Kenman, please re-post on Lugan Girl

[BrianN]

... in response to JHC?, posted by odeccaman1 on Apr 11, 2002

you did it... no one else.  As well, you extrapolated jhc... maybe I meant, John Howard Christopher.

You never know.

[odeccaman1]

... in response to Then quit bringing it up when it wasn't ..., posted by BrianN on Apr 11, 2002

I do not need some weasel to tell what to post or not thanx

[BrianN]

... in response to John Howard Christopher, posted by odeccaman1 on Apr 11, 2002

With a spiteful attitude like yours, you're gonna need it.

[Patrick]

... in response to Re: Re: Kenman, please re-post on Lugan ..., posted by KenMan on Apr 9, 2002

You're willing to call them scammers here on a site that gets 2.5M hits per month, but you'll only supply the evidence through e-mail to individuals who request it?  This thread is going to be deleted (again) unless you post the reasons and evidence here, on the board.

[KenMan]

... in response to What facts?, posted by Patrick on Apr 9, 2002

So you are telling us that this site gets over 80,000 hits a day? Even if ryan accounts for a hundred himself... Come on dude be for real!

[Patrick]

... in response to Re: What facts?, posted by KenMan on Apr 10, 2002

While I'm not willing to give anyone the administrative password to access the area of the site that contains the statistics, I am at least willing to copy them here.

[BubbaGump]

... in response to Yes, that's correct, posted by Patrick on Apr 10, 2002

During the winter months you often had so few posts but you're still getting a huge number of hits on the board.

[tim360z]

... in response to Yes, that's correct, posted by Patrick on Apr 10, 2002

I am really somewhat amazed at the hits volume.

[BrianN]

... in response to WOW!  Patrick good breakdown and, posted by tim360z on Apr 11, 2002

For anything that is popular internet wise these days.

[MarkInTx]

... in response to Re: Re: Kenman, please re-post on Lugan ..., posted by KenMan on Apr 9, 2002

Why do you want us to email you privately?

Can't you post your proof to the forum? I think it would be of interest...

[Patrick]

... in response to Re: Kenman, please re-post on Lugan Girl, posted by KenMan on Apr 9, 2002

From their web site-
"To send up to $100, we charge just $15, and only $10 for each additional $100 you wish to send her."

This isn't really very clear to me, but it may be saying that repeat customers pay only $10 per $100 sent after they've sent $100 in the past through their service.  That would make it cheaper if you send $100 multiple times.  Of course, it could also mean that they charge $15 to send $100 and $25 to send $200.

I notice your Western Union prices have changed from your original post.  You stated they charged $15 for the first $100 and $22 for the second, etc.  Now it's $25 to send $200.  There were two ways of inpterpreting your first price list.  One would be that Western Union charged $15 to send $100 and $15+$22=$37 to send $200.  Another would be that they simply charge $22 to send $200.  Your facts are changing from post to post.  I checked the Western Union site and found no prices listed.  From what I was able to read in the fine print, the price depends on various factors including the location of the place it's being sent.  I'll take your word that the prices to send to whatever particular location you checked are as you state (in your new post).  But I wouldn't call this evidence of a scam by Lugan Girl.

Now, if you want to post a credible scam report, you should post the e-mails that you think were "ghost written" and explain why you think that.  Are you getting replies that do not address specific questions you asked a lady?  I'd call that suspicious if that's what you encountered.  All I'm asking is that you include WHY they're a scam if you think they are.  The "gut feeling" that Ryan describes is what I would call simple paranoia.  I see it all the time.

[KenC]

... in response to Re: Kenman, please re-post on Lugan Girl, posted by KenMan on Apr 9, 2002

n/t

[Ryan]

... in response to Kenman, please re-post on Lugan Girl, posted by Patrick on Apr 9, 2002

I personally do not think it would be a good idea to send money using some agencies money transfer system.  Not only is sending money a bad idea to begin with but you are also putting yourself into a situation for being taken.  More than likely an agency that would offer such a service would charge you and the women your sending the money to a fee.. But that's just my thoughts on the issue.... When I was in Lugansk I saw two different western Union offices why chance it....    

KenC Your last post (that was deleted) that was in reply to my theory on being scammed was right on the money.. Now I will shut up...:-)

[KenC]

... in response to Re: Kenman, please re-post on Lugan Girl, posted by Ryan on Apr 9, 2002

Ryan,
Why on earth would anyone send money via an agency instead of Western Union is beyond me too.
I understand that when a relationship breaks up, there are hurt feelings.  These hurt feelings sometimes turn into anger.  The agry person looks for anyone to blame except themselves.  Sometimes, after the anger subsides, the person can reasonably look back at their OWN errors.  You are a better man for doing so, Ryan.  Sure, the girl (and her family) worked you like a "mark" in a con game, but you also ALLOWED them to do so.  There are insincere people world wide and we all have to be able to have our defenses up without letting the few scammers taint our ability to move forward.  Just as being naive doesn't work, so doesn't being cynical.  This fine balance is called "experience".  Best of luck to you.
KenC

[Richard]

... in response to sending money & more, posted by KenC on Apr 9, 2002

I once used an agency to send money so that I could include a surprise gift at the same time.  For money only, Western Union makes the most sense.