Anybody else getting PM SPAM from CYNDIE?

[jek187]

[ QUOTE ]
What would jek do? Every other post a viscious attack. No thanks. I think most people hold themselves to a much higher standard.

[/ QUOTE ]

I harldy think everyone who is too meek to say anything about Cyndie's tactics are holding themselves to a higher standard.

[ QUOTE ]
I guess she could start putting her site in her signature with no complaints from you though, right?

[/ QUOTE ]

You are right. She's had it in there for awhile now, and have I complained?

[Jim Easton]

[ QUOTE ]
I am not using it to "punt my own site or product for my own financial gain."

[/ QUOTE ]

This claim borders on laughable.

[ QUOTE ]
I don't state what services or content are on my site in my sig, just that I'm associated w/BW.com

[/ QUOTE ]

All the more reason for them to go to the site to find out what it is.

[ QUOTE ]
IMO, if you wanted to make an example of someone who spams in their sig,

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not trying to make an example of someone who spams their sig, I'm making an example of someone who vehemently
condemns spamming while doing it himself.

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think my sig fits any definition of spam.

[/ QUOTE ]

At least 2 of us disagree with you.

[Jim Easton]

[ QUOTE ]
I harldy think everyone who is too meek to say anything about Cyndie's tactics are holding themselves to a higher standard.


[/ QUOTE ]

Those who do not make it their life's mission to destroy another person are not meek, they are rational.

[ QUOTE ]
You are right. She's had it in there for awhile now, and have I complained?

[/ QUOTE ]

You certainly won't complain now.

[pokerlover]

[ QUOTE ]
adamantly and vociferously

[/ QUOTE ]

After that you lost me

[jek187]

Jim,

My sig is a simple tag stating my affiliation with my site so people know what my angle is. This is also per Mat's rules. If you want to try and make the shaky case that my sig is spam, fine. That is something that should probably be brought up with Mat. If he ever says it's inappropriate, it'll go down the moment he says so.

Trying to make me look like some sort of hypocrite because I follow the rules and lambast those who don't, is despicable. Higher standards my ass.

[Jim Easton]

[ QUOTE ]
This is also per Mat's rules.

[/ QUOTE ]

Mike and I both noted that.

[ QUOTE ]
If you want to try and make the shaky case that my sig is spam, fine.

[/ QUOTE ]

I asked the question and Mike said, yes, it is spam.

[ QUOTE ]
Trying to make me look like some sort of hypocrite because I follow the rules and lambast those who don't, is despicable.

[/ QUOTE ]

A highly respected, independent 3rd party said your signature is spam. I merely went with his opinion.

[ QUOTE ]
Higher standards my ass.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good one, Spamboy.

[jek187]

The point here is that even if my sig is spam, it's not only allowed, but required.

I highly doubt Cyndie can say the same for her definite and blatant spam.

Do you really think that these 2 things are one and the same?

[jek187]

[ QUOTE ]
Those who do not make it their life's mission to destroy another person are not meek, they are rational.

[/ QUOTE ]

She is reaping seeds she has sown. To let her skate off consequences free for the [censored] she has pulled, should be criminal. You can try and paint me as the bad guy all you want, but she brought this on herself.

[ QUOTE ]
You certainly won't complain now.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yay! Score one for the great Jim Easton. He stopped me from complaining about something that I wasn't going to complain about anyways.

[Jim Easton]

[ QUOTE ]
Score one for the great Jim Easton. He stopped me from complaining about something that I wasn't going to complain about anyways.

[/ QUOTE ]

I claimed no credit.

[Terry]

I think the difference here is that jek’s sig, while it certainly has promotional value for his site, is also a “required” disclaimer showing his involvement, so that anyone reading his posts about his site can take any advice he gives with a grain of salt. Jek makes mostly informative posts about things other than his site.

Cyndie/Mary, on the other hand, makes purely self-promoting posts, and attempts to hide her involvement to deceive readers into believing that she will not profit from them. She makes no posts that inform anyone about anything that does not involve profit for her (except for nonsense drivel... I think pokerwhore had it right about her just padding her numbers to impress the newcomers.)

Even though I am strongly against all affiliate programs, I see a big difference between these two people. Jek is a regular poster who also happens to run an affiliate site. Cyndie is an aggressive spammer who uses this forum only to further her own monetary interests, who does so in a deceptive manner, and who refuses to take responsibility for her actions, repeatedly trying to “weasel word” her way out.