Prospers.ORG Prosper Forum

Advanced search  

News:

Welcome to Prospers.ORG!   Login here

Pages: 1 2 3 [4]   Go Down

Author Topic: Prosper.com - You got some 'splainin' to do  (Read 16342 times)

bamalucky

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +477/-477
  • Posts: 43291
    • View Profile
Re: Prosper.com - You got some 'splainin' to do
« Reply #45 on: August 27, 2008, 11:59:44 am »

I think their new forum actually backfires on them.Anyone with half a brain will start looking for an unmoderated opinion once they see that their own questions go unposted there.
Logged
There are no stupid questions, just stupid people.

ira01

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +153/-12041
  • Posts: 49278
    • View Profile
Re: Prosper.com - You got some 'splainin' to do
« Reply #46 on: August 27, 2008, 12:02:58 pm »

I think their new forum actually backfires on them.Anyone with half a brain will start looking for an unmoderated opinion once they see that their own questions go unposted there.

Maybe so.  I guess it depends on the lurker/poster ratio.  If a lot of people just read, and don't post, they would never know about Prosper's heavy-handed moderation.
Logged
If you're not outraged, you're not paying attention.

mothandrust

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +5276/-11649
  • Posts: 23551
    • View Profile
Re: Prosper.com - You got some 'splainin' to do
« Reply #47 on: August 27, 2008, 01:49:20 pm »

Two innocuous posts made it, so at least FlyingMissle's thread is bumped back to page one.
Logged
So all those people who ran in the primary, dropped out, and endorsed the eventual winner who wind up in every cabinet is just a coincidence?
Yes.  They drop out because they realize they cannot win and staying in will hurt their future prospects.  If they later wind up with a job, that's fine.  But that's not remotely the same as a quid pro quo.

Capital_Finance_Group

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • Posts: 1586
    • View Profile
Re: Prosper.com - You got some 'splainin' to do
« Reply #48 on: August 27, 2008, 09:17:30 pm »

Unfortunately I do not believe that P has a "splainin" department.

Perhaps the "splainin" department might be staffed with the same folks that are in the "collections" department  ::)
Logged

bamalucky

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +477/-477
  • Posts: 43291
    • View Profile
Re: Prosper.com - You got some 'splainin' to do
« Reply #49 on: August 27, 2008, 09:27:09 pm »

Quote
<double007> i'm not going to even post about this notary business
This is Teddie33 on Prosper

Quote
<bama> in fact,i know you can't think of 1 intelligent thing to say about it
<bama> come on teddie,don't make yourself look stupider
<bama> tell us why prosper shouldn't require a notary siggy?
<bama> gaerke wouldn't be happening if they did
<bama> you can do it teddie..say something
<bama> crickets
Logged
There are no stupid questions, just stupid people.

GLeaderAccountantsChoice

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • Posts: 787
    • View Profile
Re: Prosper.com - You got some 'splainin' to do
« Reply #50 on: August 29, 2008, 11:07:13 am »

I just posted this in the .com forums, so let's see if it makes it through moderation:


<> LendingClub's S-1 seems a little different than Prosper's.  I'm not making any judgements here, but it's interesting at least how this all works, so hop on EDGAR (which is the SEC's public database of company records) and check out both of the P2P lending companys' apparent interpretations of their own business activities.  Personally, I feel LendingClub filed a more accurate S-1.
<>
 Why is the above relevant to this thread?  It has to do with what lenders' roles are on this site, and whether or not Prosper's selling notes falls under the definition of issuing unlicensed securities.  I personally don't know the answer here and am a bit confused.

Typically one must have a license to lend and is subject to regulations.  If Prosper never lent any money per their statements in court, then it makes me feel like I should have a license to lend money to people before using this site.  If on the other hand Prosper is doing all of the lending (or WebBank now, which wasn't the case previously, as can be noted by differences between today's current lender registration agreement and Prosper's S-1), and then selling all kinds of notes across the country, then I'm curious as to why that doesn't fall under the definition of selling unlicensed securities.  I personally just don't know the answer here and may be confused.



This did not make it through moderation.  Apparently, I must have said something against TOS.   >:(
Logged


*Warning - Lending stats subject to change
Pages: 1 2 3 [4]   Go Up