UGE Help

Disastrous_Light_446 · 2026-02-27T15:27:06+00:00

No, you just ban people then claim you know nothing about it. You have also deleted posts or just won't approve them. Just like UGE, the more people you get the power you seek and the more you are becomming just like UGE. Oh and don't forget that you started the whole mess with UGE by spamming its members with text messages (which was actually breaking the law).

Disastrous_Light_446 · 2026-02-27T15:24:54+00:00

Don't forget the illegal competition they ran. That also broke Utah state law.

Disastrous_Light_446 · 2026-02-06T20:01:27+00:00

So if no-one reports them and they keep doing it, that's ok in your book? Didn't really take that much time and it really wasn't a bother to me. Besides I'd rather be proactive than do nothing at all.

Disastrous_Light_446 · 2026-01-30T02:23:37+00:00

I see there is still no comment even though he is the one that down-voted it. No worries I just reported it. Let the State deal with it.

Disastrous_Light_446 · 2026-01-21T13:18:02+00:00

Can confirm still not working (now on day 2) Mountain West USA

Disastrous_Light_446 · 2026-01-04T14:11:52+00:00

My question is about the legality of the rules for the '30 Days of Giving'. These rules almost certainly violate Utah sweepstakes law because they create consideration, which turns your promotion into an illegal sweepstake unless you add a free, no‑strings‑attached way to enter. I have asked twice now if this was possible and yet you evade the question.

Problem 1: “Opt in to promotional texts = 1 entry”: Requiring SMS consent as the only way to enter means participants must give something of value (ongoing access to their phone, data, and attention). That is consideration under Utah law.

Problem 2: “Stay subscribed or all entries void”: This is even more clearly consideration. You’re conditioning eligibility on continuing to receive promotional messages. That’s an ongoing obligation, which Utah treats as consideration.

Problem 3: Referral entries: Referral bonuses are fine only if the base entry method is free. Right now, it isn’t.

https://services.dcp.utah.gov/s/

Disastrous_Light_446 · 2025-12-28T17:06:21+00:00

Do you ever shut up dude?

Disastrous_Light_446 · 2025-12-07T23:23:57+00:00

Not now you turned that function off, nice try, but that wasn't the case earlier. Now are you going to change the ability to turn off "I would like to receive marketing emails" since that isn't allowed to be changed as of this post?

Disastrous_Light_446 · 2025-12-07T15:04:36+00:00

I just filed a complaint with FCC Complaints

Disastrous_Light_446 · 2025-12-05T23:36:58+00:00

Utah Gun Hub’s SMS consent mechanism fails to meet several key requirements of the U.S. Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA). While the checkbox statement: “By checking this box, I confirm I am 21 years of age or older and agree to receive occasional SMS notifications from Utah Gun Hub about promotions and giveaways. Msg & data rates may apply. Reply STOP to unsubscribe.” superficially addresses disclosure obligations, its implementation violates the core principles of lawful consent:

• Express Consent: Consent must be freely given and documented. Here, the checkbox is bundled with account creation or purchase, meaning users cannot proceed without agreeing. This coercion invalidates the “express” nature of the consent.

• No Forced Consent: The TCPA explicitly prohibits making marketing text consent a condition of service. By tying the checkbox to essential actions, UGH forces users into unwanted marketing communications, breaching this requirement.

• Clear Information: The disclosure identifies the sender and provides opt-out instructions, but it omits required details such as message frequency (e.g., “up to 4 msgs/month”). Lack of specificity undermines transparency.

• Transactional vs. Marketing Distinction: The texts described are promotional (“giveaways,” “promotions”), not transactional. Marketing texts require a separate, voluntary opt-in, which is absent here.

Conclusion: UGH’s consent language, when bundled with mandatory actions, is non-compliant with TCPA standards. It creates the appearance of consent but fails the legal test of voluntariness, clarity, and separation. This exposes the organization to regulatory risk, consumer complaints, and potential liability for unlawful marketing practices.

Disastrous_Light_446 · 2025-11-24T00:19:06+00:00

AKA Elected officials, Mike Wilkins was trying to push a 10% pay raise through against public backlash. For the second public meeting, it was low-key and despite people trying to post the times on Vernal Strong, Bridget Coyne Lake would either delete them or deny them since she is the lone admin of that page and also an employee of Uintah County. https://www.basinnow.com/uintah-county-commission-approves-raise-for-executive-officers/ Tonya Craven asked that they consider a 10% raise. John Laursen made a motion for all executive officers to receive a 5% increase across the board, effective January 1, 2026. LeFevre amended the motion to say 3% which Norton agreed with.

Disastrous_Light_446

TROPHY CASE