Sentry Marketing Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> bgriffin
>
> How is it that I have been upfront about every
> person that indicated their account was
> deactivated with the exception of your account?
Because you know if you admitted to deactivating my account that many people would have a more negative opinion of you, whereas you had a least a slightly decent reason for deactivating most of the accounts you have deactivated.
> After finding your comments on this site, I
> checked your account and it was active. Then,
> based on subsequent comments, I deactivated it.
That's not true. You know it's not true. I know it's not true.
> You asked Steve is it is acceptable for a
> shopper's account to be deactivated based on a
> comment posted that an assignment's reimbursement
> does not cover the meal.
Yes I did, and I'm very interested in his response.
> Does it matter that a
> shopper posts information like this when they have
> not actually completed the assignment in question?
> Because if you haven't actually performed the
> assignment, how do you know if the fee and
> reimbursement cover the meal?
Because I had eaten at the McDonald's of BBQ very shortly after they opened their first location there and for my meal I spent more than what the assignment paid.
> You call it "retaliation", however, would you
> continue to complete assignments for a company
> that communicated with you in a sarcastic manner?
> How about if that company posted inaccurate
> information about you on a public forum?
I communicated with you in a sarcastic manner only after you deactivated me. Please tell me what I posted about your company that was inaccurate?
There are reasons that a body stays in motion
At the moment only demons come to mind