Palmetto Marking inc ripoff fraud business Deana Walton Magazine subscribtion Coral Springs Florida *EDitor's Comment

I am an ex-employee of PMI, and could tell you many things that are both good and bad. I am not trying to be a smart-alek or start an arguement. I have been reading the reports posted and can say that I do agree with some and disagree with others. My understanding is that this site is here to inform people of the dangers that they may encounter to help them make wise choices. With that being said, I would like to know how responding to a remark made by an individual who is being slited in a complaint in the maner as was done in this case is going to be benificial to anybody, unless it was just a ploy to spark this colorful conversation. Also, as I read what would and would not be viewed as an actual report, I wonder how and why the "EDitor" would respond in such a manner. The "REBUTTAL" is suposed to be the place where a person can respond to any comments, correct? If it is vulger, rude, or even insulting that is that persons view, the same as the original statement is the view of the person who submitted it. If I am wrong please do let me know. But, if I'm not I think it is not only in poor taste to drop to level that was taunted but also unproffesional. In fact in the "grade school" banter one of the comments directed to the rebuttal was that the preson was rude. Isn't it rude to offer a forum to complain and recieve respons to only ignor the response then taunt the responder into the "grade school" games. If the "EDitor" has such strong feeling that they need to be displaied in such a manner, in my oppinion, they should be addressed to the person they are ment. I know that it is an option because in order to even submit a "REBUTTAL" an e-mail address needs to be submitted. My goal from this tangent, if you want to call it that, is to point out the fact that:Yes, every person is aloud to thier oun point of view, and yes, not every body needs to agree with it, but if this is supossed to be a place for people to find information, that information should be offered with an unbias slant otherwise the credibilaty of all the other comments are compromised.
Like I said some things I have read I do agree with and others I don't, but, if the "EDitor" is going to show these "childish" behaviors to all and is willing to resort to name calling in response to one persons reaction, some body might wonder if all the facts are actualy be presented fairly or if what is here is only the "EDitor"'s point of view. This is your site and I'm not telling you how to run it but I wanted to point out how this behavior could be counter productive.

If you, the "EDitor" do not agree with me, or feel like responding, please don't air the dirty laundy to the world because any response to this statement has no connection to the topic that it originaly was the focus.

thank you for your time.

Hey editor,

The Magazine company is never responsible for the shady activities of the sales-people. I sold magazines a while back, and the company required us to sign a contract which stated that we were independent contractors, and that they were in no way responsible for our actions while in the field. In other words, it was as if we were working for ourselves. . .self employed. That's one reason magazine companies can't be touched.

Billy,

You get an "F." Liability is retained by the corporation and its "scandalous kids" are its agents-in-fact, and hold the company responsible for their action.

Oh, and as for your last proposition... We know the EDitor is not into microsurgery.

EDitorsStaff@ripoffreport.com

You had better watch your mouth mister Editor if u had ever been a legitamate mag agent thn u ould know why we get so outraged at the moronic complaints of some of these customers. First of all it is not the company who rips people off it is scandalous kids. And if u judge people without knowing the situation then u might as well get down on your knees and s*** m* c****.



Billy 333

Allstars

I can see why your company has had so many problems with your customer service attitude.



Nice language, b***h!

EDitorial Staff



..if the shoe fits, wear it.

You are silly!!! Read the f*cking receipt - if you ordered 7/31/02, you're not suppossed to be receiving anything yet, it says on the receipt "90 to 120 days for first issues." And d**n girl, put your BUG OFF tag back up so i don't have to knock on your door.



oh- no, i never worked for PMI but worked for a mag company that was sprung from PMI. Have a nice day... 333