Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

****SCAM site, use caution ****

 

 

We are adding TwoDollarClick to our Not Recommended List and here are our combined reasons why:

 

1. Owned by a Scammer -  Their whois info shows "addicted2punishment@hotmail.com" as the registered owner. Google that email address and you will find it is the same owner of NeoDollar and TenDollarClick. Both are on our Not Recommended List.

addicted2punishment%40hotmail.com%20-%20Google%20Search.jpg

 

2. The Obvious - Like the old saying says, if it sounds too good to be true then it probably is. $2 per click is unsustainable and bogus. You are not going to get rich by clicking a link or an advertisement.

 

 

3. No Forum - Sites that don't have them don't welcome feedback about their program.  Forums can be a excellent asset to many sites since proof of payment can be posted freely by members. This site does not have one.

 

4. Fake Certificates - Site claims they are BBB accredited. Which is a lie.

Page%20Image.jpg

 

5. "Payments are sent out on a net 60 basis" - Way past when you can file a dispute with paypal or alertpay. Which is why they have you waiting that long. As soon as you realize you are not getting paid, it is too late to do anything about it.

 

 

6. "All earnings listed and/or represented by twodollarclick.com are estimated value(s)" - Then why name the site twodollarclick? Basically what they are telling you is that you will not be paid.

 

 

If they do not state this on their home page then they are false advertising. 

 

i would not recommend TwoDollarClick for the reasons previously described. We deem it as a scam. Use at your own risk...you were warned.

  • 1 month later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Posts

    • try this one instead. The one he shared affects every single NPC/player character in the game, the one I posted only affects player characters  https://drive.google.com/file/d/1UtccbD9e50x3WEnQBab2PTZnBHwpcGYM/view?usp=sharing or perhaps i misunderstood; if you could please post a full explanation of the problem you're having with the files, unfortunately i think whatever you're using to translate to english is a bit bad nevermind, i got what you mean, here's the fix   https://drive.google.com/file/d/1av7OHaGSdnVQtcBgb9MhtiIkxVXy3P2y/view?usp=sharing   CanIngnoreCollision=True CanBeIngnoredCollision=True  
    • <dailyReward days="28" autoOpen="true" minimumOnlineTimeSeconds="30" oneRewardPerIP="true" resetIfMissDay="true">   For now, I have these settings in the XML—this is the V1 version I created, though I plan to make further improvements over time. Of course, I’ll also add more protections—MAC, HWID, and perhaps others like account-based restrictions—to make it more secure. We can also implement non-tradable items to further enhance the system's security. I’ll keep posting updates and refining both the system and the interface. I might make a video tomorrow; if you look at the top, you'll see the "auto-open" feature can be toggled on or off, allowing users to rely solely on the `.daily` command. Cheers! Note: If I sell it in this state, I’ll provide support and roll out updates to users. I’m not forcing anyone to buy anything; I’d even provide the patch files so that anyone with the necessary skills can add features, modify it, or improve it further.
    • If the problem is that the target is lost, the action of aiming at another character, upon losing collision, does not allow aiming.   This one works as it should, allowing you to target characters
    • MICROTEXT AND WATERMARKS BREAK MOST RENDERINGS Microtext and watermarks aren’t just small decorative details. They are one of the most common reasons a document fails verification, even when it looks decent at first glance. The issue is that these elements are almost impossible to reproduce “by eye.” Microtext requires precise geometry and legibility at a very small size, while a watermark needs the correct density, transparency, and accurate placement relative to other security features. Any deviation becomes obvious during detailed inspection. ▪ What’s most often done wrong: - microtext is drawn too thick or blurry - the watermark is made either too visible or almost invisible - the positioning between microtext and watermark is ignored - the original printing technology isn’t taken into account when choosing density and shape - The stronger the document’s security features, the less room there is for approximation. What matters here isn’t visual similarity, but accurate reproduction of the original technical characteristics. If your document contains microtext and watermarks, this is always an area that requires extra attention. Write to us in DMs. We’ll review your case and point out exactly which details need the highest precision during rendering. › TG: @mustang_service_ms ( https:// t.me/ mustang_service_ms ) › Channel: Mustang Service ( https:// t.me/ +JPpJCETg-xM1NjNl ) #drawing #microtext #photoshop #editing #watermarks
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

This community uses essential cookies to function properly. Non-essential cookies and third-party services are used only with your consent. Read our Privacy Policy and We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue..