Honestly Scrubbed Against DNC and Cell Phones

[senior-advisor-indiana]

I've already shared my personal email in this thread and have received an email from Rick.

So what you are claiming is untrue.

I apologize. I see that now...

 

[goillini52]

For $50 a month I expect crap data not scrubbed against cell phones or DNC. Josh 's data is NOT crap and it appears to be DNC compliant so I believe in that case it may be worth the cost. But to say it is something when it is not (TCPA compliant) is false advertising.

I did not come on here to call Josh out. He solicited my business in this thread. If he wants to solicit publicly he deserves to hear the truth publicly .

Actually, you said you were giving him a try BEFORE his 1st comment...and I wouldn't call that much of a solicitation.
V
V
V

Originally Posted by goillini52 View Post

Josh @ listshack/Affordable Marketing.
I've heard his name thrown around here. I'm going to try him out.

 

[djs]

Well to be honest it's not fair because you are being a coward and hiding behind a screen name so your complaint means nothing...

Actually, he didn't even really complain. Josh is trying to make it a complaint, which surprises me. He just commented on something, which if I read this thread correctly, Josh agreed that there is potential for an error, but small.

Some minor disagreement what constitutes compliance, but that is normal when you talk compliance.

Josh doesn't ask for 'proof' when someone comments positively, he shouldn't require it when someone comments in not so bright a light, unless he is looking to fix a problem. Josh is taking the stance there isn't a problem, so I don't know why he needs the email.

I'm confused, this is getting petty. I suggest it stops here.

Dan

 

[wingateexpress]

Actually, he didn't even really complain. Josh is trying to make it a complaint, which surprises me. He just commented on something, which if I read this thread correctly, Josh agreed that there is potential for an error, but small.

Some minor disagreement what constitutes compliance, but that is normal when you talk compliance.

Josh doesn't ask for 'proof' when someone comments positively, he shouldn't require it when someone comments in not so bright a light, unless he is looking to fix a problem. Josh is taking the stance there isn't a problem, so I don't know why he needs the email.

I'm confused, this is getting petty. I suggest it stops here.

Dan

Dan, I'll drop the subject and move on.

Thanks,
Jay

 

[tins]

I've already shared my personal email in this thread and have received an email from Rick.

So what you are claiming is untrue.

That is the email you used when you signed up?

 

[Josh]

You cannot possibly be removing ported numbers, and if you think you are your vendor is extremely delayed.

You can't even verify that you're a client. In as many posts as you've made about this, a simple blank email in response to your receipt to at least verify you're a client.

 

[tins]

Josh doesn't ask for 'proof' when someone comments positively...
Dan

There is a massive difference. This person said straight out that Josh is breaking the law. I think in this situation a business owner has the right to defend himself against someone that probably never used his service and is looking to spread lies that will cause the business owner a loss.

 

[Thad.Sipple]

You can't even verify that you're a client. In as many posts as you've made about this, a simple blank email in response to your receipt to at least verify you're a client.

Adults lie as much as children he is both., it's clear he never signed up, he is publicly bashing you with no public proof, wing quit being a little boy hiding behind a screen name. Man up or go home!

 

[Josh]

Actually, he didn't even really complain. Josh is trying to make it a complaint, which surprises me. He just commented on something, which if I read this thread correctly, Josh agreed that there is potential for an error, but small.

Some minor disagreement what constitutes compliance, but that is normal when you talk compliance.

Josh doesn't ask for 'proof' when someone comments positively, he shouldn't require it when someone comments in not so bright a light, unless he is looking to fix a problem. Josh is taking the stance there isn't a problem, so I don't know why he needs the email.

I'm confused, this is getting petty. I suggest it stops here.

Dan

My stance is that I don't believe there is a problem, but I'm open to the possibility that there is one and with more information I could make a better decision about what should/could be done about it, if one exists.

So far it looks like a gentleman has made a claim that should be taken seriously. Unfortunately other than posting some information publicly that he claims came from the data he purchased from me, no information has been given to shed more light on what happened.

If the OP didn't want to send me an email, that's perfectly fine. This thread got rekindled when I bumped it to let him know I didn't receive his email as this is the only place they'll respond with me.

Again, I'm more than happy to take criticism, even negative criticism, but it's difficult to use that to improve anything if I can't even verify the person making the claims has ever even used my product.

 

[VolAgent]

Actually, he didn't even really complain. Josh is trying to make it a complaint, which surprises me. He just commented on something, which if I read this thread correctly, Josh agreed that there is potential for an error, but small.

Some minor disagreement what constitutes compliance, but that is normal when you talk compliance.

Josh doesn't ask for 'proof' when someone comments positively, he shouldn't require it when someone comments in not so bright a light, unless he is looking to fix a problem. Josh is taking the stance there isn't a problem, so I don't know why he needs the email.

I'm confused, this is getting petty. I suggest it stops here.

Dan

It seems that Josh wants to find out if there really is a problem and if so he wants to fix it.

It appears that there was nothing to this and when wing got called out on it he back tracked. I find this entire thread confusing. What judge or jury is going to hold Josh or any of his customers liable when clearly he is taking every effort he can to scrub the list. Perfection is impossible, particularly when there isn't a central database to scrub against.

The TCPA doesn't require you be perfect, merely that you make reasonable efforts to avoid certain actions.