What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Paypal Attempts AGAIN To Create $2,500 Terms Of Service Fine PER INSTANCE Of Perceived "Intolerance" (10/9/22 15:01 PST) (1 Viewer)

GordonGekko

Footballguy
Direct Headline: New PayPal Policy Lets Company Pull $2,500 From Users’ Accounts If They Promote ‘Misinformation’

By Ben Zeisloft Oct 7, 2022

A new policy update from PayPal will permit the firm to sanction users who advance purported “misinformation” or present risks to user “well-being” with fines of up to $2,500 per offense.

....The financial services company, which has repeatedly deplatformed organizations and individual commentators for their political views, will expand its “existing list of prohibited activities” on November 3. Among the changes are prohibitions on “the sending, posting, or publication of any messages, content, or materials” that “promote misinformation” or “present a risk to user safety or wellbeing.” Users are also barred from “the promotion of hate, violence, racial or other forms of intolerance that is discriminatory.”... The Daily Wire reached out to PayPal for definitions of the added terms, although no response was received in time for publication....

...Deliberations will be made at the “sole discretion” of PayPal and may subject the user to “damages” — including the removal of $2,500 “debited directly from your PayPal account” per offense. The company’s user agreement contains a provision in which account holders acknowledge that the figure is “presently a reasonable minimum estimate of PayPal’s actual damages” due to the administrative cost of tracking violations and damage to the company’s reputation.....“Under existing law, PayPal has the ability as a private company to implement this type of viewpoint-discriminatory policy....Whatever motivation PayPal has for establishing these vague new categories of prohibited expression, they will almost certainly have a severe chilling effect on users’ speech. As is often the case with ill-defined and viewpoint-discriminatory speech codes, those with unpopular or minority viewpoints will likely bear the brunt of these restrictions....”

The move comes days after PayPal canceled three accounts linked to Toby Young, a commentator who runs a nonprofit called Free Speech Union. The organization has defended clients such as actor and comedian Russell Brand, who recently moved his show from YouTube to Rumble in reaction to censorship from the former platform....Roughly one-third of Free Speech Union members rely upon PayPal to process their membership dues — although the company gave no explanation to Young for the suspension beyond mentioning a breach of the acceptable use policy. PayPal later restored the accounts after receiving criticism from lawmakers and apologized to Young for “any inconvenience caused,”....Platforms such as Amazon, Twitter, and Facebook have formerly censored conservatives and others who subscribe to heterodox positions on controversial social issues, including transgenderism and homosexuality. GoFundMe seized millions in funds raised for trucker protests in Canada earlier this year, while Google recently began suppressing search results for crisis pregnancy centers....

“Whatever PayPal’s intentions may be, censorship and chilling free speech is precisely the effect of these kinds of vaguely worded policies....“We’ve seen social media companies use similar policies to stifle free speech on their platforms. We can expect a similar outcome with PayPal....”


https://www.dailywire.com/news/new-...users-accounts-if-they-promote-misinformation



Direct Headline: PayPal Reverses Plan To Fine Users $2,500 For ‘Misinformation’ After Daily Wire Report

By Greg Wilson Oct 8, 2022

A red-faced PayPal walked back a shocking new policy announcement that users who advance “misinformation” could face fines of $2,500 per offense, saying it was all a mistake after The Daily Wire called attention to the chilling scheme.

...“An [Accepted Use Policy] notice recently went out in error that included incorrect information,” a PayPal spokesperson said. “PayPal is not fining people for misinformation and this language was never intended to be inserted in our policy. We’re sorry for the confusion this has caused.

....The original announcement said PayPal would expand its “existing list of prohibited activities” on November 3. .... The report sparked outrage online, with many people tweeting pledges to dump the online payment facilitator. Particularly chilling was the fact that the policy said determinations of what could be deemed “misinformation,” or a threat to the “wellbeing” of other users was to be at the “sole discretion” of PayPal. The now-aborted policy said users could be liable for “damages” — including the removal of $2,500 “debited directly from your PayPal account” per offense.


https://www.dailywire.com/news/payp...00-for-misinformation-after-daily-wire-report
 
Last edited:
Direct Headline: PayPal won’t fine users for misinformation posts, policy posted “in error”

Ivana Saric 10/9/22

PayPal on Saturday denied that it intends to fine users who use its service to "promote misinformation," saying an earlier policy update notice describing such a change was sent "in error."

State of play: The news caused a stir on Saturday after Lightspark CEO David Marcus — former president of PayPal — said on Twitter that the new policy "goes against everything I believe in....A private company now gets to decide to take your money if you say something they disagree with. Insanity.."

"Agreed," Elon Musk tweeted in response to Marcus.

"An AUP notice recently went out in error that included incorrect information," a PayPal spokesperson told Axios on Sunday..."PayPal is not fining people for misinformation and this language was never intended to be inserted in our policy. Our teams are working to correct our policy pages. We’re sorry for the confusion this has caused..."


https://www.axios.com/2022/10/09/paypal-misinformation-fines

https://news.yahoo.com/paypal-policy-permits-company-fine-143946902.html


**********


"It gives me no pleasure to impose any of these measures. In fact we do so with great sorrow but do not doubt our determination to act, to defend our democracy, to defend our economy, and to restore peace...The consequences are real and they will bite." - Canadian Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland

(Freeland made this statement on 2/18/22, after ordering financial institutions to start freezing bank accounts and canceling credit cards of those donating to protesting truckers against vaccine mandates, "in accordance" with the Canadian Emergencies Act )


Photo Screenshot Of PayPal's "Misinformation" TOS

User Submission Of Cancelling PayPal With Comments

Additional User Submission Of Cancelling PayPal With Comments

Screenshot Of Denial Screen Where PayPal Has Stopped Account Cancelling Because Of Mass Cancellations Of Accounts


The deep ugly question is what happens when our society turns into a "cashless" society? With more tracking of what we buy, what we say, where we go and what we value and believe. How easy would it be to financially choke out, starve out and punish those who simply have a different opinion and viewpoint and political voice?

Looks like PayPal tried to sneak this in just before the Mid Terms, but backed out because of the backlash. Ask yourself, without the major platforms of Elon Musk and The Daily Wire, what would have happened otherwise? The left leaning activist MSM can try to suppress this, but you can't stop the signal when you enrage the masses. Ask Malcolm Reynolds yourself if you want - You can't stop the signal.

Think about the gaslighting here

"We posted this in error"

"We are sorry for the confusion"

"This language was never intended to be inserted into our policy"


OK, if it was never intended, then why was it placed there? Are we supposed to pretend that any changes to their TOS is not subject to extreme vetting? What's the "error", because the intent is very clear. What confusion? The only confusion is that PayPal refused to actually define what constituted "misinformation"

I'll leave this here for others to discuss.
 
I’m not quite sure how this was all going to work? Were they going to monitor PayPal users social media accounts?
I find it hard to believe that they would have the authority to do this.
 
PayPal is terrible. My only surprise here is that people still use PayPal.
I press send and it sends money, what’s terrible about that
If that's the only definition of a non terrible company, that their product works, then so be it. Seems weird though. Sure hope you never go after gun manufacturers. Or oil companies. Or a company that uses sweat shop labor. Or pharmaceutical companies.
 
PayPal is terrible. My only surprise here is that people still use PayPal.
I press send and it sends money, what’s terrible about that
If that's the only definition of a non terrible company, that their product works, then so be it. Seems weird though. Sure hope you never go after gun manufacturers. Or oil companies. Or a company that uses sweat shop labor. Or pharmaceutical companies.
Yeah, what is wrong with a company who wants to steal $2500 because they don't like your opinion. It is only conservatives they will target and not real humans.
 
PayPal is terrible. My only surprise here is that people still use PayPal.
I press send and it sends money, what’s terrible about that
If that's the only definition of a non terrible company, that their product works, then so be it. Seems weird though. Sure hope you never go after gun manufacturers. Or oil companies. Or a company that uses sweat shop labor. Or pharmaceutical companies.
Yeah, what is wrong with a company who wants to steal $2500 because they don't like your opinion. It is only conservatives they will target and not real humans.
But you see...If he clicks a button, it works!!!! Nothing else matters I guess!
 
PayPal is terrible. My only surprise here is that people still use PayPal.
I press send and it sends money, what’s terrible about that
If that's the only definition of a non terrible company, that their product works, then so be it. Seems weird though. Sure hope you never go after gun manufacturers. Or oil companies. Or a company that uses sweat shop labor. Or pharmaceutical companies.
Yeah, what is wrong with a company who wants to steal $2500 because they don't like your opinion. It is only conservatives they will target and not real humans.
But you see...If he clicks a button, it works!!!! Nothing else matters I guess!
I don't think he was defending these actions. I think he was responding to the implication that PayPal was terrible anyway, prior to these allegations.
I agree with him: have never had an issue with the way PayPal works.
 
PayPal is terrible. My only surprise here is that people still use PayPal.
I press send and it sends money, what’s terrible about that
If that's the only definition of a non terrible company, that their product works, then so be it. Seems weird though. Sure hope you never go after gun manufacturers. Or oil companies. Or a company that uses sweat shop labor. Or pharmaceutical companies.
Yeah, what is wrong with a company who wants to steal $2500 because they don't like your opinion. It is only conservatives they will target and not real humans.
But you see...If he clicks a button, it works!!!! Nothing else matters I guess!
I don't think he was defending these actions. I think he was responding to the implication that PayPal was terrible anyway, prior to these allegations.
I agree with him: have never had an issue with the way PayPal works.
Exactly, good god what a bunch of raging hormones waiting to lash out lol.

I don’t think PayPal’s technology sucks, that was the point. The policy does make me reconsider using them (but honestly so we think chase and BofA are any better lol)
 
PayPal is terrible. My only surprise here is that people still use PayPal.
I press send and it sends money, what’s terrible about that
If that's the only definition of a non terrible company, that their product works, then so be it. Seems weird though. Sure hope you never go after gun manufacturers. Or oil companies. Or a company that uses sweat shop labor. Or pharmaceutical companies.
Yeah, what is wrong with a company who wants to steal $2500 because they don't like your opinion. It is only conservatives they will target and not real humans.
But you see...If he clicks a button, it works!!!! Nothing else matters I guess!
I don't think he was defending these actions. I think he was responding to the implication that PayPal was terrible anyway, prior to these allegations.
I agree with him: have never had an issue with the way PayPal works.
Exactly, good god what a bunch of raging hormones waiting to lash out lol.

I don’t think PayPal’s technology sucks, that was the point. The policy does make me reconsider using them (but honestly so we think chase and BofA are any better lol)
It was a drive by comment that was intended to be difficult. You knew it when you posted it. And you got called out for it. Tough
 
PayPal is terrible. My only surprise here is that people still use PayPal.
I press send and it sends money, what’s terrible about that
I was probably a little harsh, but there are way better options out there for both peer to peer transfers and payment processing. Better technology, less fees.
But none can be used on eBay for the majority of transactions.
eBay is also terrible. You guys are like 20 years behind the times.
 
PayPal is terrible. My only surprise here is that people still use PayPal.
I press send and it sends money, what’s terrible about that
I was probably a little harsh, but there are way better options out there for both peer to peer transfers and payment processing. Better technology, less fees.
But none can be used on eBay for the majority of transactions.
eBay is also terrible. You guys are like 20 years behind the times.
Haha, I don’t use eBay (what used goods marketplace is better?)

But your PayPal note was unconvincing. I can send money to a friend in 13 seconds using PayPal, for free. Maybe you’re referring to other functionality that makes the experience so much better…what is it? Genuinely curious.

I use Zelle, same experience.
 
Haha, I don’t use eBay (what used goods marketplace is better?)

But your PayPal note was unconvincing. I can send money to a friend in 13 seconds using PayPal, for free. Maybe you’re referring to other functionality that makes the experience so much better…what is it? Genuinely curious.

I use Zelle, same experience.
Everyone I know uses Facebook Marketplace now. But I think it depends mostly on your local market. I just rarely hear of anyone using ebay in the last 5 years. Possibly for hard to find collectables.

It always drove me nuts that I had to pay fees to withdraw my money from PayPal. Maybe they have changed that now. I also hate that they always try to get me to create an account just to pay with credit card. The credit card processor should be essentially invisible... Like Stripe.
 
Haha, I don’t use eBay (what used goods marketplace is better?)

But your PayPal note was unconvincing. I can send money to a friend in 13 seconds using PayPal, for free. Maybe you’re referring to other functionality that makes the experience so much better…what is it? Genuinely curious.

I use Zelle, same experience.
Everyone I know uses Facebook Marketplace now. But I think it depends mostly on your local market. I just rarely hear of anyone using ebay in the last 5 years. Possibly for hard to find collectables.

It always drove me nuts that I had to pay fees to withdraw my money from PayPal. Maybe they have changed that now. I also hate that they always try to get me to create an account just to pay with credit card. The credit card processor should be essentially invisible... Like Stripe.
Gotcha.

The market has definitely caught up to PayPal in terms of additional options for card not present txns (google pay, Apple Pay, etc), but with all of them as far as I know you have to register/add a card in their wallet if you want to use said card?

When you use PayPal the processor is invisible no? The experience when I use it online is seemless (especially if your PayPal credentials are stored in your browser or an integrated password application). For mobile transactions yah you can’t beat Apple Pay integration.

Anyhoo a diversion from the topic, I just think sometimes old tech gets thrown out as bad tech unnecessarily or prematurely.
 
When I read stories like this all that I think is "what moron decided that this was a good idea?" Chances of blowback are like 100%.
 
Haha, I don’t use eBay (what used goods marketplace is better?)

But your PayPal note was unconvincing. I can send money to a friend in 13 seconds using PayPal, for free. Maybe you’re referring to other functionality that makes the experience so much better…what is it? Genuinely curious.

I use Zelle, same experience.
Everyone I know uses Facebook Marketplace now. But I think it depends mostly on your local market. I just rarely hear of anyone using ebay in the last 5 years. Possibly for hard to find collectables.

It always drove me nuts that I had to pay fees to withdraw my money from PayPal. Maybe they have changed that now. I also hate that they always try to get me to create an account just to pay with credit card. The credit card processor should be essentially invisible... Like Stripe.
In the collectibles market, I need every option. I have had good luck on Facebook marketplace, but I don’t trust it totally. I know eBay has my back on a rogue seller.
 
Stupid policy that will cost them users, really not much more to say then that. Wouldn’t be surprised to see it retracted here soon.
 
VIDEO: Paypal Just Got BUSTED Again Trying To Re-Sneak $2,500 Fine For Customers Into Terms! TheQuartering Oct 26, 2022

....Aside from the fact that the clause is a fool’s errand because there is literally no way for the company to legitimately determine what is or isn’t misinformation, and that “offensive” is subjective, there is no legal basis for a clause like this anyway. PayPal has no legal right to dictate activity that happens outside of its own platform, especially when that activity has zero impact on PayPal.....

https://youtu.be/zt8YonMWBN4?t=356



Direct Headline: Following PR Crisis, PayPal Again Updates TOS Hoping You Won’t Notice

By Jeremy Knauff October 25, 2022

....One entrepreneur, Tony Whatley, who runs several mastermind groups, closed his account that day and canceled the tens of thousands in monthly recurring fees for the members in the groups his business processes through PayPal. .....Financial titan and Fox Business host, Charles Payne, stepped up and canceled his account as well, but by this point, PayPal had begun fighting account closures by introducing additional steps and even outright ignoring customers. ....There were countless others following suit. In fact, Google searches for “delete PayPal” spiked to 1,392% after the announcement, according to Google Trends. And as the situation continued to unfold, the company’s stock price continued to plummet....

.....By the following day, PayPal’s PR team was in full crisis mode and trying to spin the story as a “simple mistake” that was never meant to be included in the terms of service. But most people saw through this because any rational person knows it had to pass through multiple phases of review by multiple teams before being finally inserted into the terms of service and published online. No one bought the story they tried to push....

....The bigger story, though, is that despite it’s PR team publicly claiming it was just a simple mistake that that was never intended to be published, shortly after the criticism on social media died down, it was added back into the terms of service with equally ambiguous language. Apparently, they believed that everyone would just accept their claim and immediately forget about the incident.....So the clause that was a mistake and was never intended to be included in PayPal’s terms of service magically ended up back in there once the criticism died back down. That sounds plausible, right? And as for what constitutes a “violation” of the company’s terms of service, the language is so vaguely worded that it could encompass literally anything....

.....The term “other forms of intolerance” is so broad that it legally gives the company grounds to claim that anyone not fully supporting any particular position is engaging in “intolerance” because the definition of the word is the unwillingness to accept views, beliefs, or behavior that differ from one’s own. So essentially, this clause gives PayPal the perceived right to withdraw $2,500 from users accounts for voicing opinions that PayPal disagrees with.....


https://gritdaily.com/pr-crisis-paypal/


********


IMAGE of PayPal's updated Terms Of Service



IMAGE of PayPal's "Prohibited Activities" - "other forms of intolerance"


********



The media optics perspective here is the eventual new media cover story for PayPal/Venmo will be that the "mistake" they admitted in public was that the new controversial terms of the TOS was placed into the wrong section, not that it should never have been placed there at all.

That operationally gives them some wiggle room to say they technically "Did Not Lie" to everyone in their statements. Technically.

Let's see how this unfolds.
 
Do you know who owns Venmo?
I do and I feel a big gotcha moment is coming.
Wasn't the intent, but I see in rereading this how that would be a very likely result. Sorry @dkp993 if that is how it felt.

My point is that like lots of "big guys", it is hard to avoid something like PayPal. Even using an alternative in this case is using PayPal. Despite all of the talk of innovation and employment by small businesses, the reality is that the deck is stacked for the "too big to avoid". And tying it back to the subject of this thread* emboldens the "big guys" to do stuff that true competition would prevent. PayPal isn't losing many customers* because there are not really anyplace else to go,


*Assuming the accusations from last night which I haven't read yet are both real and would cause such loses in customers. In other words, I'm trying to avoid pretending to be current on the topic because I'm not and I'm only speaking in broad generalities.
 
VIDEO: Paypal Just Got BUSTED Again Trying To Re-Sneak $2,500 Fine For Customers Into Terms! TheQuartering Oct 26, 2022

....Aside from the fact that the clause is a fool’s errand because there is literally no way for the company to legitimately determine what is or isn’t misinformation, and that “offensive” is subjective, there is no legal basis for a clause like this anyway. PayPal has no legal right to dictate activity that happens outside of its own platform, especially when that activity has zero impact on PayPal.....

https://youtu.be/zt8YonMWBN4?t=356



Direct Headline: Following PR Crisis, PayPal Again Updates TOS Hoping You Won’t Notice

By Jeremy Knauff October 25, 2022

....One entrepreneur, Tony Whatley, who runs several mastermind groups, closed his account that day and canceled the tens of thousands in monthly recurring fees for the members in the groups his business processes through PayPal. .....Financial titan and Fox Business host, Charles Payne, stepped up and canceled his account as well, but by this point, PayPal had begun fighting account closures by introducing additional steps and even outright ignoring customers. ....There were countless others following suit. In fact, Google searches for “delete PayPal” spiked to 1,392% after the announcement, according to Google Trends. And as the situation continued to unfold, the company’s stock price continued to plummet....

.....By the following day, PayPal’s PR team was in full crisis mode and trying to spin the story as a “simple mistake” that was never meant to be included in the terms of service. But most people saw through this because any rational person knows it had to pass through multiple phases of review by multiple teams before being finally inserted into the terms of service and published online. No one bought the story they tried to push....

....The bigger story, though, is that despite it’s PR team publicly claiming it was just a simple mistake that that was never intended to be published, shortly after the criticism on social media died down, it was added back into the terms of service with equally ambiguous language. Apparently, they believed that everyone would just accept their claim and immediately forget about the incident.....So the clause that was a mistake and was never intended to be included in PayPal’s terms of service magically ended up back in there once the criticism died back down. That sounds plausible, right? And as for what constitutes a “violation” of the company’s terms of service, the language is so vaguely worded that it could encompass literally anything....

.....The term “other forms of intolerance” is so broad that it legally gives the company grounds to claim that anyone not fully supporting any particular position is engaging in “intolerance” because the definition of the word is the unwillingness to accept views, beliefs, or behavior that differ from one’s own. So essentially, this clause gives PayPal the perceived right to withdraw $2,500 from users accounts for voicing opinions that PayPal disagrees with.....


https://gritdaily.com/pr-crisis-paypal/


********


IMAGE of PayPal's updated Terms Of Service



IMAGE of PayPal's "Prohibited Activities" - "other forms of intolerance"


********



The media optics perspective here is the eventual new media cover story for PayPal/Venmo will be that the "mistake" they admitted in public was that the new controversial terms of the TOS was placed into the wrong section, not that it should never have been placed there at all.

That operationally gives them some wiggle room to say they technically "Did Not Lie" to everyone in their statements. Technically.

Let's see how this unfolds.
WAIT! (Speaking of "gotcha moments")

PayPal is saying that you are responsible for the damages that PayPal runs up in dealing with your usage of its services in a manner inconsistent with its terms of service and that $2500 would be a minimal estimate on the cost of these realized? This is something new? This is a fine? Isn't this what the party of "pro-business", corporate arbitration over juries has fought for and won? That corporations shouldn't be on the hook for costs created by customers? This is the scandal? At least from the right?

I see a lie here. Just not from PayPal!
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top