It doesn't bother me one bit that PayPal is chock full of GFWs (Gun-Fearing Wussies).
However, PayPal's recent actions with regards to a Soldiers' Angels Valour-IT fundraiser merely *because* PayPal is chock full of GFWs bothers me.
A lot.
Got that? PayPal sooooo doesn't like guns, it wanted to insure anyone even remotely connected with guns, including those who used to carry them in our defense, and were wounded while carrying them in our defense, suffered the Wrath Of PayPal.
I, personally, will henceforth include in any and all references to and correspondence with PayPal the salutation, "Dear PayPal, you scumsucking crapweasels"...
However, PayPal's recent actions with regards to a Soldiers' Angels Valour-IT fundraiser merely *because* PayPal is chock full of GFWs bothers me.
A lot.
Online donations through PayPal are a huge part of our fundraising. They shut down our entire account-not just the raffle button—for twelve hours right in the middle of an email fundraising push. Looking at the Terms of Use, we couldn’t understand where we’d gone wrong, but we had to immediately remove the raffle so we could get back online ASAP. This just breaks our hearts because we were so excited about the tremendous fundraising impact the Gun Blogger Rendezvous raffle was already having.Got that? Soldiers' Angels was helping the Gunblogger Rendezvous with a raffle and PayPal shut off all contributions to SA -- as in, ALL contributions, regardless of where they were going -- merely because the GFWs at PayPal don't believe *you* should have the opportunity to exercise your rights under the Second Amendment.
Got that? PayPal sooooo doesn't like guns, it wanted to insure anyone even remotely connected with guns, including those who used to carry them in our defense, and were wounded while carrying them in our defense, suffered the Wrath Of PayPal.
I, personally, will henceforth include in any and all references to and correspondence with PayPal the salutation, "Dear PayPal, you scumsucking crapweasels"...
They were willing to take their blood money until it started costing them uncomfortable moments at lunch with their GFW peers in the Liberal Oligarchy.
Which has made Auction Arms, Gunbroker and Guns America very successful.
And the lock they have on the on-line payments thing has made people very creative in how they use Paypal to accept payments for items. It's hilarious, in a sense. At least before, they had some visibility of how much their service was used in supporting legitimate open trade in firearms. Now, they don't know. Because people are buying machinegun parts and paying for "t-shirts" or "bolts of cloth."
They've even taken it to the level of they have people watching transactions involving people who they believe to be vendors on the gun sites, and are watching for auction numbers and user ids associated with Gun Broker, Guns America, Auction Arms, etc, and suspending accounts if they score.
They not only are losing revenue, they are actually spending money in order to lose revenue - from a lawful activity.
But this is also lawyer-driven. They decided that since they couldn't verify that each specific transaction was legal in the context of local laws and restrictions, they would simply not allow the trade.
But they're not so pure that they aren't happy to be one of the biggest single conduits for fencing stolen goods, however, along with Craigslist.
Using *that* particular line of reasoning, every volunteer fireman selling raffle tickets for a Thanksgiving turkey should be required to have a food-handler's certificate...
This is a lawyer-driven action... but one that eBay and PayPal have interpreted with a wide brushstroke. Banning all contributions to SA is ridiculous.
I have a PayPal account and will call and email. I too, will take names and write down comments.
Time to get the military Up in Arms. Get those Valour-IT recipients to say something too. Maybe it is time to form a non-profit separate account...through USAA.
So there, yo' own self. PP bounces around on both sides of legality, reacting only to possible Stern Finger-Wagging from the Libs, which makes the PP Posse *consistent* at being scumsucking crapweasels.
insert a very long beeeep here... I have nothing else to say about PP...
After consulting nuerous nautical references, and a few old Boatsain's Mates, I think I have suitable, and more accurate salutations.
However, sadly, not a word of them are repeatable in a family blog.
%$#@(*&)ing $*&^$#@!*&s is just too open to misinterpretation.
Any statistical aberration and they flip the switch. Unrelated to firearms. Did paypal state they turned off funding because of the wildly tangential connection to firearms?
They would never disable just the 'donate' link for one thing, they suspend entire accounts when investigating unusal activity.
Did you read Patty's statement?.
...but we had to immediately remove the raffle so we could get back online ASAP.
Rick, we are unable to comment on the status of accounts to individuals who are not registered to the account.
Sincerely,
StevenPayPal Compliance DepartmentPayPal, an eBay Company
Original Message Follows:
------------------------ Form Message customer subject: Why was the Soldiers Angels/Valour IT fundraiser shut down? customer message: Additional Information: 'I just read an article advising that a fundraiser for Soldiers Angels/Valour IT was shut down by PayPal for unknown reasons. Apparently, this cost these organizations a considerable loss of donations and funding. The article goes on to surmise that the terms of agreement were considered to have been abused and consequently the use of PayPal was cancelled for that event. Please advise what the reason(s) were for the shutdown for donating to a wounded servicemen's organization.'
From Smallest Minority:
In the short time (3.5 days) the [Raffle] PayPal button was live, they had 42 participants and 109 tickets sold.
Yup. Tremendous volume of donations there, all right.
The kicker is, PayPal *knows* that SA generates a lot of donations and has periodic surges of traffic. PP has also cited SA *by name* as one shining example of its successful fundraising assistance.
So, it wasn't the volume of traffic or an unusual surge in donations, and SA is a *known* charitable fundraiser. Then there's Patty's statement that she had to remove the raffle as the condition to having her service restored.
It was the raffle. There's no other possible explanation.
To paraphrase The Great Detective, "Once you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, particularly if scumsucking crapweasels are involved, must be the answer."
Their derailing a charity is a very low act.
(Dons CCC cap)
Sigh. So this is what the other side sees when they want to break into the Boyscouts or something: It doesn't support our views so we gotta burn it to the ground.
Sure, building an alternative is hard, but it's also an opp to make something glorious of kvetching and pointing fingers. Der Fuzzy Eine is a great example of this---she found something lacking, and rather than get huffy she DID something constructive rather than destructive(whining, yeah, funny, I know who I am and how funny it is coming from me. Oh, the irony). There's enough talent in our circles to pull something like this off. If we dare.
And, no, I know I don't have the talent to do it.
Ya need to *read* the entire thing, not just scan the highlights.
You've put yourself into the position of defending a business organization that violates its own terms of usage -- and ethics -- merely because it detected what it considered an affront to the *political* agenda of its owners.
Kind of a tough position to be able to defend, other than emotionally.
Since we know people are weak, it doesn't take much to make em do things a certain way. Fear is a great motivator. It's just that, when the balance of powers isn't balanced, usually it is the thugs that get all the fear generation.
Whenever situations arise that those in power fear the attackers of, say, the US Constitution more than they fear the defenders of it, then we got problems.
Ry there are two modes to quote Herbert Brun:
Here you are being a reformer, a champion of the conflict. I do not think you read what is happening properly
Paragraph 2:
Here you appear to switch into revolutionary a champion of the contradiction and are burning Paypal to the ground yourself. CCC doesn't mean being internally inconsistent.
Having said that I think it's a good idea and fits in more with my idea of action is better than complaint.
Screw the extraneous details and get to the part where we fix shiite. Yeah, I woke up on a different side of the bed the last coupla. Odd as heck.
Look. The evidence is *for* PayPal messing with a charity. Why don't you find out what PP side of the story is? Then you can say 'neener neener' with impunity.
However, aol also has a history of trashing people who believe in the 2nd Amendment, and it isn't a far stretch to ascribe that attitude to PP based on the evidence presented. There is no wild speculation based on hearsay, but plausible probability.
I have not been able to get through to ask why; but it won't hurt my feelings or my 100% positive feedback rating to close my account. I have had it for ten years, long before eBay bought it.