And they refunded your names from July 4th-6th? I can’t imagine GFM had your money in their hands after all that time. I’m more inclined to believe they paid out of pocket to scrub out your donation
And they refunded your names from July 4th-6th? I can’t imagine GFM had your money in their hands after all that time. I’m more inclined to believe they paid out of pocket to scrub out your donation
And they refunded your names from July 4th-6th? I can’t imagine GFM had your money in their hands after all that time. I’m more inclined to believe they paid out of pocket to scrub out your donation
That would be fraud (spending peoples money in a way they did not authorize and not for the intended purpose) and the IRS would love to give GFM an oral exam on why they are to be feared.
Is that even ethical? The donation was to go to the intended charity. Not to go to an unintended recipient. GFM's problems don't overrule GFM's compliance with following their own terms of service
That would be fraud (spending peoples money in a way they did not authorize and not for the intended purpose) and the IRS would love to give GFM an oral exam on why they are to be feared.
No, not at all. Because your donation on the 18th is still going through. That's what fungible means, from what I understand. $1 here is the same as $1 there.
No, not at all. Because your donation on the 18th is still going through. That's what fungible means, from what I understand. $1 here is the same as $1 there.
again because gfm refers to it as donation that means that there are rules they must follow or risk the IRS's wrath. and I highly doubt they have enough money to throw money at the IRS to make them go away.
more likely they simply paid out of pocket rather than mess with donations since that is a literal legal land mine.
No, not at all. Because your donation on the 18th is still going through. That's what fungible means, from what I understand. $1 here is the same as $1 there.
And he bolstered it by saying "if it did happen, I would have remembered, and if it did happen, I would have acted differently in my subsequent dealings with Monica and Vic."
I know Nick has said that there is no such thing as a slam dunk case, but god fucking damn.
Is that even ethical? The donation was to go to the intended charity. Not to go to an unintended recipient. GFM's problems don't overrule GFM's compliance with following their own terms of service
It wouldn't be the illegal kind of ponzi scheme, but the last thing a platform that handles money wants to do is run their business like a ponzi scheme except without the profit
It wouldn't be the illegal kind of ponzi scheme, but the last thing a platform that handles money wants to do is run their business like a ponzi scheme except without the profit
That doesn't make any sense at all. A ponzi scheme has the first investors get given money that later investors chip in. Go Fund Me doesn't give investors anything.