re: Ronnie Branch....god fearing or scammer?? Shaklee Scam
Retro Ronnie.
Turned up a day Scamville erased all the posts back to March.
Even funnier in light of him back begging Charles for his $ a few weeks ago. retrorockinronnie.jpg
"the owner seems really confident and even promises this one won't be going anywhere"
I'm confused, is Ronnie saying Satan is Scoville's business partner? Or that Chucko No Bucko has a mote for a brain thinking he could pull the "sharing" crap on the SEC.
SEC Psalm 5, you can't share $600,000,000 you don't have.
"It's virtually impossible to violate rules ... but it's impossible for a violation to go undetected, certainly not for a considerable period of time." Bernie Madoff https://www.facebook.com/pages/Scam-...98399986981403
re: Ronnie Branch....god fearing or scammer?? Shaklee Scam
"Ronnie Branch Hi Don, Heather along with her people have been harassing and Cyber bullying me from a old post that started in 2016. I finally got around to responding. I just put up a video cast on youtube about it, I am sorry you've gone through this. I've included your link on my video so we can get the word out about these people. I am cosidering contacting the Police about her along with members posting my videos and taking my photos without my permission and talking ill about myself and my woman. Feel free to check out my video here about what I've said about her: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YHK8a-xtKlY&t=1162s"
re: Ronnie Branch....god fearing or scammer?? Shaklee Scam
I searched my email and found this gem:
From: Ronnie Branch <ronniebranch@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, April 25, 2021 9:22 AM To:soapboxmom@hotmail.com <soapboxmom@hotmail.com> Subject: Hi Heather - I am Ronnie I wrote on you facebook about somebody writing about me on your site
Hi Heather, I am Ronnie one of your members talked about me over 5 years ago. I'll give a link at the bottom of this post. I am in agreement about this post about Traffic monsoon as I ceased promoting that once I realized Charles was a child offender. I do not promote ponzi scams and I do legitimate work. This post is over 5 years old and I do not like my photos of my woman and I being showed. I am asking you to please remove this post since it is old. If you do not remove this post I will have to make a video cast letting potential people who visit your site know that you let your members take photos without their permission which isn't cool. The people who talk about me in that forum post do not know me and if they did they would know I don't care for Ponzi scams but never got a chance to know who I am as a person. I do respect what you do trying to protect the people but there are some things in regards to privacy issues that I feel do cross the line. Anyways I hope I do not have to make a video about this and no I am not going to make threats legally but I will let your audience know some of the flaws I've seen from your site so that your site's Credibility won't be good along with using your name on a title youtube video as well. I do not want to do this so I am asking to let this goto rest as I do not involve myself in ponzi scams at all. Thanks for your help.
PS- Your members along with you said some hateful things about me, I don't think you'd like it if I posted a photo of your house and where u live like your members did share info on your site along with photos without my permission. I don't want to call out your flaws in a video cast as people are going to think twice before listening to you when you are quick to judge me based on another speaking ill about me. I agree about scams and ponzis I want nothing to do with them but your methods of mockery from your members trying to make me look like a idiot when they are defaming themselve making themselves look bad I don't want to point that out in a upcoming video cast along with you allowing people to post photos without peoples permissions. Again I respect what your doing but do not let your hate for those that u think are wrong think everybody is bad or wrong. I do love God and I believe in doing what is right I hope you will as well.
Thanks for reading,
God Bless,
Ronnie
What is posted in this thread was already public record or was made public by you yourself. If you publicly promote obvious scams then you can expect to get commentary on such. Thank you for promoting the site.
Please do go to the police. I have worked with law enforcement for over a decade and will continue to do whatever I can to help protect the public.
You clearly did not fact check any of the creeps you are quoting in your video and commiserating with. Do ask Don Allen Holbrook for proof of his latest PhD and tell him the Texas taxpayers demand their 24 million back! So, do keep up your antics. The more publicity our site generates the more people we can warn and inform!
Anyone needing assistance please feel free to use this e-mail in addition to the PM system here to contact me: soapboxmom@hotmail.com
re: Ronnie Branch....god fearing or scammer?? Shaklee Scam
Originally Posted by pantherdadX2
Is this the guy riding bitch on Sir Talks-a-Lots horse?
He is now. Don Allen Holbrook has made a complete fool out of himself for a decade and keeps seeking revenge on me for ending his emptying of the taxpayers pockets and keeps hooking up with clowns like Branch. What a bunch of loonies! https://www.quatloos.com/Q-Forum/viewtopic.php?t=8508
Anyone needing assistance please feel free to use this e-mail in addition to the PM system here to contact me: soapboxmom@hotmail.com
"No one in this world, so far as I know - and I have researched the records for years, and employed agents to help me - has ever lost money by underestimating the intelligence of the great masses of the plain people" - H. L. Mencken
re: Ronnie Branch....god fearing or scammer?? Shaklee Scam
When I logged on this morning the view count for this thread was 8567. Goal is now 10,000 for quoting me out of context and failing to acknowledge legal content posted in this thread.
Originally Posted by Ronnie Brunch ( copied text taken from Video Posted by SBM Above)
Irony of ironies the first time I saw Ronnie rockin the wife beater sportin a flowbee hairdo I thought nutrition or relationship coach, turns out both.
What I said Ronnie was "rockin the wife beater" also known as wearing a sleeveless shirt. See above Lobster Paws
Further down in the post I even acknowledge that I'm being a jerk. Maybe I shouldn't have been such an ass, perhaps you lost your shirt in Traffic Monsoon?
Originally Posted by ribshaw
That's me being a jerk about someone that comes across as rather smarmy.
In the video SD posted Ronnie makes some very lofty claims about Shaklee's products. Much he attributes to his "mentor", someone probably equally clueless.
Very simply those claims violate federal law. Anyone stupid enough to make a video while breaking the law is leading no one to the land of milk and honey.
What requirements must I meet to make any of these types of claims for my dietary supplement?
There are three requirements you must meet. First, the law says you can make these claims if you have substantiation that the claims are truthful and not misleading. You must have this substantiation before you make the claims. Second, you must notify FDA that you are using the claim within 30 days of first marketing your product. Third, the claim must include a mandatory disclaimer statement that is provided for in the law.
Further, Ronnie is either too stupid to comprehend the affiliate agreement he signed, or just ignores it to make sales. Shaklee the company certainly isn't foolish enough to claim their vitamins are anything more than vitamins.
Unauthorized Claims
Shaklee Distributors may not make claims about Shaklee products, or the Shaklee
Compensation Plan, that are contrary to literature and labels published by Shaklee. http://images.shaklee.com/canada/application-e.pdf
"It's virtually impossible to violate rules ... but it's impossible for a violation to go undetected, certainly not for a considerable period of time." Bernie Madoff https://www.facebook.com/pages/Scam-...98399986981403
re: Ronnie Branch....god fearing or scammer?? Shaklee Scam
I have no idea if Ronnie's girlfriend is still using Shaklee products for her Muscular Dystrophy. Or for that matter if any (alleged) benefit she is/was achieving was from the placebo effect or actual science. One thing I have anecdotally noticed about MLM in general is when people quit the business building side program they often quit consuming and some even attempt to offload the product. See https://www.ebay.com/b/Shaklee/bn_21835131
Ronnie hasn't done a Shaklee video on this channel for since Sep 12, 2014. Maybe he's living off that MLM residual income we always hear about? (Sorry just me being an ass again)
What I do see on the channel halfway through is a tickle fight with his sponsor. Just me but if someone I loved was getting remarkable health benefits for a very serious medical condition that would be my focus. Or lead stealing, dunno?
A lot of MLM representatives seem to simply parrot medical claims their uplines use without any regard for what Federal law requires.
Originally Posted by FTC
A. What is the Substantiation Standard?
The FTC standard of competent and reliable scientific evidence has been defined in FTC case law as "tests, analyses, research, studies, or other evidence based on the expertise of professionals in the relevant area, that has been conducted and evaluated in an objective manner by persons qualified to do so, using procedures generally accepted in the profession to yield accurate and reliable results."(7)
In determining whether the substantiation standard has been met with competent and reliable scientific evidence, we recommend that firms consider the following issues in their assessment:
"It's virtually impossible to violate rules ... but it's impossible for a violation to go undetected, certainly not for a considerable period of time." Bernie Madoff https://www.facebook.com/pages/Scam-...98399986981403
I made a joke about your communal parking situation, again me being a ass. I don't take anyone seriously that's telling me how to make money for effectively doing nothing. If they flash stacks of cash while sharing a dumpster with 50 neighbors, even less so. Anyone earning big bucks clicking 10 ads a day can afford a garage and curbside trash pick up.
No matter, addressing your use of photos complaint in the video posted above by SBM. In setting yourself up with a Youtube channel and website offering money making and/or health related opportunities I believe you very muchly meet the definition of a limited purpose public figure.
Originally Posted by Wikipedia
In the context of defamation actions (libel and slander) as well as invasion of privacy, a public figure cannot succeed in a lawsuit on incorrect harmful statements in the United States unless there is proof that the writer or publisher acted with actual malice by knowing the falsity or by reckless disregard for the truth.[2] The legal burden of proof in defamation actions is thus higher in the case of a public figure than in the case of an ordinary person.
A fairly high threshold of public activity is necessary to elevate people to a public figure status. Typically, they must either be:
a public figure, a public official or any other person pervasively involved in public affairs, or a limited purpose public figure, those who have "thrust themselves to the forefront of particular public controversies in order to influence the resolution of the issues involved." A "particularized determination" is required to decide whether a person is a limited purpose public figure, which can be variously interpreted:
One of the strongest defenses of Fair Use is educating the public in a non commercial manner.
Originally Posted by Wikipedia
Fair use is a doctrine in the law of the United States that permits limited use of copyrighted material without having to first acquire permission from the copyright holder. Fair use is one of the limitations to copyright intended to balance the interests of copyright holders with the public interest in the wider distribution and use of creative works by allowing as a defense to copyright infringement claims certain limited uses that might otherwise be considered infringement.[ Fair use - Wikipedia
Originally Posted by CorporateFindLaw
The Fair Use Four-Factor Test
Courts consider four factors when evaluating whether an unauthorized use of copyrighted material is fair. The following factors are guidelines under the Copyright Act:
The purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes: Courts consider whether the use is transformative. For instance, was the purpose of the new use transformative, did a new expression change the original work, or did the use create new information or lead to new ideas? The more transformative a new work, the more likely a court will consider it fair use.
The nature of the copyrighted work: Courts look at whether the copyrighted work is creative or factual and whether it is published or unpublished. Creative works, such as fiction, creative nonfiction, pictures, and graphic works, typically receive more protection. Factual works, such as history accounts and scientific works, receive less protection because of the benefit to society from the exchange of ideas . Authors have a right to decide when to publish their work, so the use of unpublished works without permission is less acceptable than using published works.
The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole: Courts consider how much material was copied and was the copied material a central part of the original work. When a large portion of the entire copyrighted material is used or it includes the use of a central point, it is less likely that a court will consider it fair use. For, parody, however, it is acceptable to borrow a large portion and to use the central part of the original work.
The effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work: A court will look closely at a use that deprives a copyright holder of income, regardless of whether the new material is competing in the same market. Important factors include the current market and the potential market.
Courts may use additional factors to determine whether the unauthorized use of copyrighted material is fair.
The United States Supreme Court in Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc. (1994) stated in no uncertain terms that a parody as a form of criticism or comment could be fair use of a copyrighted work. Parody: Fair Use Or Copyright Infringement - FindLaw
Last edited by ribshaw; 05-12-2021 at 01:32 PM.
"It's virtually impossible to violate rules ... but it's impossible for a violation to go undetected, certainly not for a considerable period of time." Bernie Madoff https://www.facebook.com/pages/Scam-...98399986981403
re: Ronnie Branch....god fearing or scammer?? Shaklee Scam
Ronnie I was a little hurt that while you reviewed my profile you juxtaposed the Nigerian Ministry with Romance Scammers. Are you saying everyone in Nigeria is a romance scammer, that's not very Christian. Or are you saying that Nigerians can't suss out fraud because that's where many 419 scams originate?
Have you read my work on Romance scams, it has 280,000 views as of today.
You went on to show how many friends I have, seven I think. As if this somehow weighed again on my credibility. Realscam isn't Friendster or MySpace. What really should matter to readers considering an opportunity or guru is how accurately users of RealScam have called scams long before they stopped paying people.
"It's virtually impossible to violate rules ... but it's impossible for a violation to go undetected, certainly not for a considerable period of time." Bernie Madoff https://www.facebook.com/pages/Scam-...98399986981403
re: Ronnie Branch....god fearing or scammer?? Shaklee Scam
Most states have very similar laws against participation in and the promotion of Ponzi/Pyyamid schemes. The common denominator of both is endless recruiting. While the risk of prosecution for a promoter is extremely low, the risk of losing money and friends nears 100%.
Ponzi Schemes
In some variations, there may be an underlying business used as a “front” to make the scheme seem more legitimate. These schemes can continue only as long as new investors provide additional funds.
"PYRAMID PROMOTIONAL SCHEME PROHIBITION ACT" BY ADDING ARTICLE 7 TO CHAPTER 5, TITLE 39 SO AS TO PROVIDE PYRAMID PROMOTIONAL SCHEMES CONSTITUTE UNFAIR TRADE PRACTICES UNDER THE SOUTH CAROLINA UNFAIR TRADE PRACTICES ACT, AND TO PROVIDE NECESSARY DEFINITIONS
3) 'Pyramid promotional scheme' means a plan or operation in which an individual pays consideration for the right to receive compensation based primarily upon recruiting other individuals into the plan or operation instead of selling products or services to ultimate users for their use or consumption.
"It's virtually impossible to violate rules ... but it's impossible for a violation to go undetected, certainly not for a considerable period of time." Bernie Madoff https://www.facebook.com/pages/Scam-...98399986981403
the SEC hasn't examined whether religious groups are more susceptible to "affinity fraud" -- scams that target specific demographics, whether evangelical Christians or the elderly.
But researchers say it's a question worth considering.
One thing I often look for when evaluating an opportunity is inconsistencies, no matter how minor.
9 “‘These shall ye eat of all that are in the waters: whatsoever hath fins and scales in the waters, in the seas, and in the rivers, them shall ye eat.
10 And all that have not fins and scales in the seas and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters and of any living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you.
11 They shall be even an abomination unto you: ye shall not eat of their flesh, but ye shall hold their carcasses in abomination.
12 Whatsoever hath no fins nor scales in the waters, that shall be an abomination unto you.
Does this inconsistency matter, that's a question each of you will have to answer. Personally I find lobster mitts and crab appendages too much work for too little meat. In that vein will be chewing the fat about another opportunity tomorrow.
"It's virtually impossible to violate rules ... but it's impossible for a violation to go undetected, certainly not for a considerable period of time." Bernie Madoff https://www.facebook.com/pages/Scam-...98399986981403
Bookmarks