Talk:Ripoff Report

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Ripoff Report article.

Article policies

Contents

[edit] Criticism links

It cannot be denied there is some controversy surrounding Ripoff Report. However, they should be described following Wikipedia rules. This obviously has not been the case so far. No time for it myself, alas. 82.73.161.13 14:09, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

I removed two external links. Not only for being superfluous, but the one leading to the advocacy program page contains a very aggressive popup. I understand mr Magedson needs the money to keep up his (imo great) site. I guess Errorsafe pays well, but this product is no good (containing spyware) and their marketing sucks big time. Please, be advised to get rid of that. 82.73.161.13 11:57, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

I have removed the forum links, but have integrated the link and point into the Criticism section; which is entirely in keeping with Wikipedia rules. If you disagree, be specific and I can look into it. - RoyBoy 800 04:15, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
Alleging someone is an extortionist a.o. without undisputable legal proof is libel. The given references are sites run by Magedsons opponents, highly biased and exclusively put up to attack him. Not what one can consider to be reliable impartial sources. I see you do a lot of work, very fast. Please be advised to take a little more time to look into this a bit deeper. Thank you. 82.73.147.201 04:56, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
Fast fingers, but if anything looks amiss – like this – that is indeed what I do. I support your content edits, but negative links and criticism are required to be referenced on Wikipedia (linked to). - RoyBoy 800 15:04, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
Thanks, I feel your last editing is another step to further improvement in the right direction. Have a nice weekend! 82.73.147.201 18:55, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
You too. - RoyBoy 800 04:44, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

I edited Criticism and lawsuits. Decided to remove all specified allegations, in order to keep this article factual and undisrupted by a war of allegations. There is plenty to find in provided links and the Internet. For more clarity we could use a simple complete list of cases against ROR. No extended case histories. Mentioning only end-verdicts and currently undecided cases, with references to documents or sites about it. 82.73.147.201 20:27, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Lawyer

As to his representing lawyer, the criticism websites list lawyers that have withdrawn from the case. So does that leave his business partner? If so, does she legally represent him? If she doesn't then wouldn't he need to be served personally? - RoyBoy 800 04:44, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

I made a mistake: unless the court orders that his attorney accept service, serving his attorney is not service to Magedson. 82.73.147.201 20:27, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tagged for deletion

Unless MAJOR editing takes place, then the article is worthy of deletion. it is biased and advertising. contact me to dispute this. Jmac 19:06, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your nomination for deletion Rip-off Report page

-jmac-, while agreeing there needs work to be done on this page, I strongly disagree with deleting it. Both supposed advantages and critisism of ROR are present. Over all neutrality in tone of voice is moving in the right direction. Who is biased here? I can't help noticing, you did not even remove the blatant vandalism. SooperJoo 20:13, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

jmac, thanks for your answer on my talk page. Feel free to help me out working on the Background section. I am not a native writer, costs me lots of effort to formulate correctly. SooperJoo 20:40, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Beware

From some of the things I have heard about this Ed person, he will shut down all of Wikipedia for daring to level relevant criticism.207.103.48.164 15:36, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome Metatran

Metatran, thank you for contributing. Please review NPOV for Wikipedia Neutral Point Of View rules and perhaps give it another try. SooperJoo 19:03, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] bad-business-rip-off

bad-business-rip-off.com down as of 10 Dec 2006, but bad-business-rip-off.netis still up, but having some loading difficulties. For the record, the latest contribution to that site. Previous versions in archive.org

Newest Update: November 27th 2006

Ed Magedson is fighting for his life in Illinois Federal Court for the right to continue publishing the following despicable lies and personal attacks, despite already having been held in contempt of court for doing so. Consider carefully the base nature of these criticisms Magedson struggles to keep on his website.

Cries of pedophilia, child pornography and drug dealing to children are typically unfair criticisms of a business, but this is a shared experience for all those targeted by Magedson for his Corporate Remediation Plan (aka Extortion Racket). After unsuspecting businesses initially object to what is typically much more benign criticism, then Magedson starts to create his own comments intended to embarrass and harass the company and its owners into submission. One can see many examples of this by reading this website carefully. The pattern is the same: Once Magedson knows he has a business' attention, if the mark won't pay his extortion demand, Rip-Off Report pulls out the stops and goes for the maximum damage with scandalous allegations of child pornography, pedophilia and drug dealing. We question the public interest in reading lies like these, and we know from personal, first hand experience that Magedson and the Rip-Off Report only fight for the right to keep such filth online in order to further their ongoing extortion racket:


Original Court Document, Pages 1-2. PDF

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by SooperJoo (talkcontribs) 19:45, 11 December 2006 (UTC).

oei! --SooperJoo 19:48, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Moved to talk

I am not sure what this user is attempting to say:

Apparently some companies hired the services of fictious organisation 'Defamation Action League' (criminal spammers William L. (Bill) Stanley and Robert Russo). The criminals - allegedly operating from Austria - are very open about their defamation of ROR, the owner and his hosting companies by all kinds of Internet means. [1] [2]

Travb (talk) 20:06, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Denial of Service Attack?

The web site is loading slowly as of March 7, 2007. Most pages don't load on the first try. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.20.226.218 (talk) 17:15, 7 March 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Ripoffreport.com screenshot.png

Image:Ripoffreport.com screenshot.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 23:49, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Two video links are broken removed ad

There are two video links which are broken. I left them on the page though.

I wikified the site links, made the statments morre neutral. etc.


I moved the following to the talk page:

One added feature offered by the Rip-off Report is the "Corporate Advocacy and Remediation Program". As a companion service to the main web page, this add-on provides assistance to businesses who have unfavorable Rip-off Reports. Magedson offers his services to help companies handle online complaints – specifically those posted on the Rip-off Report – in which the complaints are investigated. As a companion service to the main web page, this add-on provides assistance to businesses who have unfavorable Rip-off Reports. First, Magedson emails the Report filers and informs them that the business wants to make amends (usually including a 100% refund -- which is required to join the program). Second, the results of this offer of remediation are then posted along with the Report on the site. The original report is not rescinded but is updated to reflect whether the offer of remediation was accepted or not. Magedson points out that the Report filers identities are not disclosed in the process unless the filer wishes to communicate with the company directly about a remediation. The "advocacy and remediation" element of this resource involves a consulting fee. This appears to be one aspect of the revenue stream at the Rip-off Report. Magedson bills his program as something that benefits both consumers and businesses, and he promises to reduce the number of complaints received by companies who retain his services.

This sounds like an ad, and the only reference is ripoffreport.com itself. Instead, I moved the corporate (extortion) program to the criticism section, and quoted a third party--the Phoenix New Times.

I decided not to include this paragraph on the main page, from the Phoenix New Times article, probably too remote:

In 2001 pizza deliveryman John Unger sued Pizza Hut several allegations. Magedson helped Unger with media coverage and introduced Unger to his own lawyer, Maria Crimi Speth. According to the court file in Pinal County, Magedson's called a Pizza Hut executive threatening him with media coverage and a large class-action lawsuit if the executive didn't give Unger $200,000. Ugner had agreed to pay Magedson a portion of the settlement.

The case eventually settled.

Travb (talk) 05:25, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Added the mug shot, this is a fact User: jglogau Jordan G (talk) 19:59, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Article is about the web site, not Magedson. Might be appropriate for a bio, but it's not appropriate here. Shritwod (talk) 22:26, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

You must not have any exposure to corporate structure, anyone can form a corporation for a small fee, RipOffReports IS Magedson. Corporations were invented in the 1800's to help investors limit they liabilities, a good idea that promoted major investments, like building most of the rail systems around the world. Magedson hides his acts behind ROR. When does wiki "objectivity" become criminal neglect? Jordan G 67.85.93.164 (talk) 14:53, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] == Problematic rip-off currency exchange transactions ( CHF against Euro) In Milan

== Problematic rip-off currency exchange transactions ( CHF against Euro) In Milan

Incident date December 2007

Predominantly carried out by italian and jenisch fraud gangs have increasd sharply.These involve individuals embarking on what they belive to be profitable transections being ripped off for a large sum, often amounting to six figures.The perpetrators contact their victim by means of advertisements aimd at the top end of the market. The transaction in question might involve furniture, vehicles, horses, jewelery, or the takeover of companies or investments in said companies. As a rule, the intended transaction is proposed using a favorable exchange rate or an intebank rate with up to 30% BONUS. The perpetrators justify this unfavorable rate for them selves by indicating the illegal origins of the funds (black money or tax evation.

It can happen that the fraudests immediately go for the sting, but sometimes they also carry out an initial as a trust,test transaction. The swindle itself usually manifests itself with cases of money changing hands under extreme time pressure with genuine notes on the top hiding either bundles of paper beneath bearing the mark FACSIMILIE - FALSO —

[edit] Mark Stalder for Modesto, CA contractor a criminal... scam fraud artist

Mark Stalder of Modesto, CA.

If you or someone you know that has been cheated, lied, or/and lost lots of money from this bogus contractor, he has a court date on May 27,2008 in Modesto CA courtroom. He is being tried for fraud. He uses other contractor's license number. Come forward and report your claim against Mark Stalder with the police department or the Stanislaus District Attorney's office before the court date.

Tell your story and spread this message to everyone you know to help stop this crooked mastermin contractor. Together we can make a difference.

[edit] Vandalism

There has been a lot of vandalism by people who presumably are upset about being listed on RipOffReport. It's easy to understand why people get angry, but the article needs to retain a Neutral Point of View and have appropriate citations. There is quite a lot of criticism in the article already. Shritwod (talk) 09:30, 22 May 2008 (UTC)