The "water4gas" scam, "HHO" scam

[c۞g]

I discovered this:
Inventor will stop claiming his device saves gas
Tuesday, June 02, 2009

I also fouund some court documents that described how the February Injunction against Dutchman/Lee was denied from lack of proof by the FTC. This was not a "win" nor a "loss" but merely a delay...

IMO, it's best to offer link(s) with the topic's OP that point to (in this case) court dockets; ie, justia or as in my reference a local newspaper.
-------
Against Intuition - gives us safety through Web of Trust.
WOT Community - gives us security through unity.
Thank you all
G7W {G.O.M}
http://g7w.net/

[c۞g]

I edited my comment, I wasn't impressed with the initial reply.

As for the US Justice system being the reason on how to rate a site?
No, absolutely not. With all the sites / domains / IP's scams, phishing, etc I've researched and recommended upon within these forums, you should know that I rely upon more simpler requirements; but if a statement / topic is made which involves the Court, then out of respect for the justice system itself, I claimed to wait before I joined in the requested rating process. With the discovery of the June 2 newspaper article I referenced, I see now that this Lee is a shady character and deserves his websites, which ever they are to be rated as unTrustworthy as he is. I would have offered to dig those domains and IP's etc. but I think I'll sit this one out and let Desertphile dig through the "network trenches."

-------
Against Intuition - gives us safety through Web of Trust.
WOT Community - gives us security through unity.
Thank you all
G7W {G.O.M}
http://g7w.net/

[Guest]

That's why I emphasized "in this particular event", because, as you said, I know you usually dig deep into whois, IP info, and such.

It was confusing to me that in this instance you seemed to "forgive" these measures, but now I understand.

Though I disagree with you that "respect for the justice system" should be a factor in WOT ratings.

Rating contrary to what judgement the system makes in no way indicates a lack of respect for the system . . . only a disagreement with the outcome. Disagreement does not equal a lack of respect.

For example, I respect you and your work, but in this case I disagree with your reasoning. That disagreement in no way diminishes my respect for you.

While one may "respect" the U.S. justice system, that respect has absolutely nothing to do with WOT ratings . . . my opinion, of course.

[Desertphile]

If you don't like my f**** language, don't f*****g read my f*****g comments.

And who the bloody f*** has claimed the USA Department of Justice is the sole arbiter of what is and is not a scam?

The device doesn't work; the sellers of the device may or may not know the device is worthless and that they have been robbed by Lee. That is not an excuse from warning people to avoid the scam. A shit load of "dealers" paid a hell of a lot of money for the right to sell the worthless device, and it has brought them nothing but economic hardship and ruin. Victims should be warned regardless of what the Department of Justice says.

I see that there are several versions of the Freije "easywater" scam being sold to morons who don't know shit about simple high-school-level physics. None of the web sites that sell that scam, some of them robbing people of thousands of dollars per victim, had been marked by the Web Of Trust community; if people believe they must wait for some government "authority" before knowing if a claim is fraudulent and a business is criminal, the WoT becomes utterly worthless.

[spectre]

All sites have red ratings now!

[Timo]

Thanks for the list of websites. I have done some editing to the language used in this thread. I also closed the thread, as it's starting to go off-topic.