Hello Kyoshi, Indeed, Peter. That "someone" is probably me. You are aware of my background. You are indeed correct in that you were that "someone", as I am aware of your background and the level you have achieved. While that level is, I will agree, somewhat higher than the levels I have transpired to in my 25 years of practice, I would still take the three rounds if only to learn. I recall in a coversation I was fortunate enough to have one day when working security at Toronto International Airport. I was walking down one of the many hallways and there right in front of me was Chuck Norris. To my good fortune his flight was delayed so I escorted him to a private First Class lounge and we sat and discussed many things about the martial arts. One topic we just had to discuss, as I was at the time studying Jeet Kun Do, was the topic of Bruce Lee. Chuck expained to me that he had developed this new technique, and he had shown it to Bruce, once. About a week later Chuck was over at Bruce Lee's house and not only had Bruce improved the technique but he had developed the defense for it. This topic alone afforded me a private lesson one on one with Chuck Norris something that I will have and respect forever. Chuck just shook his head and said, "Never show Bruce Lee anything". He then introduced me to Bill (Bigfoot) Wallace as he had had just entered the lounge. I think that the handshake these two exchanged would have crushed my hand. I paid my respects to the both of them and quitely left them on their own as they were both waiting on the same flight to L.A. When my day statred I was a bit put off as I had to miss going to a major tournament in Toronto that day, not to compete, but more just to observe. I think I couldn't have had a better time than I ended up having just being in the presence of those two back when both were still in active competition. I think that sometines respect is given purely on reputation, it is deserved, but given just because someone is who they are and represent what they do.

Linda, How are your skills at being a referee if Gary and Peter agree to have their respectable, full contact, whatever it is they like to do or want to do. You guys are funny. :-) Reality TV at it's best, I think. If I understand correctly, the randomizer scheme we are talking about in this forum is a scheme and not a business or an investment. It doesn't matter if it's PayPal or not. Reading the paypal fine print is not the issue. It may be good advise to read the fine print but the method of exchanging the funds is not the issue. So any scheme similar to the one in questions here is not a business or an investment. I don't see a product or service offered nor I'm I presented with some form of goods that can appreciate in value over a specified period of time.

Hi Winston; Boy, this got lively for a while. You post great questions and observations, and I didn't want you to think I was ignoring you. In your post, you asked... =========================================== Going back to one of Linda's original questions on this topic, can anyone else detail their results with Randomizers for us? Using hard numbers? =========================================== When *no one* will post hard numbers, it usually warrants a look. See, it's not that "no one" is making money. It's (usually) more a case of *who* is making the money. Let's take money4urandomizer.com. According to the main page; -- There are 147 users. -- The best sponsor is "admin" - 65 signups. -- Total "random" payments: $575 When a new user signs up, they make 3 payments of $5 each. Payment #1 ($5) goes to their sponsor. Payment #2 ($5) goes to a member at random Payment #3 ($5) goes to admin Let's look at payment type #3 - 147 members each paid $5 to admin. That's $735 65 users were sponsored by admin, so admin also got the sponsor payment 65 times. That's $325 -- Theoretically, admin has made $1,060 if the posted numbers are accurate -- During the time that admin made $1,060 - $575 in "random" payments have been divided between 147 users (again, if the posted numbers are accurate) So, it's not *really* an issue that these programs don't work. They *work* - for the admin. As admin, the goal is to get as many people signed up as possible. What's the best way to do that? Offer an option for the lazy folks as well as the worker bees. The lazy folks don't *have to* recruit. They just pay their $15 and never promote - and they'll come up in the randomizer now and again. Easy money, no work. That's incentive to lots of people, and $5 to admin each time someone bites. The worker bees will work their hearts out to promote because they'll get the $5 sponsor payment for every member they bring in. And, for every $5 they make - admin also makes $5. Anyone who is a "user" needs to be aware of how the money plays out. I know 2 "users" of that particular group that were willing to give me numbers, but NOT willing to have their name posted. One has made his $15 back - the other is up $5. Anyone else that wants to share numbers, you can do so anonymously by sending me a private message. I won't tell your name. So there you go. At least *some* numbers - the best I could do with what I have to work with. : ) Linda

Hi Jack Good to see you join us in this rather crazy but lively thread! =========================================== How are your skills at being a referee if Gary and Peter agree to have their respectable, full contact, whatever it is they like to do or want to do =========================================== Oh, that's easy. Gary lives in Oz, so it's not likely an issue. And, if it was, I'd take a good book and head to the bench in the woods where I like to read and come back when they're done. lol =========================================== If I understand correctly, the randomizer scheme we are talking about in this forum is a scheme and not a business or an investment. It doesn't matter if it's PayPal or not. Reading the paypal fine print is not the issue. It may be good advise to read the fine print but the method of exchanging the funds is not the issue. So any scheme similar to the one in questions here is not a business or an investment. =========================================== I had to smile. See, on a personal level, I completely agree. I'd never get into one myself. But, I figure that if I expect the freedom to make my own choices, I should extend that to others. But I do think a lot of people stopped to think once Winston posted the paypal notification. For a lot of people, that was a real shocker and a good reminder that no matter how "long" the small print is, it's a good idea to read it. : ) Linda

Hi Linda, Did you happen to read the User Terms for this site.? I'm not sure I want to admit I read the fine print or any other print for that matter. In a lot of cases it doesn't hold water. I generally make an assessment on the company, website, or person making an offer before I consider giving any information. I get many invites with links from people in this community to join programs and when I go to the site I'm expected to provide my name or email before I receive some detail or some valuable information from the website. It doesn't make sense to me. Don't you think there are programs and/or opportunity promoted on this site that do not follow the term of use as stated on this site?