Question Shocked at Tom's Guide...supported by users but only looking after themselves?

Status
Not open for further replies.

heatm1ser

Honorable
Dec 8, 2013
9
0
10,560
My landlord asked me to use Venmo to pay my monthly rent. When I did research on Venmo and how safe it is, I've found dozens and dozens of article warning user just how unsafe Venmo actually is. I was shocked that Tom's Guide did exactly the opposite in this article about Venmo last year. The only security threat Tom's Guide pointed out is when selling stuff on Craigslist. Tom's Guide neglected to point out the various security vulnerabilities that exist with Venmo. Here's and example of what Tom's Guide neglected to fill readers in on: Your phone gets stolen, lost or your account gets hacked. The thief changes your email address and login info. Said thief then takes as much money out of your bank account and the user may not know about it for several days because their email is no longer on file to send notifications to. Youre now out THOUSANDS of dollars, and out of luck. Here's an excerpt from an article I just read:

"While Venmo's security, encryption, and liabilities insurance ostensibly protect users from losses, they are easy to circumvent. After gaining access to a user's account, hackers can easily change passwords, linked email addresses and bank accounts unbeknownst to the legitimate user."

Furthermore, Tom Guide never mentioned how Venmo lost over $40 million dollars in payment fraud in just the first quarter of 2018. I'd say the Wall Street Journal is a pretty reputable source.

Also, Tom's Guide failed to protect users by NOT pointing out that Venmo settled with the FTC over misleading its users and not fully or properly disclosing information regarding security of each users Venmo account. Here is the posting directly from the FTC website, and their post came 5 months before Tom's Guide wrote their article endorsing Venmo.

I can go on and on, but Im extremely shocked by this neglect by Tom's Guide, and mainly because I have relied heavily on Tom's Guide for a few decades. I always knew Toms Guide was funded by users, but I never expected Tom's Guide to show their gratitude towards those users that keep them in business by endorsing a product that has a clear and extensive history of having major security vulnerabilities. Its appalling that Tom's Guide would sacrifice users identity, finances, and more but not disclosing the real truth. We, the people who have supported Tom's Guide over the decades should be pissed that Tom's Guide is willing to screw us over because they get a nice paycheck from Paypal/Venmo. Now, I'm assuming Tom's Guide is making money in some way off of Paypal/Venmo, but I may be wrong. How can I assume anything else when the website (conveniently?) leaves out CRITICAL data that could protect the very users that have supported Tom's Guide for decades? If Tom's Guide DOESNT make money in some way from Paypal/Venmo, then I dont know what to say....Tom's Guide acts like an authority in all things technology-related, and has since the websites inception so I have a tough time believing that their research team/author failed to uncover the stuff that I was able to uncover in 1 Google search and less than 5 minutes of my time. I am so disappointed in Tom's Guides because its obvious to me that Paypal/Venmo has their hands in Tom's Guides pockets and that they are willing to throw us users under the bus to make a little money from Paypal/Venmo. I may never use Tom's Guide as a resource ever again...cant believe their loyalty would to be to someone OTHER than the users who have made the website successful over the past few decades. Really disappointed.


And one more little detail Tom's Guide (conveniently?) left out: Venmo is not FDIC insured, so your pretty screwed if someone hacks your Venmo account.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

heatm1ser

Honorable
Dec 8, 2013
9
0
10,560
Moving this from the "apps forums" to the "forum feedback" forums is another form of censorship. As anyone who reads this can see, the entire post centers around an article Toms Guides wrote about the Venmo app. They took this post from a forum with over 17,000 posts to a forum with less than 30 posts.

Way to disrespect "freedom of speech" when it doesnt favor Toms Guides...who needs rights anyway? Oh thats right, this entire website is based off their ability to exercise their freedom of speech, how incredibly ironic.
 

heatm1ser

Honorable
Dec 8, 2013
9
0
10,560
Nope, the apps forums are the proper place for my post. My post was NOT for the admins/mods/staff, it was for the general population. Its fine though, you are obviously not willing to bite the hand that feeds you, and in your lack of actions you are just as guilty as the author of the article of misleading readers. I get it. Thats fine. I would have forgotten about this in a day or two, but now I am motivated to share this with others on forums in which you cannot censor me. Fortunately I saved several screenshots, links and the wording of my post. Its cool, now the rest of the staff can see how active you guys have been with protecting Tom's Guides from people knowing about how the author/editor of that article intentionally gave misleading info in order to put more money in their pockets. I'm sure each of you earned several brownie points.

The worst part about this is, you're willing to compromise your morals as long as in the end you benefit---even if its at someone elses expense.
 

heatm1ser

Honorable
Dec 8, 2013
9
0
10,560
I stand corrected! I didnt notice there was a specific forum for article feedback. This doesnt belong in the apps forums like I had originally thought...it belongs in the article commentary forums since my post is specifically about an article. My apologies.
 

COLGeek

Cybernaut
Moderator
Your new thread had been moved to a private area on the site. It is a duplicate of this thread.

Commenting on a specific article is okay, if comments are available under the article itself.

However, the article in question is over a year old so it is not really a current topic.

Also, bashing and questioning TG as you have is more general than a single article. Thus the placement here.

Have a good day.
 

heatm1ser

Honorable
Dec 8, 2013
9
0
10,560
Was my post specifically feedback on an article? Yes.

Was my post specifically feedback on an article written by TG's? Yes.

Was the article in question the most current article written by TG's on the safety and security of Venmo? Absolutely, Yes.


An article thats 15 months old and the most recent article about the safety and security of Venmo by TG's belongs in the "article feedback" forums. Its not like Im questioning an article about drive speeds from 5 years ago and current technology has replaced that technology. I posted about the most recent article you guys put out on this particular subject. Moving it to a forum that has less than 30 posts all time is a form of censorship, and you know it to. I get that you dont want to bite the hand that feeds you....I get that you dont want to lose the privilege being a moderator on the TG forums gives you. Whether your paid in money, special discounts exclusive to staff at TG's, product samples you may get for free as a result of your status here, or another form of payment, I get that you dont want to risk losing that so you censor users who trash TG. I get it...anyone would. But moving it to the wrong forum is just a way to censor me.

So I ask, what makes my post related to forum feedback? The article wasnt posted on the forums, and I didnt say anything at all about the forums in my post, so why would it belong in the "forum feedback" section instead of the "article feedback" section? Also, please answer the 3 questions I asked and answered at the beginning of this particular reply.

Thank you.


Edit: Besides the "article feedback" forums, it could also go into the "antivirus/security/privacy" forums....but you'd never move it there because it has a lot more than 27 posts so people may actually see it.
 
Last edited:

COLGeek

Cybernaut
Moderator
Your latest thread was also moved to a private section of the forum. This thread is where it should be. The number of threads in a section has nothing to do with who can actually see and respond to it. All TG members can see this thread and respond accordingly.

You have a concern with a service that is somewhat old news. You also question TG's reputation and integrity.

Please do not start additional threads on these topics. Feel free to continue expressing your concerns here and/or to allow others to respond.

Thank you.
 

heatm1ser

Honorable
Dec 8, 2013
9
0
10,560
Your latest thread was also moved to a private section of the forum. This thread is where it should be. The number of threads in a section has nothing to do with who can actually see and respond to it. All TG members can see this thread and respond accordingly.

You have a concern with a service that is somewhat old news. You also question TG's reputation and integrity.

Please do not start additional threads on these topics. Feel free to continue expressing your concerns here and/or to allow others to respond.

Thank you.
No, my original thread was moved into the forum feedback section to censor me, and you know it. You moved it to where the likelyhood of people seeing it was at a minimum. Yes, after what I read I did question TG's integrity.

Imagine this: someone protests their government, and they do so peacefully. Said government has them locked up for protesting but cites a different reason for the incarceration...that way they can protest as much as they want while behind bars and while their only audience would be other inmates. That severely limited the number of people who hear them. Thats what youre doing with my post....minimizing the number of people who will hear it. Its damage control.

You also directly avoided answering the questions that i had asked. Why? Would answering them truthfully make me look correct? Yes, it would. Let me throw those questions out there again just so you cant say you didnt see it to answer...

Was my post specifically feedback on an article?

Was my post specifically feedback on an article written by TG's?

Was the article in question the most current article written by TG's on the safety and security of Venmo?

I ask, what makes my post related to forum feedback? The article wasnt posted on the forums, and I didnt say anything at all about the forums in my post, so why would it belong in the "forum feedback" section instead of the "article feedback" section?
 

COLGeek

Cybernaut
Moderator
Just so that you understand, the First Amendment does not extend to this (or any) forum. Regardless, censorship has not been a factor at all. Period.

If that were the case, the thread(s) would have simply been deleted altogether.

Even in the Article Feedback section, it gets no more visibility than it does here or any other section of the forum. All can see it and respond if they feel like it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.