NATS vs Xclusivecash - GoFuckYourself.com

spacedog · 08-24-2006, 09:22 PM

there's just one thing I don't understand?

something extremely peculiar about the thread that started this, & I just realized something about it .. I need link to that thread to read it again before I say what's on my mind,,..

anyway, you people read the thread.. go read the part about somebody noticing discrepancies between ccbill stats & the stats in nats admin.. go read that part & think about that for a few minutes..

PMdave · 08-24-2006, 09:40 PM

Seems like it's more NATS fault than anything else to me. Since there is no access to the source code how can there be discrepancies? NATS pulls the data from the billers. Program owner can't just program in a little feature to only pull 80% of the stats since they don't have access to the sourcecode.
Just my 2 cents... I could be way wrong here...

Jace · 08-24-2006, 09:45 PM

I hear what you are saying...it could have happened that way and NATS could be at fault in the long run, but what if xclusivecash knew about the "glitch" or whatever it could have been, and did nothing about it for months on end?

wasn't there some other NATS programs owners saying a while ago that occasionally the link between ccbill and nats get disrupted and needs to be "reattached" because of changes at ccbill or changes to the nats software? What if one of those disruptions occured, but xclusivecash never said anything, and continued to knowingly let rebills not get reported back into nats from ccbill?

spacedog · 08-24-2006, 09:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PMdave

Seems like it's more NATS fault than anything else to me. Since there is no access to the source code how can there be discrepancies? NATS pulls the data from the billers. Program owner can't just program in a little feature to only pull 80% of the stats since they don't have access to the sourcecode.
Just my 2 cents... I could be way wrong here...

I had something else on my mind,, but I'm not saying it til I read the thread & am 100% certain on what I remember,, I need to know if it was a "webmaster" that noticed discrepancies..

r-c-e · 08-24-2006, 09:49 PM

Its all just speculation. I guess the truth will come out if it goes to trial.

spacedog · 08-24-2006, 09:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jace

I hear what you are saying...it could have happened that way and NATS could be at fault in the long run, but what if xclusivecash knew about the "glitch" or whatever it could have been, and did nothing about it for months on end?

wasn't there some other NATS programs owners saying a while ago that occasionally the link between ccbill and nats get disrupted and needs to be "reattached" because of changes at ccbill or changes to the nats software? What if one of those disruptions occured, but xclusivecash never said anything, and continued to knowingly let rebills not get reported back into nats from ccbill?

Oh, yeah & out of all these wonderful programs, Xclusive cash "(might/could/possibly") be the ONLY one (maybe) doing it,, I'm sure there's plenty others (could be doing the same).,, personally, I think,, well, never mind what I think...

JMM · 08-24-2006, 09:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spacedog

I had something else on my mind,, but I'm not saying it til I read the thread & am 100% certain on what I remember,, I need to know if it was a "webmaster" that noticed discrepancies..

Yes, that was said in the original thread. The discrepancy was pointed out by a 3rd party webmaster, TMM investigated, found the discrepancy and contacted XC.

Jace · 08-24-2006, 09:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spacedog

Oh, yeah & out of all these wonderful programs, Xclusive cash "(might/could/possibly") be the ONLY one (maybe) doing it,, I'm sure there's plenty others (could be doing the same).,, personally, I think,, well, never mind what I think...

well, that doesn't matter right now, cause XclusiveCash is the only one on trial (literally...LOL)

spacedog · 08-24-2006, 09:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JMM

Yes, that was said in the original thread. The discrepancy was pointed out by a 3rd party webmaster, TMM investigated, found the discrepancy and contacted XC.

I fucking knew it, I call bullshit,, I smell bullshit,,,

You don't get CCBill stats for programs if you sign up through nats..

BluMedia · 08-24-2006, 09:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PMdave

Seems like it's more NATS fault than anything else to me. Since there is no access to the source code how can there be discrepancies? NATS pulls the data from the billers. Program owner can't just program in a little feature to only pull 80% of the stats since they don't have access to the sourcecode.
Just my 2 cents... I could be way wrong here...

I think if someone did do this the rebills would not match and NATS would know.

Mark

spacedog · 08-24-2006, 09:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jace

well, that doesn't matter right now, cause XclusiveCash is the only one on trial (literally...LOL)

Umm.. actually, it's NATS on trial..

JMM · 08-24-2006, 10:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spacedog

I fucking knew it, I call bullshit,, I smell bullshit,,,

You don't get CCBill stats for programs if you sign up through nats..

True..but you do get NATS stats and if you were doing any kind of volume it would be easy to see that the rebills had vanished.

DateDoc · 08-24-2006, 10:02 PM

if this is a nats issue and not just an XC issue how much money are you leaving on the table unclaimed each month?

spacedog · 08-24-2006, 10:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JMM

True..but you do get NATS stats and if you were doing any kind of volume it would be easy to see that the rebills had vanished.

so, how did this 3rd party notice discrepancies between ccbill stats & nats stats if the 3rd party only has nats stats?

PMdave · 08-24-2006, 10:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spacedog

so, how did this 3rd party notice discrepancies between ccbill stats & nats stats if the 3rd party only has nats stats?

With vanished I think means
Log in to nats >10 rebills
Log in again to nats 2 mins later > 5 rebills gone 5 left

spacedog · 08-24-2006, 10:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PMdave

With vanished I think means
Log in to nats >10 rebills
Log in again to nats 2 mins later > 5 rebills gone 5 left

I see shit like that all the time on tons of sponsors..

marketsmart · 08-24-2006, 10:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spacedog

so, how did this 3rd party notice discrepancies between ccbill stats & nats stats if the 3rd party only has nats stats?

i thought u were actually going in a different direction. something that may be anotheoption that no one has mentioned yet....

Jace · 08-24-2006, 10:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spacedog

so, how did this 3rd party notice discrepancies between ccbill stats & nats stats if the 3rd party only has nats stats?

i think that is something we will just have to find out as time progresses

Jace · 08-24-2006, 10:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by marketsmart

i thought u were actually going in a different direction. something that may be anotheoption that no one has mentioned yet....

haha, yeah...no shit...the big pink elephant in the room, huh? hahahaha

marketsmart · 08-24-2006, 10:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jace

haha, yeah...no shit...the big pink elephant in the room, huh? hahahaha

think multiple accts.. that is all i will say....

spacedog · 08-24-2006, 10:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jace

haha, yeah...no shit...the big pink elephant in the room, huh? hahahaha

you got one of those too.. cool

Adult Warden · 08-24-2006, 10:19 PM

*follows all the drama*

Tempest · 08-24-2006, 10:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spacedog

so, how did this 3rd party notice discrepancies between ccbill stats & nats stats if the 3rd party only has nats stats?

It was "implied" it was an insider... I should re-read the thread again as well but I thought it was something like some ccbill password or id number of something was changed by Xclusive but they didn't do a full implementation and so rebills didn't track back into nats. Thus XClusive pocketed all the rebill money coming in from ccbill and the affiliates were none the wiser.

LiveDose · 08-24-2006, 10:44 PM

It's interesting to read some real drama for a change.

babymaker · 08-24-2006, 11:07 PM

I didn't realize that xclusive was 1. invite only and 2. 100% revshare no PPS so why shave too easy to get caught, something is fucked, a program with only 200 invited affiliates have to close a relationship to shave and WM's advanced enough to be doing revshare and invite programs (not chasing newbie scam BS) will notice real quick that they are missing rebills just from their average stats. I am going to trenton lol when does this start i want to watch....will be easy to get there from philly :D

p1mpdogg · 08-24-2006, 11:13 PM

./.......................

SiMpLe · 08-24-2006, 11:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spacedog

Oh, yeah & out of all these wonderful programs, Xclusive cash "(might/could/possibly") be the ONLY one (maybe) doing it,, I'm sure there's plenty others (could be doing the same).,, personally, I think,, well, never mind what I think...

I was thinking this today following the other thread - Is XC the only nats based program with the hiccup rolling atm? I push a lot of programs using nats and I never notice anything odd, but now the question is there - sigh

08-24-2006, 09:22 PM	#1
spacedog Yes that IS me. Bitch. Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2001 Posts: 14,149	NATS vs Xclusivecash there's just one thing I don't understand? something extremely peculiar about the thread that started this, & I just realized something about it .. I need link to that thread to read it again before I say what's on my mind,,.. anyway, you people read the thread.. go read the part about somebody noticing discrepancies between ccbill stats & the stats in nats admin.. go read that part & think about that for a few minutes..

08-24-2006, 10:02 PM	#13
DateDoc Outside looking in. Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: To Hell You Ride Posts: 14,243	if this is a nats issue and not just an XC issue how much money are you leaving on the table unclaimed each month? __________________

08-24-2006, 10:44 PM	#24
LiveDose Show Yer Tits! Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Somewhere Out there... Posts: 25,792	It's interesting to read some real drama for a change. __________________ Scammer Alert: acer19 acer [email protected] [email protected] Money stolen using PayPal

08-24-2006, 11:07 PM	#25
babymaker Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: philly Posts: 4,751	I didn't realize that xclusive was 1. invite only and 2. 100% revshare no PPS so why shave too easy to get caught, something is fucked, a program with only 200 invited affiliates have to close a relationship to shave and WM's advanced enough to be doing revshare and invite programs (not chasing newbie scam BS) will notice real quick that they are missing rebills just from their average stats. I am going to trenton lol when does this start i want to watch....will be easy to get there from philly :D __________________ $99mo Hosted CMS From ElevatedX! ICQ 293125596

08-24-2006, 11:13 PM	#26
p1mpdogg Too lazy to set a custom title Join Date: Nov 2002 Posts: 16,714	./....................... __________________ A fast fortune is easy to earn! Just go with a winner! Last edited by p1mpdogg; 08-24-2006 at 11:14 PM..

08-24-2006, 09:40 PM	#2
PMdave Confirmed User Join Date: Dec 2003 Posts: 1,517	Seems like it's more NATS fault than anything else to me. Since there is no access to the source code how can there be discrepancies? NATS pulls the data from the billers. Program owner can't just program in a little feature to only pull 80% of the stats since they don't have access to the sourcecode. Just my 2 cents... I could be way wrong here...

08-24-2006, 09:45 PM	#3
Jace FBOP Class Of 2013 Industry Role: Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: bumfuck, ky Posts: 35,562	I hear what you are saying...it could have happened that way and NATS could be at fault in the long run, but what if xclusivecash knew about the "glitch" or whatever it could have been, and did nothing about it for months on end? wasn't there some other NATS programs owners saying a while ago that occasionally the link between ccbill and nats get disrupted and needs to be "reattached" because of changes at ccbill or changes to the nats software? What if one of those disruptions occured, but xclusivecash never said anything, and continued to knowingly let rebills not get reported back into nats from ccbill?

08-24-2006, 09:49 PM	#5
r-c-e Confirmed User Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 1,070	Its all just speculation. I guess the truth will come out if it goes to trial.

08-24-2006, 10:19 PM	#22
Adult Warden So Fucking Banned Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Orlando, FL Posts: 1,822	follows all the drama