Originally Posted by Forkbeard

There's not one word in what I posted that is untrue, and I provided the context with a link.



Can you please specify what is "the law" you are obeying here? Many people in the other thread speculate that it has something to do with EU VAT rules, but there has never been any DDFCash confirmation of that claim. What's more, in other places on the web there is extensive discussion of the EU VAT rules as they apply to overseas affiliates, and the consensus is that no invoice from overseas affiliates is required, or if an invoice is required, it can be auto-generated by the party requiring the invoice. American affiliates who deal with many large and professional Euro outfits (not "in the dark") confirm that withholding payments to affiliates who do not invoice is not something anyone else is doing. That calls DDFCAsh's claims into question, as I am sure you can understand. If you would specify in a few sentences precisely what law you think requires this procedure, it would go a long way toward restoring your company's public credibility. We might agree or disagree, but it would undermine the popular theory that you're simply looking for a way to avoid payments.



That's good news. If Paul had made such a promise back in December, we wouldn't be having this conversation now. It's a pity he did not. He allowed us all to continue believing that DDFCash would simply ignore accounts with pending payments until affiliates spontaneously generated an invoice.

This problem has never been about the invoice as much as it has been about the perception that DDFCash was abandoning its obligation to pay affiliates without demand. If you are initiating payment processes by any means when payment is due, that pretty much solves the problem.




If you review the other thread, you'll see that Paul promised to provide that information to all affiliates, not just "affiliates with pending payment". That never happened. Once again, if that commitment had been kept, you and I would not be having this conversation.

Thanks for your responses here. They do help. I find your efforts to dismiss my concerns as not true and "out of context" to be disappointing and disingenuous, but of course they are well within the rough standards of discourse here at GFY.