gaby

So andy,

assuming not a scamming intend

Facts (if entities were not linked somehow)
CSATM - generates revenue (the fees for using it)
XLOtwo - does not generate revenue (but the obligation to use CSATM helps CSATM generate revenue).
CSATM - can be used by people not participating in XLOtwo just like all other Digital Currencies.

Unique Situation
XLOtwo and CSATM are both owned by the same person.


This situation adds to the complexity..

Now the survival of XLOtwo completely resides on the success of CSATM with people outside the XLOtwo program, because the fees held by the XLOtwo participants cannot be used to pay interest on their deposits.

So it still remains that XLOtwo is a ponzi by definition because on its own it cannot generate revenue.

XLOtwo cannot not exist (in a non scam form) before CSATM is widely accepted and used by merchants - a thus generating profit that can be used to pay interest on the XLOtwo deposits.

Claiming that the fees withheld from the deposits to XLOtwo can be used to pay interest on the same deposits is foolish.

regards

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

gaby

And since i am at it..

about csatm

Supposedly the system is completely secured because noone knows what name i have used for my location ... but my location is generated by your system ! I am supposed to just trust you that you do not store the location that i create through your own interface ?

What is my security that you do not store all locations created and that one day you will not move all assets held in them to another one of you own ?

you are not a registered company, so how can i be sure of your intentions ?

regards

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Andy

I'm confused, why can the fees not be used? Because you say so?

If a spend generates a fee within a separate entity then by definition it generates revenue. Doesn;t matter whether your opinion is that this does not matter, it actually does generate revenue.

Why? Could you elaborate? You saying it is so does not make it so. It seems that the arguments against the program are based in "It is foolish".

I will say you have come closest to asking objective questions.

Now your other post

Your location is not generated by the system. A suggested location is generated because otherwise people would be more tempted to use something that IS unsecure. All you need to do is change one or two letters and it is your own.

OK Let's assume for a moment that I somehow have access to the locations. I do not btw.

What am I going to do with the funds? I cannot withdraw them. I have to go through an exchanger. If all of a sudden people were complaining about losing funds and then I was trying to remove funds, doncha thnk that the exchangers would get a hold of that and decide that I was doing something rather bad and STOP it?

Their business is based on their reputation. They have no interest in dealing with some dickhead who is seeking to rip people off.

This layer of protection also protects your funds from any government intervention as there is no central location of funds that can be targeted and frozen.

sharonsopinion

So why are they dealing with you? LOL

What Gaby is saying is that you are not using the spends in XLOtwo to generate revenue. So, XLOtwo is a ponzi, because the funds are only used to line your pockets and payout ad packs that mature prior to you coming up with excuses for not paying anymore.

You have a separate entity that generates revenue in the way of fees all on its own. Assuming CSatm doesn't take off and is only used for XLOtwo and whatever other scams you might run. The fees generated are from the XLOtwo members. So, you're still taking new money to pay out old money. Still assuming it is only used by your members, then the fees are not enough to pay out the unrealistic ROI on the ad packs.

IF (and that is a huge IF) CSatm is used by others outside of your scams, then it is still a separate entity. You're still not taking the XLOtwo deposits and turning them into profit, then paying out the profit. So, XLOtwo is a ponzi, even if you supplement the pool of funds for payouts from the CSatm fees.

Here is a test: If one person pays the fees to get $1,000 into XLOtwo, purchases $1,000 worth of ad packs and no one else spends into XLOtwo, how do you generate $500 to pay the person $1500 in 75 days? He did not pay $500 in fees and no one else spent into the program. In other words can a single ad pack be turned into 150% in 75 days all on its own? If your answer has anything to do with needing others spending, then you are running a ponzi! What don't you get?!?

Several people are trying hard to explain it to you, however you seem to be stuck on calling all of our explanations "foolish." Just because you call them foolish, doesn't make them so. We're trying to tell you that what you are doing is illegal and your responses are full of BS. You still haven't answered my question. Did you read my Pond Scum article?

The reason I did not bring up the privacy and security previously is that I seriously doubt it, too. Scammers are well known to lie. So, I do not believe you when you say that you don't store the information somewhere.

In case there is anyone reading this that is buying into Andy's brainwashing techniques, think again and just say NO!

JMO,
Sharon

PS To Cashflow: Hmmmm, my ex meets several of those definitions! ROFL

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Good Behavior = Good Results; Bad Behavior = Bad Results!

gaby

my answers & questions in red

regards

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Andy

Gaby I will not copy and paste otherwise the post will be bigger than Ben Hur. I will try and address your points - if I miss any let me know.

The general thrust seems to be what if no one else uses CSATM.

Well as far as I am concerned that is not good. The fees are the main source of revenue.

Now let us also remember the risk level here. The people in the program are aware of the risk. Accepting risk does not make something a scam it makes it a risk. So my role is to facilitate the ATM acceptance. And- despite the fact that several here have chosen not to look at it and have prejudged it, I know the concept is valid.

I think you will find it begins to get more acceptance over the next few weeks. Of course it might get acceptance in places that you do not see, but there are a lot of areas that are quite happy to have the privacy benefits of the ATM. And I spend more time dealing with those people

The issue seems to be "but what if it does not work". You and I could sit around and discuss that for days and weeks. We could also dicuss what if it does work. There are lots of issues surrounding e-currencies today. What if e-gold loses? There are some who say that right now your gold in e-gold is worthless. What if that comes to be true?

Seems to me that solutions need to be worked on now rather than later and that is what I am doing.

Now regarding the admin running with the funds. Firstly I do not have the locations. Whether or not you accept that is up to you, but the point of the system is privacy. There can be no storage of locations. That would defeat up front the point of the system and render it vunerable.

So it is a moot point. On so many levels your question stops right there, because it cannot happen. But I will proceed for the sake of clarification

Exchangers comply with all KYC and AML guidelines. That is a safety. Your assets are held not by a central location but by various people, and those people are ones of your own choosing.

The Exchangers are not stupid, and I suggest that "moving fast" would throw up cautions.

You might remeber Osgold, you might remember evocash. Funds went to a central location and the admin of that program could just help themselves. this is not the case in the case of the ATM.

The storage of assets at globally diverse locations is in fact the subject of much discussion in e-currency circles. The freezing of e-golds' bank accounts and so on has had a deliterious effect on many - and people are looking for solutions. CSATM is such a solution.

So lets say you exchange through Solid Trust. Solid Trust still have your Solid Trust Funds. If fraud arises, they (an indepenant third party) still HAVE your Solid Trust Funds. It is not an escrow service but could be likened to one.

I cannot go running to STP and say hey I want those STP funds.

Let me know if I have addressed your post to your satisfaction.

lobstroid

The point is being missed here - this isn't about the gimmick payment processing - it's about the scam ponzi that will end up lining "Andy"s pockets and losing a lot of people's money. Whether or not the "government" can see how much money you are moving around is moot - if they want to see it, they will either outlaw the gimmick or hack it. All of your communications over the 'net are being watched and may be recorded at any time the NSA wishes to (or is tasked to) do so. All they need do is set the parameters to "flag" and record your 'net traffic by keyword or phrase.

The gimmick, by the way, might "protect" you from the Admin stealing your money while the money is in the gimmick system, but once you have transferred that money to the Admin's gimmick "location" there is NOTHING to stop him from depositing it into an exchanger account and then withdrawing it from that account to a phony "investment" account and then closing that account out when the ponzi starts to fail. Processors ("exchangers") can be snookered by a crook too, they (the processors) are human. Furthermore,why should you pay an extra fee and go through the hassle of the CSATM process if you trust the Admin and have nothing to hide from your "government"?

I certainly am not going to trust anyone who is willing to violate their own privacy policy (if the XLO Privacy Policy was the standard "boilerplate", member info was supposed to be safe from everyone except law enforcement and court orders) by selling my name, email address and who knows what other information may have been compiled (spends, payouts etc.etc.)!

No, the matter at hand is the scam ponzi being smokescreened by all this talk of the grand gimmick processing method. If you don't want something examined, divert attention from it - which is exactly what "Andy" is doing. Wake up and smell the fiduciary irresponsibility and focus on the fact of the scam - not the gimmick masking it.

All you're going to get from "Andy" is more diversionary tactics designed to hornswoggle you into forgetting his record and accepting his latest scam ponzi as a "real" opportunity.

I say stop his drivel about the "processor" gimmick in this thread - move it to the Processors section and leave this scam right here - in the scam section!

Lobstroid Crustacean MCMLII

__________________
AAAAARRRRGGGH!

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Andy

I was asked a question and I was providing an answer.

If you cannot handle that then I suggest you do not read the thread. But to suggest that by answering an enquiry I am providing a smokescreen is a little over the top. Your position is clear. Does this mean that no one else is allowed to ask anything?

The point about the database being sold has been handled many times over. The owner of the program is reponsible for the privacy policy. The new owner is reponsible for the privacy policy. There is nothing in violation in the terms of service. The information contained in the program remained IN the program.

What do you think happens when a new owner buys a business? Are they not allowed access to the records?

However I am aware that this is lost on many people and do not have any desire to argue it out. It is a smokescreen provided by those who have not researched the program because of their biases.

lobstroid

You can maintain you're not running a ponzi all you wish to, it isn't going to change the fact that XLO2 is a ponzi until you provide proof that there are investments or other "outside" income streams that support the rebates WITHOUT using member's upgrade money to directly pay those rebates. Your processor gimmick fees are NOT going to pay those rebates in full - so, if your scam is not a scam (ponzi) where is the money coming from?

A responsible answer to the questions about your processor gimmick would be to ask the questioners to move the gimmick discussion to the Processor section if you do not wish to have it considered a scam like your ponzi is.

Most all "privacy policies" clearly state that a member's information will not be sold, rented or otherwise shared with anyone except as required by law. If yours did not state that then I suppose that you got away with yet another ethically shaky act.

Your record speaks for itself - let the buyer beware.

Further deponent sayeth naught, because it's a waste of time and bandwidth attempting to get a straight answer out you about XLO2 - all you do is try to divert with your unnecessary (to an honest person) processing gimmick.

Have whatever sort of day you decide to.

Lobstroid Crustacean MCMLII

__________________
AAAAARRRRGGGH!

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

longfellaz

So how does the ponzi in your sig earn the money to pay.

Is it by you having to spend back half in order to get paid??

Or maybe the subscription fee??

They're both incomes from members that are used to pay other members.

I guess that's a different story since you're the one pimping it.