No Warning From A Rat Writer Or His Boss!

Varaschin case highlights dark side of dating websites – – by Nicki Thomas

The Toronto Star lives up to it’s name, when you read it backwards. The organization is infested with rats. I’ve talked about the gatekeepers wandering all over the planet. They are people who think the way elites want them to think, who are loosed on society, and who are too free while they hinder, with impunity, others, whose views they disagree with, from going about their business. It’s one thing more to keep the people off balance and sidelined. Nicki Thomas may or may not be a gatekeeper. He may as well be one, since he, with the Star’s blessing, has just wasted a great deal of my time and annoyed the crap out of me.

His uninteresting article – it’s straightforward, and important enough, reportage with no hint of personality to it – does not come with any commenting options. So, after trying the dating site he ‘helpfully’ provides a link to, and discovering that it’s horrible, and not as advertized (by the site’s owner), I can’t return to this Star article and warn anyone. And the wonderful Mr. Thomas hasn’t got a handy email link for me to tell him about this. I’d have to look around on the Star’s website to see whether this writer is reachable, but right now it’s not looking good.

The site? It’s called “True.” And it’s false. It advertizes that it’s free. It’s not. You get a free trial and they ask you to phone them if you want to cancel. I’m reeaally looking forward to that. As you wind up the registration process, which is fairly involved, and still not what I want from a dating site (Let us do our own frikkin talking!), you get hit left, right and center with a zillion pop ups using the info you just inputted into True’s fields. Nice! Way to go assholes! All of you!

As for Niki Thomas’s article, here’s an excerpt, consisting of an interesting tidbit, at least for those of us using Plenty Of Fish:

** The site’s CEO, founder and sole employee, Markus Frind, could not be reached for comment Wednesday. **

He’s no doubt sitting in a bar or coffee shop somewhere hashing out the details to a new partnership with some scammy company whose popups will soon assail us fish looking for romance, or lust, on his overly busy site. And his is still, that I can see, the best site out there!

*edit/ May 26
I was wrong about needing to phone them in order to cancel. You’ll find a cancellation link in your account section. What a scammy operation though! You think, after being misled by a writer who mentions their safety features (the checks they do on you with your credit card info), that you’re registering with a decent site, which is why you’re handing over credit card info, only to find out that it’s not free, which isn’t clearly laid out. And the credit card info you’ve given, thinking only about the safety feature, ‘will’ mean that you get dinged if you let cancelling slide once you realize you’ve been had. We are all busy. That’s easy to do and I’m sure these shit heads are counting on that.

The one good thing about the pop ups you are swamped with immediately upon entering the site? It’s like getting doused with cold water. It wakes you up. It’s annoying and that might be enough for you to pull out of this scammy operation before you get dinged.

*edit, May 29
As I was reviewing items on my blog, I noticed that WP flagged this post. It said I had a newer autosave than the post I had showing. I have no idea how that can come about. I clicked on a link that said ‘compare’. It didn’t show me the difference, so I figured that I couldn’t go wrong with taking what was the newest version and I clicked on ‘restore’ attached to the newer autosave version. After a small touch up (swapping the word ‘option’ with ‘feature’ in the sentence about the Star article not having a commenting feature and putting parentheses around the company name “True,” I realized that there was a missing piece.

I’m sure that my final version included mentioning or emphasizing that the Star article misled us by implying that the site was straight up otherwise it would not be so considerate as to do background checks. Except that “True’s” intentions are demonstrably not good and Nicki Thomas and the Toronto Star have done a disservice to readers of the Star, especially those who look to it for guidance.

For example, In addition to what I’ve laid out above, I was in one of my favorite coffee shops yesterday (May 28) and when I opened my netbook and checked my email there was was a message from True. The tone was along the lines of “When will you be home for dinner honey?” to an ex husband from his ex-wife following a nasty divorce proceeding that only ended the day before. As I noted above, I had already found the cancellation feature on the website, in the user’s (mine) account section, and used it.

This didn’t smell good, considering I had given over my debit number to True. I’ve been unemployed since May 13th, not because I’m a criminal, but because we live in a barbaric system, and this is not something I need. So I called up my bank and asked them what they could do. They killed my debit card and I then went in to a branch within the hour to get a new one. Better to be safe than sorry.

Thanks Toronto Star. Thanks a lot!

This entry was posted in Romance and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Feel free to comment!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s