Re: [atlarge-discuss] $1 verification.

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Sotiris and all fellow members,

Sotiris Sotiropoulos wrote:

> Jeff Williams wrote:
>
> >Sotiris and all fellow members,
> >
> >  How do you address a member that doesn't choose to use
> >PayPal, does not have a digital cert and does not wish to obtain one,
> >AND has several checking accounts but cannot write a check
> >on them for less than $100.00 US given your scenario below
> >Sotiris?
> >
>
> Well, that's one ornery sourpuss to be sure, Jeffrey!!  Why, I'd hogtie
> that son of a bishop, and haul his carcass off to the glue factory!
>  That, I would boy!

  Not much of an answer here Sotiris.  And certainly not an answer
that solves the problem eh!  >:)  But it is a humorous response.

>
>
> >And if using a checking account for validation which
> >sounds pretty wild and off base to me, do you protect that
> >that members account number is not used for nefarious
> >purposes and/or guarantee their personal and financial privacy?
> >
>
> That's the banks job, not mine.

  Sorry but no it is not the banks responsibility.  It is the
holder of the accounts responsibility as well as the liability
of the recipient of said information.

>
>
> >In fact how do we as an organization verify that such a
> >checking account is even valid to the person/member
> >using said checking account and do so online without
> >jeopardizing that persons personal privacy or financial
> >security/privacy?  There are several ways of accomplishing this
> >online of course, but I want to hear/read your answer Sotiris...
> >
>
> We could try online chequing, most banks offer it these days.

  Yes we could.  But many folks are happy with their current
checking arrangement presently.  Why should they go to an online
checking system if they are not satisfied or insured it is safe simply
for the purposes of this fledgling organization?  What is the
justification?

>
>
> --Sotiris
>
> -----------
>
> "The science of jurisprudence regards the state and power as the
> ancients regarded fire- namely, as something existing absolutely.
> But for history, the state and power are merely phenomena, just as for
> modern physics fire is not an element but a phenomenon.
>
> >From this fundamental difference between the view held by history
> and that held by jurisprudence, it follows that jurisprudence can tell
> minutely how in its opinion power should be constituted and what
> power- existing immutably outside time- is, but to history's questions
> about the meaning of the mutations of power in time it can answer
> nothing."
>                                      --Leo Tolstoy, "War and Peace"

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 131k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Be precise in the use of words and expect precision from others" -
    Pierre Abelard
================================================================
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number: 214-244-4827 or 214-244-3801



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de