Zig's Reasons...

Also my bitch Theprestigedmuzza can work with me as well, he's mentally retarded so I'm not actually sure if he's capable of delivering gold, I'll have a talk to him , thanks , contact me via pm if you're interested

 

pls mr will

 

hi mez and lame

edit: and john

 

hey sxy

 

Hi der babe

 

am i the only one who doesn't care about r2p's drama

 

hello plz have , filled application on site . You will contacted short and u , will be able to sell gord for me !

 

RIP Ziggs

 

no bias, I think she should be held liable

If it was a newfag 250 post count $5 donor they'd have to pay up.

Also why are OMM's held liable if we're wiped mid-trade if employees aren't? Technically we're "employed" by the 2 parties looking to do a safe trade, and the circumstances (high risk trades) are the same

 

Quite honestly, I don't think ziggy is completely at fault but I do think she should still have to repay r2p. Even though r2p may not have trained her, it's also her responsibility to be ready for the job. I don't think r2p denied her training in any way :/

 

She doesnt want to talk to R2, nor cares what he has to say in his report therefore she isnt even reading it.

 

Sounds kind of childish to me... I think it makes r2 even more angry and want the money back even more.

 

>R2P goes on an account and it possibly could have been wiped with the ban
>was being held liable

>Ziggily goes on her account and it possibly could have been wiped
>was not being held liable

Poor R2P... I feels for ya.

Also, I'll flip some gold for you if you're interested. I might get uh wiped... and I might vouch Arcus for a similar amount...

 

Because she's a mod, a female, and cried at an admin. 2 years ago no one would have put up with this shit.

 

^Strong this. What has the world come to.

 

No your not employed by both parties, you are acting as one whole and providing a service???

Paypal acts as a 'middle man' from buyer to sellers bank ,and if they fuck up something it is there responsibility.

Employees are not liable ; An employer cannot hold an employee responsible for company losses, even if the employee is negligent. The employer might have a claim only when the loss involves intentional or gross negligence by the employee.

k.

 

Businesses/Partnerships: Anyone running a business or partnered service implicitly agrees to share responsibility for the actions of their co-owners, as well as any workers they employ. Thus, if a partner or worker scams, all owners of the business will be banned until the debt is repaid. Workers, however, are not liable for anyone's actions but their own (although it is up to the staff to determine who falls into that category).

 

This thread gave me AIDs

 

fucking lol'd, sypherz grew a pair when he resigned

 

Yes now fuck off fatty.

This.

I'm sorry you must be new here.

The spam forum has made all major Sythe decisions for about four years now.