact...
That is a lie. I have presented a plenty
(continues)
...
Edit: This was supposed to be a direct reply to Zpike's last reply, not the original post.
To start, I'm going to throw this out here since there seems to be some arguments about what cramming is. This is directly from the FTC site:
"Cramming happens when a company uses your mobile or landline phone bill like a credit card, and adds a charge for services like trivia, ringtones, daily horoscopes or love tips to your bill that you didn’t agree to or use. The most common dollar amount for a cramming charge is $9.99, a relatively small amount which is easy to overlook. Some charges sound like larger fees you do owe, making it tough to pick out the phony charges, especially if your mobile phone bill varies month to month."
For there...
(continues)
To start, I'm going to throw this out here since there seems to be some arguments about what cramming is. This is directly from the FTC site:
"Cramming happens when a company uses your mobile or landline phone bill like a credit card, and adds a charge for services like trivia, ringtones, daily horoscopes or love tips to your bill that you didn’t agree to or use. The most common dollar amount for a cramming charge is $9.99, a relatively small amount which is easy to overlook. Some charges sound like larger fees you do owe, making it tough to pick out the phony charges, especially if your mobile phone bill varies month to month."
For there...
(continues)
...
Thanks, for the more meaningful and less contentious dialogue. I find that real understanding happens under such circumstances.
>>To start, I'm going to throw this out here since there seems to be some arguments about what cramming is. This is directly from the FTC site:
Just an FYI, your following quote was one of the key pieces I used when determining what the FCC meant by cramming. I find your concluding thoughts interesting, but I don't agree with them entirely. I'll explain why later.
>>Cramming happens when a company uses your mobile or landline phone bill like a credit card, and adds a charge for services like trivia, ringtones, daily horoscopes or love tips to your bill that you didn’t agree to or use.
I wanted to point o...
(continues)
>>To start, I'm going to throw this out here since there seems to be some arguments about what cramming is. This is directly from the FTC site:
Just an FYI, your following quote was one of the key pieces I used when determining what the FCC meant by cramming. I find your concluding thoughts interesting, but I don't agree with them entirely. I'll explain why later.
>>Cramming happens when a company uses your mobile or landline phone bill like a credit card, and adds a charge for services like trivia, ringtones, daily horoscopes or love tips to your bill that you didn’t agree to or use.
I wanted to point o...
(continues)
...
I just don't think the problem is as big as it's made out to be. I know there are some invalid charges on some customers bills because I've seen it and gotten it taken care of several times over my years here. But I believe the vast vast majority of these cramming complaints are valid charges that the customer doesn't want to pay.
...
>>But I believe the vast vast majority of these cramming complaints are valid charges that the customer doesn't want to pay.
Unfortunately, the FCC and FTC don't see it that way. And they have investigated the actual cases much more thoroughly than you or I. I don't know how they arrived at the fines and can't speak to whether or not the actual amounts were warranted. But I do think it is clear that to some extent the carriers all willingly participated in cramming scams because they were profitable, hard to notice, and hard to dispute.
Furthermore, I am sure that you are honest and upstanding in your role at whichever call center you work in. However, I've been in IT for a long time and have some prior experience in a call center (tho...
(continues)
Unfortunately, the FCC and FTC don't see it that way. And they have investigated the actual cases much more thoroughly than you or I. I don't know how they arrived at the fines and can't speak to whether or not the actual amounts were warranted. But I do think it is clear that to some extent the carriers all willingly participated in cramming scams because they were profitable, hard to notice, and hard to dispute.
Furthermore, I am sure that you are honest and upstanding in your role at whichever call center you work in. However, I've been in IT for a long time and have some prior experience in a call center (tho...
(continues)
...
Don't work in a call center, or directly for a carrier for that matter. Work in store for a US Cellular Agent location, we are privately owned so I try and do good by our customers so they come back to us rather than go to a corporate location. However, I do stand my ground very firmly when a customer is trying to argue a valid charge, not trying to set a prescient of he who whines the loudest gets his way.
Maybe I'm just lucky that US Cellular doesn't do cramming but the ratio I see of valid charges vs invalid charges when customers are questioning their bill makes me believe that most of these complaints are just people whining til they get their way because it's worked for them too many times in the past. There are too many places...
(continues)
Maybe I'm just lucky that US Cellular doesn't do cramming but the ratio I see of valid charges vs invalid charges when customers are questioning their bill makes me believe that most of these complaints are just people whining til they get their way because it's worked for them too many times in the past. There are too many places...
(continues)
...
>>Don't work in a call center, or directly for a carrier for that matter. Work in store for a US Cellular Agent location, we are privately owned so I try and do good by our customers so they come back to us rather than go to a corporate location.
Oh sorry, I guess I misunderstood. I ran a third-party cellphone store for two years several years ago. We offered contract services with Sprint, T-mobile, and AT&T. We also sold a plethora of MVNO services across all four major carriers. In addition, we had pre-paid home phone service and pre-paid debit and credit cards.
It was a lot of work and treating your customers right was the only way to keep one. I spent many hours of my day arguing with Sprint, Precash, and Budget Phone about their...
(continues)
Oh sorry, I guess I misunderstood. I ran a third-party cellphone store for two years several years ago. We offered contract services with Sprint, T-mobile, and AT&T. We also sold a plethora of MVNO services across all four major carriers. In addition, we had pre-paid home phone service and pre-paid debit and credit cards.
It was a lot of work and treating your customers right was the only way to keep one. I spent many hours of my day arguing with Sprint, Precash, and Budget Phone about their...
(continues)
...
He seems to change his argument depending on who he is talking to.
Here, he admits what cramming is yet claims in the post you responded to that it is something else entirely.
https://www.phonescoop.com/articles/discuss.php?fm=m ... »
See what I am seeing? He is more interested in arguing than being correct. He will change his argument at the drop of a hat in some attempt to be seen as being correct about somethng. At this point I do not believ...
(continues)
Here, he admits what cramming is yet claims in the post you responded to that it is something else entirely.
https://www.phonescoop.com/articles/discuss.php?fm=m ... »
But by definition the term cramming applies to third party charges. You're using the word outside of its legal meaning while talking about its legal ramifications. There may be some other legal term for what you're talking about, but its not cramming.
See what I am seeing? He is more interested in arguing than being correct. He will change his argument at the drop of a hat in some attempt to be seen as being correct about somethng. At this point I do not believ...
(continues)
...
I'm thinking it's more that he's distinguishing between third-party APPS (such as something you would download from the play store) vs third-party SERVICES (such as text in joke/ringtone). Both can result in charges added to your bill and as an in-store, rep when a customer is arguing those charges you have to deal with it the same way so to me they are the same.
...
>>I'm thinking it's more that he's distinguishing between third-party APPS (such as something you would download from the play store) vs third-party SERVICES (such as text in joke/ringtone).
That's exactly the distinction I am making, and I have made it several times.
>>Both can result in charges added to your bill and as an in-store, rep when a customer is arguing those charges you have to deal with it the same way so to me they are the same.
And I can see why that would be the case. And perhaps that is the source of some of the confusion. However, the differences do have some legal bearing in this case, as the way you get billed for one and the way you get billed for the other is quite different. Arguments some of you have been ma...
(continues)
That's exactly the distinction I am making, and I have made it several times.
>>Both can result in charges added to your bill and as an in-store, rep when a customer is arguing those charges you have to deal with it the same way so to me they are the same.
And I can see why that would be the case. And perhaps that is the source of some of the confusion. However, the differences do have some legal bearing in this case, as the way you get billed for one and the way you get billed for the other is quite different. Arguments some of you have been ma...
(continues)
...
One can only think him insincere at this point.
"I know you are but what am I" lol
You distinction is irrelevant. When you sign up for those services, you get a message detailing the charges you will get on your bill. The correct argument remains the same. People are responsible for their own actions. The reason I used inapp purchasing is because it is the same principal. This whole sham of a debate is a joke.
...
>>"I know you are but what am I" lol
I'm not sure. Maybe PeeWee Herman. You're certainly just as irritating.
>>You distinction is irrelevant.
Hardly.
>>When you sign up for those services, you get a message detailing the charges you will get on your bill.
In many cases you don't. You see that's what these cramming cases are all about. I asked you to educate yourself on the topic very early in the conversation. It would have been most helpful if you had actually done so, instead of flat out refusing.
>>The correct argument remains the same.
Which is what?
>>People are responsible for their own actions.
So are corporations, or hadn't you heard?
>> The reason I used inapp purchasing is because it is the same prin...
(continues)
I'm not sure. Maybe PeeWee Herman. You're certainly just as irritating.
>>You distinction is irrelevant.
Hardly.
>>When you sign up for those services, you get a message detailing the charges you will get on your bill.
In many cases you don't. You see that's what these cramming cases are all about. I asked you to educate yourself on the topic very early in the conversation. It would have been most helpful if you had actually done so, instead of flat out refusing.
>>The correct argument remains the same.
Which is what?
>>People are responsible for their own actions.
So are corporations, or hadn't you heard?
>> The reason I used inapp purchasing is because it is the same prin...
(continues)
...
Ad hominem attacks again?
Your constant whining and crying about how corporations are all bad people and people are not responsible for their own actions is probably the most immature and uneducated argument anyone can make. I know perfectly what cramming is. Everyone here does. Speaking of cramming, the most prevailent form of cramming I am seeing is how you cram you opinion down everyone's throat and then throw hissy fit tantrums when someone disagrees with you. Grow up. Not everyone is going to agree with you and so far most of the responses to your position I have seen here all disagree with yours. You might badger and harass those people into submission but I won't put up with it.
Your constant whining and crying about how corporations are all bad people and people are not responsible for their own actions is probably the most immature and uneducated argument anyone can make. I know perfectly what cramming is. Everyone here does. Speaking of cramming, the most prevailent form of cramming I am seeing is how you cram you opinion down everyone's throat and then throw hissy fit tantrums when someone disagrees with you. Grow up. Not everyone is going to agree with you and so far most of the responses to your position I have seen here all disagree with yours. You might badger and harass those people into submission but I won't put up with it.
...
>>Here, he admits what cramming is yet claims in the post you responded to that it is something else entirely.
I have done no such thing. I have always maintained that cramming applied to third party charges. Just because I have pointed out that this case doesn't involve in-app purchases doesn't mean I don't think third party charges apply. There are other third party charges, after all. There is no contradiction. This is another straw man.
>>See what I am seeing? He is more interested in arguing than being correct.
No, that's you actually, as evidenced by your dismissal of practically every point I make and your negligence to provide evidence of your points despite numerous requests for said evidence.
>>He will change his argum...
(continues)
I have done no such thing. I have always maintained that cramming applied to third party charges. Just because I have pointed out that this case doesn't involve in-app purchases doesn't mean I don't think third party charges apply. There are other third party charges, after all. There is no contradiction. This is another straw man.
>>See what I am seeing? He is more interested in arguing than being correct.
No, that's you actually, as evidenced by your dismissal of practically every point I make and your negligence to provide evidence of your points despite numerous requests for said evidence.
>>He will change his argum...
(continues)
...
Please learn what strawman actually means before you use the term again. Try using a different sentence while you'rr at it. It's getting to the point where I can google the terms "ad hominem, strawman, justice, and FCC" and it will pull up your phonescoop profile.
Enjoy your weird little head game. I'm good.
Enjoy your weird little head game. I'm good.
...
>>Please learn what strawman actually means before you use the term again.
I know exactly what it means. You hear it so much because you do it so much. If you stopped with the straw man arguments, I would stop pointing them out.
>>Try using a different sentence while you'rr at it.
If the shoe fits...
>>It's getting to the point where I can google the terms "ad hominem, strawman, justice, and FCC" and it will pull up your phonescoop profile.
Enjoy your weird little head game. I'm good.
More ad hominem ad nauseam.
I know exactly what it means. You hear it so much because you do it so much. If you stopped with the straw man arguments, I would stop pointing them out.
>>Try using a different sentence while you'rr at it.
If the shoe fits...
>>It's getting to the point where I can google the terms "ad hominem, strawman, justice, and FCC" and it will pull up your phonescoop profile.
Enjoy your weird little head game. I'm good.
More ad hominem ad nauseam.
...
This forum is closed.
