Oh God the lying runt is back with us!
You seem to have a habit of making 'mistakes', non of then your fault of course. You used a second account and we all know why
1. I gave permission for the PIE operators to use my testimonials NOT you and certainly not to use in a blog, then twist and make things up and then ignore my responses.
2. According to Paul at PIE it wasn't them who said that I made an error with my staking, it was YOU!
3. I contacted you a couple of times asking you to remove my details, but you completely ignored me!!! It was only when I complained to Paul that you finally removed anything to do with me and the lies that you made.
You are a deceitful liar and not a very good one at that. I don't believe anything you say
Hi Simon,
Firstly, please can we keep it civil.
I know I am on a hiding to nothing in trying to convince you I acted in good faith, but I did and do and will continue to try and prove this to you.
You're right I do make a fair few mistakes which are, by definition, all my fault. I also own up to them when I do.
I don't think logging into a site on my personal account (used just twice incidentally since 2006) rather than using the tradersbulletin account is such a terrible crime?
If I was trying to hide who I was, I wouldn't have used an account with my surname in my username!
For the post in question it would have been much more to my advantage to use the tradersbulletin account as this refers to our site.
All the post referred to was my PIE result for the month (something I would have wanted to post under tradersbulletin), there was nothing in the post that I would want to hide from anybody. In fact the opposite is true.
Obviously we are covering old ground, but;
1, We specifically asked Paul to contact you on our behalf to see if we could use your testimonial. Paul did this at our request, but referred to us as "their promoters" in his communication with you. Paul received an email reply from you confirming this was ok and therefore Paul told us we could go ahead and use the testimonial. This seems quite clear cut to me?
If necessary I can probably dig out the email trail relating to this.
We have now put further safeguards in place in that we ask that we are referred to by name, plus will contact the provider of testimonials directly wherever possible.
I understand that you didn't realise the request Paul made for his promoter to use your testimonial had come from us, but I think this has been shown to be true. I accept our procedures could/should have been a bit tighter, but I think it has been proven that we did make the request, which Paul then made of you on our behalf and you did email him back to say that it was ok.
I don't really understand what the issue is about us posting your testimonial on our review page for PIE as a comment? This is how we keep our readers updated on the performance of the strategy.
I saw your testimonial, asked if we could use it and then posted it on the PIE review page on our site. I really didn't think this was in anyway controversial?
2, As I have said before there is no point in us going to the effort of requesting permission to use a testimonial to then alter it. It would be much easier to just make one up in the first place.
I believed the reason for your losing month was because you had not increased your stake to hedge a trade, I accept this was wrong.
If I remember correctly it was only a small anomaly in an otherwise very successful trading history?
3, I did respond to your emails and I have made many efforts to prove this to you. I think it's ironic that it is you who taught me how to tamper with the times that emails show as sent!
I understand you are very cynical about this.
I did send you two emails in response to those you sent me. I was also contacted by another member of this forum to whom I replied that "I must be having communication issues with you as i had sent you two emails already, but would try again" (this is not a direct quote).
This email was sent prior to communication from Paul and can/could have been collaborated as true, if you were prepared to contact the contributor in question? (sorry to be vague here, but without digging back through all our previous correspondence, I can't actually remember who this was, but will double check if you would like me to).
Your initial emails wanted us to take down your testimonial as you believed we hadn't requested permission to use them. I was sure we had and wanted to confirm this with you, which is what I tried to do in the two emails I sent to you.
After making contact with you and proving that Paul had requested your permission, you still wanted us to take the comments down, so this is what we did.
I realise there is nothing new in what I have said above and I am unlikely to change your opinions, but will continue to try.
Regards,
Mark Rose