NEWS ANALYSIS: The Problem With Guenther’s ‘Secret’ Code Word (And Other Oddities About The AdSurfDaily Case)

Bob Guenther has told the Mods and members of the ASD-Biz forum that his previous “Bob Guenther” account had been “compromised.” He announced that he had deleted the “Bob Guenther” account and now would embed a secret code word in posts under his new forum identity, so members would know he was the actual author of posts and not a hacker using his identity to post.

Under the new forum identity “Robert L,” Guenther said he came to the conclusion that someone had hacked his old account after “in depth investigation” revealed “[s]omeone had accessed my account, had my email and my password.”

Meanwhile, in an unrelated but equally strange development, a poster at the Surf’s Up forum threatened to beat up ASD President Andy Bowdoin for lying to him.

“[I]f I ever see you face to face I will knock the f— out of you,” the poster said. “I met you and had breakfast with you and you lied to my face on that Sunday in [M]iami . . .”

Miami was the site of a July 12 ASD rally — a rally attended by federal agents working undercover.

Bowdoin was 74 at the time federal agents seized tens of millions of dollars from the firm a few weeks after the Miami rally, in the opening days of August. The poster who threatened Bowdoin also appears to be a senior citizen. Earlier discussion in the forum suggests the man lost $52,000 by trusting Bowdoin.

The Surf’s Up post, which stood for hours, now has been deleted. The man’s wife, who also appeared to be a senior citizen, was pictured alongside him in a loving pose. Some seniors are none too happy with Andy Bowdoin. The threat, however, was excessive.

No good can come through violence, suggestions of violence or menacing behavior. The man, who said he lives in California, made no threat to travel to Florida to harm Bowdoin.

The ‘Secret’ Code

At roughly the same time Guenther was deleting his old account at the ASD-Biz forum and announcing his secret code, he also was sending an email to this Blog. We deem the email menacing and convoluted.

Guenther is the de facto head of the ASD Members Business Association (ASDMBA) Trust, the subject of some recent posts on this Blog and elsewhere on the Web.

All of Guenther’s old posts at the ASD-Biz forum were wiped away when he deleted his account, including threatening posts and posts that triumphantly announced a slander and libel lawsuit against Florida resident Jack Arons by Dallas-based attorney Larry Friedman, who is the attorney for the Trust.

Bob Guenther introduced Larry Friedman during an ASDMBA conference call last year while ASDMBA was solicting funds to protect contributors’ interests in the ASD case. Friedman now blames Arons for stirring the pot online and encouraging people to file complaints about his handling of the Trust’s affairs, claiming Arons is a felon and a menace.

Links to the slander and libel lawsuit were posted in the ASD-Biz forum under the “Bob Guenther” identity, which now is wiped away. Also wiped away were goonish threats from “Bob Guenther” that Friedman would sue other people.

Here are two questions an investigator might ask if considering recent developments concerning Guenther:

  • Who could derive a benefit from the claim the “Bob Guenther” identity at the ASD-Biz Forum was compromised by a hacker?
  • Who could derive a benefit by deleting the “Bob Guenther” account and thus deleting the posts associated with it?

Friedman immediately should fire the Trust as a client and disassociate himself from Bob Guenther. He also should report this matter to law enforcement. These acts are disturbing and too unnatural to ignore.

Some people said they saved copies of the old posts, anticipating that the account might go missing. Some ASDMBA members said they filed complaints with the Texas Bar and the office of Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott about the manner in which the Trust’s affairs have been handled.

Secret code? Guenther could post something inflammatory, not include the secret code — and then claim someone else is the author because the post didn’t include the secret code.

A secret code is proof of nothing. The notion itself strains credulity at a level that cannot be ignored.

Along those lines, a claim by Guenther that he was at a volleyball tournament in Dallas “about the time” an unauthorized poster was using his old forum account and claiming to be heading to Mexico also is proof of nothing. A poster in Dallas could claim to be posting from Mexico. So could a poster from Arizona, at a location near the border with Mexico. (As noted in a previous post, in January we captured an Arizona IP address of Guenther’s near the Mexico border.)

Guenther explained that he hadn’t been to Mexico since 2003 and that “[a]nyone that actually knows me, also knows why.” Again, however, the claim proves nothing . Even a person who claims not to have been in Mexico since 2003 could claim to be posting from Mexico — or anywhere.

Restraint is not a word we associate with Guenther.  His lack of restraint is what is driving one of the stories associated with the federal probe into the business affairs of AdSurfDaily Inc. (ASD).

Within hours of establishing a new posting identity at the ASD-Biz forum, Guenther was back to threatening people with lawsuits.

Guenther is the de facto head of the ASD Members Business Association (ASDMBA) Trust. As noted above, ASDMBA was formed with member contributions in the aftermath of the government seizure last summer of tens of millions of dollars from ASD. Federal prosecutors say ASD was selling unregistered securities, operating a Ponzi scheme and engaging in wire fraud and money-laundering.

ASDMBA’s stated goal was to protect the legal interests of ASD members who contributed to the association. People concerned want to know why that hasn’t happened, despite the fact ASDMBA raised more than the $100,000 said to be needed to pay for the retainer of Larry Friedman.

In our view, Guenther has a duty to explain precisely to ASDMBA members from whom money was collected how the money was spent. If he chooses not to do so, he should have no expectation that ASDMBA members will stop asking questions.

Something this basic should not be difficult or painful. In fact, publishing a detailed accounting is the quickest way for Guenther to disarm his critics. Concerned ASDMBA members want sunlight, the best disinfectant. What they’re getting is rudeness, hostility, profanity, tirades, threats and juvenile insults — and now secret codes.

What they’re not getting is sunlight.

Friedman should drop the slander and libel lawsuit against  Jack Arons. The filing of the lawsuit was repugnant, especially under these bizarre conditions.

Arons, on Social Security, is an amateur Web critic with a fly swatter. Friedman met Arons with a Howitzer, suing him in a blitz of paperwork and then trying to force Arons to appear in Dallas for a deposition at Arons’ expense with three days’ notice.

It was disgraceful, the stuff from which lawyer jokes are born. All of it flowed from ASDMBA’s lack of transparency. If anything, Arons owes Friedman an apology — if even that.

Friedman has considerable stature in the Dallas legal community — and every right to defend his reputation. This lawsuit doesn’t help. Nor does the behavior of the Trust and its de facto head, Bob Guenther.

Guenther needs people to believe in him now, and he’s doing very little to give them any reason to.

About the Author

16 Responses to “NEWS ANALYSIS: The Problem With Guenther’s ‘Secret’ Code Word (And Other Oddities About The AdSurfDaily Case)”

  1. Actually, what’s even MORE strange (is that even possible???) is that Mr Guenthers’ original post claimed that the “secret word” was being IMPEDED in the document.

    Whether this was some sort of Fruedian slip by Mr Guenther, a mysterious force is holding the word back, or his mystery assistant is sabotaging the works, is unknown at this time.

      (Quote)

  2. If this was a poor man’s Dallas style TV series from the 1970s about dodgy deeds in business and machievellian attorneys who are out to victimize the ordinary guy in order to stop him in his quest to reveal the truth, it would have some entertainment valuer.

    The fact that is a real life situation in the US in 2009, involving businessmen, a ponzi operation and its victims, and a real and supposedly reputable member of the Texas Bar who is using his enormous “clout” to threaten one of those victims, makes it quite sickening.

    It is time that both Messrs Friedman and Guenther came down to earth and realised that there is a big wide world out there and life is not a Texas “B” movie. They need to put the ASDMBA issues to rest with the requested accounting to its members and stop their disgraceful legal and other kind of threats.

    Accidentally or by design, the ASDMBA and its intended original objective, which was the one supported and paid for by the majority of members, got screwed up. It’s time to shape up, own up and move on.

      (Quote)

  3. The mods can track ip’s to see “teams” posting to start “negative” discussion or trolling but they can’t figure out of Big Bob is really Big Bob???????

      (Quote)

  4. Oh God! Now we have secret agent. Bob you really need to find some way to control your multi-personalities. I am sure that Maria is going to be upset with you that you have now taken the side of the male part.

      (Quote)

  5. Hi, alasycia;

    As I’ve observed the lack of responsiveness to the myriad requests for a legitimate accounting of both the money that went into the ASDMBA “trust” and what was done to justify the billable hours to support the attorney’s fees, I’ve repeatedly asked myself why?

     Why not account, in detail, for the money?

     Why not account, in detail, for the time spent on legal work that generated tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees?

     The obvious answer, from my perspective, is that the people involved must fear the results that would come about if the details were known. Otherwise they’d provide the accounting and put this whole issue to bed, it seems.

    Which begs this question:

    Why would they be fearful?

     Another obvious answer, from my perspective, is that there may be something in the details for the players in this drama to be ashamed of – or something they think will be perceived as illicit.

     Bottom line: The heat they’re taking for not disclosing the details must be perceived by them to be less of a problem than the fate that awaits them is they do disclose.

    If my analysis is correct, no disclosure will be forthcoming until such time as they are required to provide it, presumably via legal action.

    alasycia: If this was a poor man’s Dallas style TV series from the 1970s about dodgy deeds in business and machievellian attorneys who are out to victimize the ordinary guy in order to stop him in his quest to reveal the truth, it would have some entertainment valuer.The fact that is a real life situation in the US in 2009, involving businessmen, a ponzi operation and its victims, and a real and supposedly reputable member of the Texas Bar who is using his enormous “clout” to threaten one of those victims, makes it quite sickening.It is time that both Messrs Friedman and Guenther came down to earth and realised that there is a big wide world out there and life is not a Texas “B” movie. They need to put the ASDMBA issues to rest with the requested accounting to its members and stop their disgraceful legal and other kind of threats.Accidentally or by design, the ASDMBA and its intended original objective, which was the one supported and paid for by the majority of members, got screwed up. It’s time to shape up, own up and move on.

      (Quote)

  6. Wow! Am I good or what?

    After writing the post above I went to the ASD-biz forum, where someone purporting to be his assistant posted this on behalf of Bob G:

    “The members have seen every detail they are going to see, unless a court of law requires it, or until he either gets ASDMBA members all or part of their money or is convinced it is a lost cause…”

      (Quote)

  7. THE ADSMBA VICTIMS ASSOCIATION has been formed for the purpose of retaining an attorney to file a Class Action Lawsuit against Robert L.(Bob) Guenther and Larry Friedman. Attorneys in Dallas are being interviewed. There was nearly $130,000 collected ‘under false pretenses’ and the money has disappeared. That amount with treble damages and costs and fees would make it a half million dollar award if successful. Several Dallas based litigation attorneys are now looking at it. After talking to several practicing attorneys in Dallas, I can tell you Friedman is NOT necessarily ‘a well respected Dallas attorney” as stated by Patrick.

    Copied and pasted below is a post from New Forum that will be used by the ASDMBA Victims Association. The poster “Justice for All” hits the nail on the head. I couldn’t say it better. This new forum is at http://www.bigbendcrimes.com

    Wayne

    Lead Attorney for the ASD Members Business Association, Larry Friedman,
    addressed the most Frequently Asked Questions.

    Independent Legal Adviser or Business Associate of the Trust? Friedman’s legal advice bears close examination, by a legal ethics committee to determine if representing the Trust was nothing more a money making opportunity presented to him by individuals he had represented in the past, to be paid to him for agreeing to espouse specific legal opinions and recommending specific courses of legal action without regard to the soundness of the legal opinion, in order to raise large sums of money.

    Fund raising ethics/tortious acts?: For his own financial benefit, Friedman knowingly, willingly, and actively worked with two of his close associates to raise $l00,000 to be paid to Friedman’s law firm, for unspecified legal services. All funds would be under the sole control of a 4/5 person group called “the Trust.” Under the guise providing legal representation to individuals through the Trust, Friedman solicited and accepted fees not merely from the Trust, but from individuals for whom he had no intention of providing legal representation. To perpetuate the myth that the interests of a loose confederation of individuals were being safeguarded as a group by Friedman, a “We’re hiring a lawyer” scheme was hatched. When pressed by those paying his fees if he was representing them, Friedman gave confusing and contradictory answers, or allowed them to be made without correction in his hearing. Although he had a legal duty to make it clear to them exactly who he and his firm were representing, to do so would cause the funds to dry up. Therefore, for every instance that Friedman stated “I am representing the Trust,” Friedman or Trust members in Friedman’s hearing made a point, in the next breath, of engaging in “word-games” such as “the members are the beneficiaries of the Trust.” Friedman used phrases that sounded as if they had legal meaning, when in fact they conveyed no meaning whatsoever, which was,of course, the purpose.

    Example: Friedman (speaking or listening): “The law firm is representing the ASD Members Business Association “Trust”.”The Trust” purpose is to create funds, a War Chest, in order to hire the firm to represent the interest of ASD members in a Federal Lawsuit that the government filed last week. That ‘Trust” has retained the law firm to represent the ‘Trust’ in the litigation.
    Therefore the Attorney/Client Relationship is with the ‘Trust” and not with Individual Members.
    The law firm communicates with the ‘Trust”,…the Trust communicate with ASD Members.
    ASD Members ‘interest’ are the beneficiaries of the ‘Trust’. The money each member
    contributes to the Trust is for the purpose of the ‘Trust’ to represent the interest of the
    ASD members in good-standing in this litigation.

    Can’t a lot of Association members assert that Friedman has caused injury to them under the “But For” Test?

    But for Larry Friedman’s direct solicitation of funds from me, in payment of his legal fees in return for representing my financial interests, to which I responded by making a check payable directly to his law firm; and “but for” the statements he made or failed to contradict when they were made in his hearing, saying that he was representing me and acting on my behalf, I would not have sent him $______for which I received NO benefit, and for which he refuses to account. He is a lawyer, I am not. If he was going to take money directly from me he had a legal obligation NOT to cloud the issue of whose attorney he actually was.

    (The “But for” Test: also known as Proximate Cause: In the law, a proximate cause is an event sufficiently related to a legally recognizable injury to be held the cause of that injury. There are two types of causation in the law, cause-in-fact and proximate (or legal) cause. Cause-in-fact is determined by the “but-for” test: but for the action, the result would not have happened. For example, but for running the red light, the collision would not have occurred. For an act to cause a harm, both tests must be met; proximate cause is a legal limitation on cause-in-fact.)

    Denial of Attorney/Client Relationship & Strange Accounting: Did Friedman perpetuate a “legal fiction” in an attempt to collect money from individuals while denying that he was their legal representative, telling them that he “could not” speak directly to them because they weren’t his clients? Under Texas law, is Friedman allowed to collect fees directly from individuals and not from the Trust, yet claim that he has no attorney/client relationship with the individuals paying his fees?

    Duty to provide a financial accounting: By inserting himself in the collection of money for the sole purpose of paying his own fee, I think it would be impossible for Friedman not to have a direct fiduciary duty to any who made a check “payable to the law firm.” I think, and I think the Texas Bar might think, that he has a fiduciary duty to all the members, that he caused to believe

    Example from Conference Call: “All of the monies received payable to the Trust are being put directly into the Trust bank account. All monies received made payable to the law firm are deposited into
    one of the firms trust accounts, then transferred to the Trust account. The Trust will be
    responsible for all disbursements and accounting of the monies to the Trust members.

    The Myth of an Association: In the same conference call in which Friedman ruled out a “class action” lawsuit, he continued to maintain that the group represented by the Trust (and whose funds were in the hands of Friedman and the Trust) should continue to exist. Why perpetuate the myth of an “association?” Friedman was hired to proceed legally on behalf of his “client,” including filing lawsuits

      (Quote)

  8. The only thing missing from Bob’s, oopppssss mean Robert L’s post (or whatever other name he wants to go by) is the secret handshake and the super duper decoder ring. I think Bob G. has mixed up Secret Agent movies with reality.

    The point of this? I don’t understand why people are just now getting around to figuring out that Bob G. has had these issues from the very beginning. This is not new behavior for him. It seems everyone was blinded by their desire to get “justice” in getting their ASD money back, they failed to really see who and what Bob G. was all about. Of course having Larry F being promoted as the attorney for the trust, it is easy to see how easy it was to get caught up in the urgency and believing something could be done by Larry’s statements.

    There were statements by Bob G. on the ASD forums that contradicted everything he said in the conference calls when setting up this trust. He said that when he was in Miami, he “knew” immediately that ASD was a scam. He tried to get his money, and other people’s money (checks he had given ASD) back before he left Miami; but because of the volume of checks being received, it was not possible to do so. I guess he forgot he, and the others, could have issued a stop payment on them if he truly felt that way. Then on the call he claims that ASD was a legal entity and not operating as a Ponzi. Then it switched to it was a Ponzi again and he and Larry tried to get named as the receiver.

    People were warning them not to join as there was no way the trust would gain standing in the eyes of the court. Since I have no dog in this hunt, it is easy for me to see things differently. But to make decisions when in the heat of anger and frustration is not a wise thing to do; and now people are paying for it. Please do not construe my comments as being overly critical of the trust members. I am merely pointing out that cooler heads were warning not to join before this ever got traction.

    One can only hope the class action lawsuit being discussed is fruitful so they can recover the money they have lost. Time will tell if this happens or not. But that is the only way anyone is going to get an accounting from Bob G. and the trust.

      (Quote)

  9. Let the trust go, it’s a stinking dead body in Bob Guenther’s kitchen and I say no better place for it. What would anyone do, try to get control over it? Seeing as it’s $50K in debt, Bob may let you have it if you ask, he has said he personally backed up that money, so he owes it (andf clue to the IRS, if they forgive the debt, Bob is on the hook for income tax on the amount, if you’d like to rub salt in the wounds).

    Bob is a blowhard internet bully, and as many people will tell you, a lot of effort was made to warn people not to send him any money. The ASD Biz forum and Kath Danch put a lot of effort into silencing that advice and this is where it’s led. Let go of what you sent Bob, it’s gone and I doubt he has a fraction of what it would take to pay you back, he’s filed bankruptcy, was denied some portion of it for being misleading on the petition, and is now trying to make his living by jumping from one to another internet ponzi scheme or other get rich quick programs, I’d be surprised if he has money to buy you lunch much less refund the ASDMBA funds.
    As big a wanker as Larry is, I can’t see anything he’s done that will get him in legal trouble. A little inconvenience perhaps but you have to give him this, he’s not a bad lawyer and the Trust was set up to protect the people running it from any liability. Post a picture of him to throw darts at but don’t waste any more money going after him either, it’s a lost cause.

    Jeesh, you gave money to a crook to get into a p[onzi scheme. Then he got caught and with him your money, so you gave more money to another crook to represent you against the first crook, and now it turns out he’s nutty as a Texas Pecan Log so now people are looking for someone else to give more money to, in order to back the money you gove to someone to get back the money you gave to the first guy…where does it end?

    If you must, send money to ME. I’ll pool it with the Chili Dog Retirement Trust and not give a second thought to you, but you can at least rest assured it didn’t go to a crrok this time….

      (Quote)

  10. My head has been spinning from trying to keep up with all these flippin law suits and secret codes and who’s doing what to who when? Then I read Gregg’s comment above and it simply put everything in perspective, I can’t quit laughing, thanks Greg!

    Gregg said:
    Jeesh, you gave money to a crook to get into a ponzi scheme. Then he got caught and with him your money, so you gave more money to another crook to represent you against the first crook, and now it turns out he’s nutty as a Texas Pecan Log so now people are looking for someone else to give more money to, in order to back the money you gave to someone to get back the money you gave to the first guy…where does it end?

      (Quote)

  11. Well, thanks. But seriously, how many times are people going to fall for this garbage? And the ASDMBA is nothing but a liability, let it go. I screamed at the top of my lungs at the time to not send Bob anything, as much as I hate to say I told them so, well, I told them so. Now, can we finally put to rest the idea of sending money to people? If you lost enough to be concerned about in the original scam (ASD) go see a lawyer of your own and have him look into it. Your best bet is to sue your upline, in profit or not. If you don’t have the stomach for that, then my advice is to let it go, but you won’t find many other places to go. The government MAY distribute some refunds, but that’s not a sure thing and unlikely to make you whole, Andy is as broke as can be, if he has any money left it’s offshore where you can’t get at it any better than the Secret Service…as I said, I doubt Bob has two nickles to rub together and Larry looks to me like he made sure HE wasn’t going to get caught holding a bag on this. The lot of them are petty thieves, con men and common thieves as far as I can tell, the sooner you can get them behind you the better.

    Of course, Chili Dog is still willing to take your contributions if you just can’t help yourself. She (nor I) will do a thing to get your money back, we will fine no lawsuits and make no trips to Washington DC on your behalf. We have already expressed to officials that we are NOT interested in being involved in a state receivership so as soon as the check clears, our promises are completely fulfilled, just so you know. We will promise that some of the funds will be spent at Tommy’s Pizza in Gettysburg, because they really do make a good pizza!

    snailspace: My head has been spinning from trying to keep up with all these flippin law suits and secret codes and who’s doing what to who when? Then I read Gregg’s comment above and it simply put everything in perspective, I can’t quit laughing, thanks Greg!Gregg said:
    Jeesh, you gave money to a crook to get into a ponzi scheme. Then he got caught and with him your money, so you gave more money to another crook to represent you against the first crook, and now it turns out he’s nutty as a Texas Pecan Log so now people are looking for someone else to give more money to, in order to back the money you gave to someone to get back the money you gave to the first guy…where does it end?

      (Quote)

  12. Greg:

    Neither you nor I can save the world. We can not stop every Ponzi, scam,scheme or crook. What we can do and continue to do is warn, advise, show people what we conceive as that which will cost them the most money for the least amount of return which in most cases is zero.

    If they listen to us then that is a good thing and as we both have found out over time most do not. The Laws are the Laws and were written for everyone even those who use the least amount of common seance when dealing with con men and con artists like Bob G.

    Therefore, why not use the very laws against those who continue to take advantage of the already disadvantaged?

    Its easier to look the other way when one knows that a crime has taken place just like many did with ASD and perhaps I would not have the problem I now have if I had done the same as many others have. Most people choose the path in life that has the least resistance and as we all know that is not the path that I have chosen.

    Just because a person has some type of status does not ob solve them from doing what is right. If we do nothing then how many others will fall victim to these people?

    Win or lose those that have been conned have a right to have their questions answered and if it takes a court of Law to get those answers then that is the course of action that should be taken. How many more lives must be ruined before some one does something?

    My right to post information is protected under the constitutional rights for freedom. Any use of the collective descriptions and shared knowledge from any of my posts are at the sole discretion of the reader.

      (Quote)

  13. I agree with you Jack. Although sometimes it is not worth following through an issue, there are also times when doing so may stop the same people doing damage the next time round. That is what makes it worth following through sometimes.

    With ASDMBA we seem to be up against an misuse of legal “muscle”. It is meant to be used to achieve justice and uphold laws, not to bend and twist them to cover for the perpetrator of the misuse.

      (Quote)

  14. As a footnote to the above..Bob is now soliciting recovery funds for the MMonguls debacle..seems he has found an astounding money source from all his FAILED business ventures! First ASD now MMonguls!

    Sorry, Gregg, but BOB G. HAS TO BE STOPPED!!!!!! He is now an internet predator. It is NOT NECESSARY to send money..just call the FBI, they have a special division just for people like bob g. I’m in touch with the FBI on another scam, so I can easily tell them ALL about mr. guenther from Coppel Tx :))))))))

      (Quote)

  15. I think Gregg and Jenny and Jack and Snail are all correct, because there isn’t a single “right answer” to this increasingly complex issue. With regard to those who sent money to the ASDBMA and now see the error of their ways, I think a lot of them would have been inclined to smite their foreheads and say “What was I thinking?!?” and let it go at that, BEFORE Larry Friedman, goaded by Bob G., decided to sue Jack. The degree of wrongness in that lawsuit, filed in hopes of silencing those critics of Friedman and Crazy Bob who were demanding accountability, adds another dimension, it seems. It is so WRONG on so many levels that viscerally it’s hard to sit by and do nothing. Friedman’s public reputation as an abuser of the Dallas court system, and what seems to be an “in” with the Judge is galling. For anyone who has money in the hands of Larry or Bob (or who did at one time) I can see how they feel that the theft of their funds, followed by the legal harassment of an individual who spoke on their behalf, can’t be allowed to go unchallenged. That’s what Larry and Bob planned all along, as best I can tell.

    Larry had to know that there was no way the “Trust” would ever have legal standing to sue “the government.” For that matter, I’m sure he knew that individual ASD members would have no legal standing to sue “the government.” Both men knew that saying “Let’s sue Andy” wouldn’t raise the money they needed. At best it was a cynical bait and switch action (raise money saying you’re going to sue the government and gradually change the focus to suing whoever could be sued) and at worst they intended to split the money collected and never provide more than lip service. Either way, Bob and Larry raised money under false pretenses, and only they have enjoyed any of the benefits. I think it was intentional theft by deception of at least $70M, according to one of the Trust conference calls; it might have been more. Should that really be allowed to stand unchallenged? Why is Larry giving back money, if he did nothing wrong? He knows that he never intended to sue the government, and he knows he was reported on television in Tallahassee saying that’s what he was going to do to get the members their money back. That was in his fund-raising hey-day, of course. I’m sure he regrets it now.

    Suing Jack to stop him from demanding answers was about as effective as pouring gas on your house trying to put out a fire. I’m glad they’re getting that message!

      (Quote)

  16. I don’t know if the ning forums work the same as php message boards but how can someone delete their account and all traces without admin assistance?
    In php., you have to have admin privileges in order to do both.
    A member can be deleted (by an admin)at the request of the member and then their previous posts stay in any thread they posted in with them listed as their member name and ‘guest’ underneath. It would take an admin to erase the posts.
    Also, it seems the old posts threatening Jack and others are still cached in google. At least they are listed on the front page. I am not a member nor going to sign up so others will have to use their resources.

      (Quote)

Leave a Reply