Points returned to account

realLexusl21 wrote: Isamorph,
. . .
Question:. You once said you never used cellnuvo. Has that changed?

Isamorph wrote: I never said I never used CN, for I did use CN.

realLexusl21 wrote: I just asked a question out of curiosity you didn't have to jump down my throat.

Isamorph wrote: "You once said you never used cellnuvo" This is not a question. It's a false statement.

realLexusl21 wrote: Actually it is a true statement from the past posts

Isamorph wrote: Please provide a link where you read that so-called true statement by me.

. . .

My 2 cents. Here at this point in the conversation is where realLexusl21 owes and should offer Isamorph an apology, if only for bearing false witness to a statement that was untrue and never verified. I see no reason for Isamoroh to apologize. I repeat, just my 2¢.

This thread has revealed that I should work on creating more memorable posts since my posts from the past are hard to remember as time goes by, and many past posts should probably be forgotten anyway. Maybe I did say I had never used CN after all or imagined I never said it, and someone someday will come across that hard to find post or posts buried somewhere in the past.

Isamorph wrote: And yet as you mentioned, CN continues to pump out the non-paying ad partners ads hoping for the best.

As far as I am aware that is not true. I am not sure where you and Kbortega got that from.

No one here can say for sure what is happening. What we know is an ad provider was removed several months ago. Seems likely to be the non paying one. We also have been told ad providers take up to 4 months to pay so it may have taken cn a while to know they were not going to pay. Plus I imagine cn had some hope or were arguing with them for some months as well after that. It would not make sense to strip the app of the ad provider the minute they did not pay. They would give them a chance to pay and try to salvage relations etc.

And to answer your other question. There is no evidence to suggest that the new ad provider is not paying.

I like you all, and it breaks my hart to see you fight about some hypothetical issue, with an energy worth more noble causes..., or is it just another slow day in CN's news cycle?

Okay, so all of the CellNuvo / Swipir accounts that the family held at one point (everyone gave up except me who swipes maybe 5 times a month just for the entries if ads flow) show all swaps / points returned to their respective balances. The numbers "look right" based on what I recall.

I can't leave y'all alone for even one single day.

Everyone is so busy giving away their 2¢ that they've spent all their lunch money.

Everybody to their room. Y'all are grounded.

And just wait until your father gets home...

LOL! Okay, bye...

Ana type closing (Frozen)

mmfacemm wrote:

Isamorph wrote: And yet as you mentioned, CN continues to pump out the non-paying ad partners ads hoping for the best.

As far as I am aware that is not true. I am not sure where you and Kbortega got that from.
I got it from the information here.


So yes it does matter if you are a cn user. It sounds like you might have some info others are not privy to. Since you are not a cn user that seems unlikely and you are probably just mistaken.

Everyone has access to the same information, users and nonusers alike. Nonuser's opinions about that info is no less valid than user's.

No one here can say for sure what is happening.
This, I agree with

What we know is an ad provider was removed several months ago. Seems likely to be the non paying one. We also have been told ad providers take up to 4 months to pay so it may have taken cn a while to know they were not going to pay. Plus I imagine cn had some hope or were arguing with them for some months as well after that. It would not make sense to strip the app of the ad provider the minute they did not pay. They would give them a chance to pay and try to salvage relations etc.

Thats all your opinion. Not based on facts. And that's fine, we all have them users and non users alike. Is there a rule that only users can opine on certain subjects? Just wondering. Im confused because fist you imply nonusers opinions are welcomed, then you imply they're mistaken. Confused.

And to answer your other question. There is no evidence to suggest that the new ad provider is not paying.

There's plenty of evidence scattered throughout this forum. I can show it to you if you want. Just ask.

KBOrtega wrote:

mmfacemm wrote:

Isamorph wrote: And yet as you mentioned, CN continues to pump out the non-paying ad partners ads hoping for the best.

As far as I am aware that is not true. I am not sure where you and Kbortega got that from.
I got it from the information here.


So yes it does matter if you are a cn user. It sounds like you might have some info others are not privy to. Since you are not a cn user that seems unlikely and you are probably just mistaken.

Everyone has access to the same information, users and nonusers alike. Nonuser's opinions about that info is no less valid than user's.

What we know is an ad provider was removed several months ago. Seems likely to be the non paying one. We also have been told ad providers take up to 4 months to pay so it may have taken cn a while to know they were not going to pay. Plus I imagine cn had some hope or were arguing with them for some months as well after that. It would not make sense to strip the app of the ad provider the minute they did not pay. They would give them a chance to pay and try to salvage relations etc.

Thats all your opinion. Not based on facts. And that's fine, we all have them users and non users alike. Is there a rule that only users can opine on certain subjects? Just wondering. Im confused because fist you imply nonusers opinions are welcomed, then you imply they're mistaken. Confused.

And to answer your other question. There is no evidence to suggest that the new ad provider is not paying.

There's plenty of evidence scattered throughout this forum. I can show it to you if you want. Just ask.

Welcoming opinions does not mean I cannot disagree with them!

You are trying to lecture me on trying to prevent someone's opinion? This whole post is hypocritical. It is simply adversarial to start a fight and belittle my opinions. Lol grow up.

I am entitled to my opinion as much as you are. I was clear about what was opinion and what was fact. Are phrases such as "as far as I am aware" and "I imagine" not clear enough? I am entitled to disagree with anyone and state my own opinions. If you confuse that with attempting to suppress other people's opinions that is really on you!