it was joke jesus, why people must jump with generic replies right away...

:1orglaugh

I've seen first hand a NATS program owner add (credit) sales to an affiliate.

Wonder if it's as easy to remove them.

go to democash.com and find out for yourself.

Not possible

So you'll allegedly shut off a program that is shaving but take no action against programs that are no longer paying affiliates at all but are still collecting sales? (SOBV)

Seems worse than shaving, as you aren't getting SHIT.

*crickets from NATS

Funny how NATS is really worried about a shaving script or states if anyone is shaving their license will be killed. But, fuck all if the program stops paying affiliates license is still good.

NATS + Shaving Affiliates = No License

NATS + Program Does Pay Affiliates = License

All along he's played the high road on Nats.

He didn't take the high road on Porngraph... and his X partner who know works for the people fucking the industry over more than any else.

All someone has to do is write a custom Apache module to siphon off some of the traffic.

do (XX% of the time) {
if (request has nats code in url) {
remove it
}

It's not rocket science. Any programmer with knowledge of C can probably do it in under an hour. Apache is open source. There is no need to even touch NATS to shave.

Hell you can probably even do it in an nginx config without even writing an modules.

There is nothing that can be done about it. It has nothing to do with NATS as the request has already been changed before it even gets to them.

If you can't trust a program maybe you shouldn't do business with them.

The CCBill model is much more secure since the affiliates send it to CCBill and then they send it to the program.

P.S., no I will not write a script to do this for you so don't even bother asking.

I was here. :)

this thread is sponsored by: Braun

unlimited smooth shaving

Fiddy kitty-kat shavers.

That would depend on the circumstances of the program closing, etc. It's not a question that can just be answered with a simple yes or no.

As an example, a piece of shit like JJ, never in a million years would I allow him to.

NATS is a fine program, Mr. Teencat. Tsk tsk, stop drinking already.

why didn't you terminate him long ago?

he's been outed as a scammer for quite some time now.

A number of reasons, none of which will likely result in any positive discussion here as people have their opinions which they post anonymously and won't sway from no matter what is explained or shown to them.

Personally, for myself, it was something I was on the fence about and it wasn't easy. He's certainly a person who if I ever have the displeasure of meeting will be told exactly how I feel about him and it won't be a pleasant conversation for him.

Fair enough :thumbsup

Shaving is so 2000.
Nowadays it's close affiliate accounts, keep their money and then sell off the company once you squeezed every last dime out of it

I don't use NATS and therefore don't have a dog in this fight (which is why I should not have posted at all, sorry NATS!). But many fine programs use NATS so I'm assuming any word of 'shaving', even from a fine hard-to-understand individual like Teencat, can be annoying (and harmful to business).

But as to the other points about allowing this scumbag or that scammer to use NATS again: people are clever, especially the douschebags who cause trouble of the world. So setting up a new NATS license, or a new Epoch or CCBill or Verotel account, would be easy if you knew what you were doing. I mean, one assumes. LOL I have no idea how to do such things, I'm too busy actually working.

He stiff you guys too?

:1orglaugh Now that's funny

This thread sucks in so many ways

Can I get 1? Just looking for a subtle version... looking to rip off maybe about 30% of time to stay under radar ;)

thanx