Jennifer just scammed Steve an additional $30,000 in addition to the $150,000 sh

[session_safe]

I'm still processing a $30,000 link.

Yeah I know! She makes it sound like it's this big thing she's giving me. I paid good money for a link. . . WHERE IS MY LINK?!??! I have a contact this time, so she can't use that stupid excuse anymore.

[session_safe]

Reach Your Target Audience

Advertising is hard. We make it simple and effective.

Advertise With Us →

[session_safe]

She said she wouldn't do it again. Her fault.

I'm sorry, but this just sounds stupid

Yeah, I know, she is. She'll come up with any excuse not to make good on her obligations.

[Bernie1212]

She said she wouldn't do it again. Her fault.

Her fault.

You entered into a business agreement with someone that you say already owed you $150,000.  You invested $30,000 when you were only contracted to spend $10,000.  And it is all her fault?

Yes, it is her fault. The contract CLEARLY STATES I am supposed to get a link in exchange for money. I provided the money and she did not give me the link. Of course it's her fault.

Someone asked why you where still doing business with her after you claimed she scammed you.

You replied that it was her fault.

I am trying to figure out why it is her fault that you went back into business with her after she had already "scammed" you out of so much money.  Sounds like unsound business practice.  Heck I wont even spend $500 on a company if there was unpaid or unfulfilled parts of an agreement. 

[session_safe]

Someone asked why you where still doing business with her after you claimed she scammed you.

You replied that it was her fault.

I am trying to figure out why it is her fault that you went back into business with her after she had already "scammed" you out of so much money.  Sounds like unsound business practice.  Heck I wont even spend $500 on a company if there was unpaid or unfulfilled parts of an agreement.

It is her fault because she said "pay me $30,000 and I'll give you a link to my website". When I paid her the $30,000, she told me "I'm not giving you a link to your website, I lied". So yes, this is her fault.

[JustBiceps]

She said she wouldn't do it again. Her fault.

I'm sorry, but this just sounds stupid

Yeah, I know, she is. She'll come up with any excuse not to make good on her obligations.

I was talking about you.

[session_safe]

I was talking about you.

Jennifer owes me a link. I paid her $30,000 to do so . If she claims "I never agreed to that", point to her the 6 contacts that say otherwise. We have a contract this time, so she can't use that stupid excuse anymore.

No, it's her fault.

[FemFlexUSA]

WARNING!

You guys may have noticed that SessionGirls, for a while, was linking to the "scammers" section of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login . That's because Jennifer had a contract with Steve saying, in exchange for $30,000, she is going to link to Steve's website. . . NO EXCUSES. Well, I paid the $30,000 and she linked to my site for a whole month and then took it down, claiming that one of my summarized reviews listed You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login as "transgender" instead of "woman". That's her dumb-ass excuse.

Also, the contract specifically states in the event of a "dispute", we go to mediation. . . NO EXCUSES. Loser pays mediation fee. But she refuses to go even though it's clearly stated in the contract.

BEWARE OF DOING BUSINESS WITH JENNIFER THOMAS!!!!!

When you file your lawsuit, do not refer to yourself in the third person. The court will think you're an idiot.

[session_safe]

When you file your lawsuit, do not refer to yourself in the third person. The court will think you're an idiot.

yes, resort to ad hominem instead of getting to the crux of the argument. I have a contract with Jen that very plainly states:

"The purpose of this contract is very simple. Steve gives $30,000 and in return he gets a link from Jennifer's website. It really is that simple!"

Then I put "STOP GIVING STUPID EXCUSES. . . STOP DOING DIRTY TRICKS.".

I put that in big bold letters and highlighted it in yellow. Jennifer signed all for corners of that sentence and the previous sentence so she can't say "eh, I didn't know!!!!"

[FemFlexUSA]

When you file your lawsuit, do not refer to yourself in the third person. The court will think you're an idiot.

yes, resort to ad hominem instead of getting to the crux of the argument. I have a contract with Jen that very plainly states:

"The purpose of this contract is very simple. Steve gives $30,000 and in return he gets a link from Jennifer's website. It really is that simple!"

Then I put "STOP GIVING STUPID EXCUSES. . . STOP DOING DIRTY TRICKS.".

I put that in big bold letters and highlighted it in yellow. Jennifer signed all for corners of that sentence and the previous sentence so she can't say "eh, I didn't know!!!!"

Unless you have filed a lawsuit in the appropriate jurisdiction, your complaint has no credibility. Why? Because it doesn't pass the "reasonable person" standard or the smell test.

No reasonable person who is "owed $30,000" would leave that lawsuit unfiled.

[session_safe]

Unless you have filed a lawsuit in the appropriate jurisdiction, your complaint has no credibility. Why? Because it doesn't pass the "reasonable person" standard or the smell test.

No reasonable person who is "owed $30,000" would leave that lawsuit unfiled.

Then you must not be a lawyer, as I have talked to three. They all say the same thing. They checked her credit and assets and they said "this person is not worth suing as she can simply declare bankrupcy and get rid of the payment that way". They are experts in their field, and you are not.

Jennifer and I have a contract that clearly states "Steve pays $30,000 and he gets a link to his website. It really is that simple!". And Jennifer did not supply my link. So my case has plenty of credibility.

So no.

[Bernie1212]

Someone asked why you where still doing business with her after you claimed she scammed you.

You replied that it was her fault.

I am trying to figure out why it is her fault that you went back into business with her after she had already "scammed" you out of so much money.  Sounds like unsound business practice.  Heck I wont even spend $500 on a company if there was unpaid or unfulfilled parts of an agreement.

It is her fault because she said "pay me $30,000 and I'll give you a link to my website". When I paid her the $30,000, she told me "I'm not giving you a link to your website, I lied". So yes, this is her fault.

Ok, you take no blame whatsoever in the situation.  Cool.

The evidence you give, the contract you have posted in this thread yourself, says nothing about $30,000.  The contract states $10,000, you invested the additional $20,000.

The contact you post also states "Steve recieves a porminent banner on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login once SessionSafe is ready.  His wesbsite also gets to be mentioned in the registration letter for ment for 6 months.  However, if Steve does "defamation of character" towards Jennifer thomas either by email, text, phone call or in person, Jennifer has the right to no longer advertise You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login."

Do you relly feel that you lived up to your end of that agreement.  You did not defame Jennifer Thomas in any way from the time the contract was signed (it was for an even in June of 2023) until the time that the sessionsafe link was removed from You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login?

There is also a confidentiality clause that states that the contract is between you, Jennifer and Susan Patrick, and shall not be disloced to anybody else.  "Any disclosure in violation shall be deemed a breach of this Agreement."  I have seen this posted publically, and you emailed it to me yourself in June of this year.  So, but disclosing the contract you breached it if I am not mistaken.

But it is all Jennifers fault.  Got it.

[Bernie1212]

wow, i had a lot of typos....my bad.

[session_safe]

Ok, you take no blame whatsoever in the situation.  Cool.

The evidence you give, the contract you have posted in this thread yourself, says nothing about $30,000.  The contract states $10,000, you invested the additional $20,000.

The contact you post also states "Steve recieves a porminent banner on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login once SessionSafe is ready.  His wesbsite also gets to be mentioned in the registration letter for ment for 6 months.  However, if Steve does "defamation of character" towards Jennifer thomas either by email, text, phone call or in person, Jennifer has the right to no longer advertise You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login."

Do you relly feel that you lived up to your end of that agreement.  You did not defame Jennifer Thomas in any way from the time the contract was signed (it was for an even in June of 2023) until the time that the sessionsafe link was removed from You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login?

There is also a confidentiality clause that states that the contract is between you, Jennifer and Susan Patrick, and shall not be disloced to anybody else.  "Any disclosure in violation shall be deemed a breach of this Agreement."  I have seen this posted publically, and you emailed it to me yourself in June of this year.  So, but disclosing the contract you breached it if I am not mistaken.

But it is all Jennifers fault.  Got it.

No, defamation of character is:
Defamation of character is the act of making a false statement that damages someone's reputation. It can take two forms: libel (written statements) and slander (spoken statements). To prove defamation, the statement must be false, communicated to a third party, and cause harm to the individual's reputation. Opinions are not considered defamation, but false factual statements are. 

So no.

Jennifer posted the contract, I did not. So SHE broke the contract, not me. And Jennifer divulged details of the contract waaaay before I did and she did it a lot. So SHE broke the contract.

So no.

She HAS to go to mediation if there's a dispute in the contract, and I have been reminding her, CONSTANTLY, for three years now. It is LISTED IN THE CONTRACT.  She has to go to mediatio with me, LOSER PAYS THE MEIDATION FEE. Steve is very eager to go to mediation and Jennifer constantly avoids it.

Hmmm. . .

[session_safe]

Ok, you take no blame whatsoever in the situation.  Cool.

And Jennifer takes no blame either. Got it.

[session_safe]

But it is all Jennifers fault.  Got it.

And it's all Steve's fault. Got it.