DANNY : DE HEKIn the world of online deception, the real danger often comes with a smile and a spreadsheet. Meet Patrick Laing — founder of Certainty Management, former counterintelligence officer, and now the public defender of a highly questionable media platform called VIDME.

With over 100 recruits and a spreadsheet full of fantasy earnings, Laing is betting his reputation on a “platform” that hasn’t even opened payment processing.

This is the follow-up to our Original Exposé — and it’s a warning. VIDME is walking the same path as so many failed MLM scams before it, and when it collapses, Patrick will no longer be able to claim ignorance. He’s been warned.

Update: Patrick Laing Responds (4 June 2025)

Following publication of this blog, Patrick Laing sent us a direct message. In the interest of full transparency and fairness, we are acknowledging his right of reply.

Patrick’s statement, which we will publish in full upon his request, includes the following key points:

  • He claims VIDME is “not our company” and “not a top priority” for him.
  • He denies being asked by VIDME founders to speak with us and says he joined out of loyalty to Mike Popovich.
  • He maintains that VIDME is “not a 3-tier MLM,” describing it instead as a “2-tier affiliate program with bonuses.”
  • He accuses us of misrepresenting numbers and claims our motives are dishonest, while offering no counter-math or evidence.
  • He concludes by distancing himself from VIDME’s outcome, stating he’s “bowing out” until later, while also offering spiritual counsel unrelated to the topic.

We stand by every documented claim in this blog. Patrick was given over two hours of live discussion to address red flags — including privacy breaches, illegal rebroadcasts, and deceptive income structures. He failed to refute any of them.

Calming the Farm: Patrick Laing’s Role as Damage Control

After our first blog and YouTube exposé on VIDME, the platform didn’t send their founders, Chris Miller or Mike Popovich, to answer the criticism. Instead, they sent Patrick Laing — a polished speaker with military credentials, a radio show (“Finding Certainty”), and ties to dozens of questionable enterprises via his own browser bookmarks.

Why him? Because they needed someone “credible” to run interference. Laing was tasked with the classic MLM tactic: calm the farm. Play nice. Sound reasonable. Deflect the red flags. But as our recent two-and-a-half-hour Zoom confrontation reveals, Patrick knew exactly what he was defending — and he kept defending it anyway.

A “Two-Tier” Lie: The Hidden Third Level

PDFOne of Patrick’s go-to phrases was: “It’s just a simple 2-tier affiliate model.” But here’s what he didn’t say:

VIDME’s own Membership & Affiliate Plan Document outlines a 25% Check Match Bonus awarded to those who recruit 10+ people. This “influencer bonus” matches earnings from Tiers 1 and 2. It’s a third-tier commission disguised behind clever wording. It’s not an affiliate model — it’s multi-level marketing.

Even the platform’s Earnings Calculator (which they recently hid from public view) was designed to mislead. It presented hypothetical monthly income of $2,754 or $18,000, based on recursive recruiting — but the actual number of paid subscriptions needed to reach those figures? Staggering:

  • $2,754/month scenario
    • Tier 1: 12
    • Tier 2: 144
    • Tier 3: 1,728
      = 1,884 total paid subscribers just to hit $2.7K per month.
  • $18,000/month scenario
    • Tier 1: 24
    • Tier 2: 576
    • Tier 3: 13,824
      = 14,424 subscribers needed for a single person to earn six figures.

This is pyramid math, plain and simple. And Patrick Laing, an experienced businessman, knows it.

Inside the Back Office: Proof of the Third TierInside the Back Office: Proof of the Third Tier

Despite repeated denials, the three-tier structure is clearly embedded within VIDME’s own back office. If you log in as an affiliate, click the menu icon in the top-left corner, and navigate to Resources → Earnings Calculator, you’ll find a tool that visually maps out income across three distinct levels. While Tier 3 is slyly labeled “Check Match Bonus,” it’s functionally identical to a third-layer commission — calculated from the earnings of your downline’s downline.

This is where the fantasy income projections come from. It’s a deceptive design: the calculator obscures the exponential growth required to hit those targets, masking the fact that you’d need thousands of active, paying recruits beneath you just to earn a modest monthly sum. It’s multi-level marketing — just with smoke and mirrors.

Telltale Red Flags from the Zoom Confrontation

Our recent 2.5-hour discussion with Patrick revealed even more issues:

  • Security Failures: Users could register passwords like “12345678” and access the public member list, which exposed full names without consent.
  • Privacy Breaches: Patrick admitted we shouldn’t have been able to see his name — yet it was visible.
  • Bloomberg Re-broadcast: The platform showed Bloomberg TV under a VIDME.io URL. Patrick danced around the legality. If they lack rebroadcast rights, that’s copyright infringement.
  • No KYC, No Disclaimers: Despite promising future payouts, there is zero compliance infrastructure. No KYC. No country restrictions. No GST/VAT integration.
  • Payment Processing Not Active: As of June 2, 2025, not a single dollar has been transacted. Once payments open, regulators should take a close look.

Gaslighting the Public, Silencing Critics

When criticism mounted, VIDME’s unofficial propaganda arm — VidmeTV — launched a 1-hour, 39-minute livestream focused entirely on me. I was accused of “trying to sell passive income programs,” of having “no audience,” and of being “the real scammer.” Days later, one of my supporters was kicked out of a VIDME Facebook group simply for linking to my blog.

Mike Charbo, one of VIDME’s leaders, allegedly issued internal statements instructing affiliates to ignore me altogether, fearing I would gain traction. Chris Miller and Mike Popovich had every chance to respond with data. Instead, they leaned into slander.

Let’s not forget — during their own botched launch, Chris Miller locked himself out of the backend software, live, for five minutes. Patrick denied this ever happened.
But here’s the Timestamped Video proving otherwise.

That’s not forgetfulness — that’s deception.

The Brooke Jean Fable: Fabricating Authority

For months, Popovich and Miller have hyped up Brooke Jean, a so-called “life coach to Fortune 50 CEOs.” Her brand, “Unperfected”, was presented as a key reason why the platform offered value.

But research reveals no corporate clients, no online following, and only minor local references in Colorado. No major CEO, no coaching credentials. Just another example of VIDME puffing up its content to convince the masses they’re buying into prestige.

The Bookmarks That Tell a Story

During our recorded session, Patrick shared his screen — and unintentionally gave us a roadmap of his affiliations. His bookmarks include:

  • TranzactCard / Finmore (Ponzi collapse)
  • Talk Fusion (shut down by FTC)
  • TenXPR, TSC Blockchain Solutions, Veritas Global, Vidme (Social Goats), Umbrella US, Virtual Merchant Services, Tradewinds, VivLife, United Financial Freedom, Tony Dody / Dreammaker
  • And more.

This is not the browser history of someone who “just wants to help artists.” It’s a multilevel minefield — many of these entities have been exposed for MLM activity, credit card laundering, or unlicensed securities.

Patrick’s Deflection Playbook

Throughout the Zoom, Patrick continuously:

  • Emphasized the “good intentions” of his friends Mike Popovich and Chris Miller
  • Claimed the model helps struggling artists and nonprofits
  • Dismissed real-world math with vague counterexamples
  • Played victim when challenged, then asked for our blog to be taken down

At one point, Patrick even said, “I admire what you’re doing, Danny. But I believe this will work.”

This, despite having been shown privacy violations, flawed math, illegal rebroadcasts, and recycled MLM tactics.

A Pre-Loaded Collapse

When VIDME falls — and it will — Patrick Laing will likely be among those asking for blog posts to be taken down and YouTube videos to be deleted. He’ll say, “I didn’t know,” or “I was misled.”

But now, the record is clear. He was warned. And he chose to ignore it.

Let’s not forget: no one has paid a dollar yet. Once the payment processing opens, this will cross the regulatory red line. Multi-level income claims, cloaked as “affiliate marketing,” with no delivery of a real product.

We’ve seen this movie before. This time, we’re naming the cast before the credits roll.

Update: Patrick Laing Responds (4 June 2025)

Following the publication of this blog, Patrick Laing sent us a direct response. In the interest of transparency and fair reporting, we are acknowledging his right of reply below.

We are publishing an excerpt from his message, followed by our response:

I really don’t have time to deal with this right now, my friend. It’s far from my top priority. Vidme is just one of many projects we’re involved in and have been trying to support, mostly—in this case—because we like and trust Mike and his wife Barb (and I really do believe they are seeking to do good). It’s NOT our company and is NOT a top focus for us. I’ll make this one commitment: I will commit to send you one more message, a brief “other side of the coin” response as soon as I have time to create it. It’s only fair that folks hear both sides of the story, especially when some of your facts are just plain wrong … like the claim that Vidme Corporate asked me to speak with you and also the way you are calculating their numbers.

Both points you make are simply inaccurate. On the contrary, it’s the exact opposite. They know who they are and know that their “rising tide will raise all boats.” And, you’re just making stuff up anyway! You reached out to me, if you will recall. I didn’t initiate contact with you. Nobody asked me to call you. I just tried to answer your and Rob’s questions respectfully while you were just playing me. I just don’t do business like that and I don’t appreciate it at all. I trusted you and believed we were having a mutually respectful, open-minded conversation. We weren’t.

I question now whether you really want to find the truth at all and, ignorantly I guess, thought you did. I believed in you, Danny. You, instead, were live streaming me (which is fine; I have nothing to hide) but then you made up stories about me and put out another personally libelous, mis-representative post. Your numbers aren’t accurate. You make claims that are false. I’ll explain this when I post my response. Your assumptions are simply wrong. If nothing else, it’s not a 3-level MLM. It’s a two-tier affiliate program with BONUSES. Period. There’s nothing wrong with that. It’s generous but there’s nothing illegal about it. One of the top law firms in this space in the nation has confirmed this and represents it. I think they know a little more than I do or you do, my friend.

In short, I don’t feel like I can trust you, boss, so we really shouldn’t continue talking. I thought I could but I feel … disappointed, I think, more than anything else. I still like you and what you’re doing. I want to believe that you have integrity. I admire what you’re doing if it’s truly sincere. I have given you the same—my respect and integrity—completely, from the start. I expected the same from you, especially if you wanted to continue talking. I’m afraid I do not feel like it’s been given in return.

I have to say, I don’t think it makes you look good either … attacking a veteran, hurting a veterans-owned company and its employees, or their families, seeking to damage our reputation when Certainty is entirely unrelated. Casting shade on me and on us with half truths, labels, character attacks, and misdirection BEFORE VIDME HAS EVEN LAUNCHED, makes you look like you’re reaching and just looking for clicks. It just makes ME … tired.

As I said, I will post a single response and I’ll keep my promise to join you again a few weeks from now for an update call (I’d recommend one quarter not just a month to give them a little time to get their feet under them; it’s only fair) but until then I have to bow out. Please leave me alone and leave me out of whatever games you want to play with Mike and Chris. It’s not my project. I’m not willing to do this. I don’t have the time or the energy for it. I’m not going to be a martyr, even for them … even if I do like their platform and what they’re trying to do. I believe it’s a good thing for the fans AND the content creators (like yourself). I really do hope you’ll give them a chance to prove it before making it harder or trying to tear them down. They’re not perfect and they never will be, but their hearts are pure and only time will tell. It will prove their intent 100%. I firmly believe that. I’ll talk with you later, my friend. I’ve gotta get to work. Thanks for listening and take care of yourself.

PS – if you ever want to talk spirituality or religion, that’s a topic I’d consider discussing with you. I’m sorry about what happened to you when you were shunned or banished or whatever it was by your JW congregation. I bet that hurt. I know it would for me. I’d love to share with you what I’ve learned that’s totally changed my life. This knowledge is the most important thing in the world to me, next to my wife and kids. It could bless your life too if you ever want to hear me out. If not that’s okay. I just wanted to offer. I’d even say I feel impressed to do so.

Our Response

We appreciate Patrick taking the time to respond. However, we stand by every documented claim presented in this blog and in our video. Patrick was given over two hours in a live Zoom discussion to address serious red flags — including:

  • Privacy breaches
  • An earnings structure that clearly resembles a multi-level marketing scheme
  • Illegal rebroadcast of Bloomberg TV under VIDME branding
  • Zero compliance infrastructure (no KYC, no payment processor, no legal disclaimers)

Not once did Patrick adequately address these concerns — instead, he chose to defend VIDME’s founders, dismiss concrete math as “false,” and cast himself as a victim of “libel” and “misdirection.” He offered no financial data, no counter-evidence, and no legal documentation to support his rebuttals — only personal trust in the platform’s leadership.

We also note that Patrick is now distancing himself from VIDME, calling it “not our company” and “not a top priority,” despite previously stating he would “put his reputation on the line” to support Mike Popovich.

If Patrick Laing chooses to issue a full public statement, we will link to it here. Until then, this blog serves as the documented record of what was said — and what was ignored.

Email Reply to Patrick Laing

Subject: RE: Your Response to the VIDME Blog

Hi Patrick,

Thank you for taking the time to write back.

We’ve read your response carefully, and while you are, of course, entitled to your point of view, it’s disappointing that you’ve chosen to deflect rather than address the very real red flags we discussed — many of which were acknowledged by you on video.

Your claim that VIDME is “not your company” is noted. However, you’ve recruited over 100 people, hosted calls, defended the compensation model, and projected personal income spreadsheets. That makes you a public advocate for the brand — and therefore accountable.

You say it’s not a 3-tier system, but the “25% Check Match Bonus” clearly pays out on Tier 3 activity. Hiding that under the word “bonus” doesn’t change the structure — or the fact that it mirrors classic MLM compensation tactics. The math, which we published transparently, hasn’t been challenged with any figures from you.

As for your accusation that we are attacking a veteran — respectfully, that’s a deflection. This isn’t about your past. It’s about your current role defending a model with privacy flaws, no KYC, hidden earnings calculators, and no compliance infrastructure — all before it’s even processed a dollar.

You’re welcome to send us your “other side of the coin” response as promised. We will publish it in full, unedited, if requested. But let’s be clear: You were warned. This blog, and the accompanying video, will serve as a public record when the inevitable happens.

Sincerely,
Danny de Hek
The Crypto Ponzi Scheme Avenger

Update: Patrick Laing Responds (4 June 2025)

It works like this:

You receive 20% of your personal (your Tier 1) membership sales. Share Vidme with just 5 people and you’ll earn $6.998 x 5 or $34.99 per month. Share it with just 1 person a month for 12 months and you will earn 20% of $34.99 ($6.998) x 12 or $83.98 in personal (Tier 1) monthly commissions.

If those 12 each do the same thing you did—sell just 1 member per month for a year—you will then be earning 12% of $34.99 ($4.1988) per month x 144 members or $604.63 per month. You’re now up to $688.60 in personal combined monthly commissions.

These 12 (your Tier 1 and Tier 2 members) will earn the same amount you did, assuming they made the same # of sales (1 person average per month for a year) … or $688.60 per month. Multiple this # by 12 affiliates total and it equals $8,263.20 in total commissions owed to these 12 Tier 2 affiliates each month.

Your bonus with 10+ personal sales = 25% of this amount or $2,065.81 per month. This is where the $2,754.41 in monthly earnings (the figure you’ve been calling unrealistic). It comes from … the $688.60 earned in personal Tier 1 and Tier 2 commissions plus the $2,065.81 in bonus. The math is crystal clear.

This is of course not guaranteed. I have a disclaimer on my income estimator. Nothing is for sure. It still takes effort, even with as generous as the plan is; we even believe these numbers to be conservative. Anyone who’s serious about this should be able to share it with ONE person per month. Not everyone will. Others will do much more. But, it should balance itself out for all active participants (both members and creatives) in the long run.

I’ve got to get going, bud. I’m going to be unplugged (for the most part) for the next week and a half. I’ll try to get you that video before I shut down but, just know, I’m cutting off all emails, phone calls, texts, and Zooms for the next 10+ days; it’s not personal, it’s for everyone. This was already planned. I’m unplugging to try to finish another—non-Vidme—project. Take care of yourself and let’s talk again in another few weeks.

Email Reply to Patrick Laing (4 June 2025)

Hi Patrick,

Thanks for taking the time to write back.

I appreciate your breakdown of the VIDME earnings structure, and I’ve reviewed the math closely. You’re right — the numbers do technically add up. But that’s not where the real concern lies.

The issue is not the arithmetic — it’s the structure.

Let me explain clearly: When you earn a 25% Check Match Bonus based on what your referrals earn from their referrals, that’s functionally a third tier of commissions. Whether you call it a bonus, override, or anything else, you’re still being compensated based on the performance of people two levels beneath you. That’s classic MLM logic — regardless of how you label it.

And let’s be honest — your earnings scenario requires:
•    12 direct recruits (Tier 1),
•    Each of them to recruit 12 more (Tier 2),
•    All of them to be paying $34.99/month, and
•    Those 12 affiliates to each be earning $688.60/month themselves before your check match kicks in at $2,065.81/month.

That means to hit the $2,754/month figure, one person needs:
•    156 active paid members below them, across three structured tiers.

That’s not conservative. That’s pyramid-based growth — and you know it.

Also, with respect, your reply didn’t offer any evidence to challenge the red flags we raised:
•    No KYC, no disclaimers, no working payment processor,
•    Public member list visibility (a data protection issue),
•    Illegal Bloomberg rebroadcast, which you dodged during our Zoom,
•    And a compensation system that relies on mass replication and team overrides to generate income.

Yet you still frame this as “just a 2-tier affiliate program with bonuses.”

That’s disingenuous.

And as for your suggestion that I “played” you — I have to push back on that. I gave you over two hours of live dialogue, every opportunity to explain your position, and have offered to publish your rebuttal in full, unedited, if you wish. That’s not ambush — that’s transparency.

I understand this isn’t your core project. But you’ve been the face of damage control, and whether or not you own VIDME, you’ve promoted it publicly, recruited others, and endorsed its earnings model. That comes with accountability — especially when people stand to lose money.

As for Certainty Management and your military background — I haven’t attacked your past or your family. I’ve addressed what’s being promoted, how it’s structured, and what risks it presents to unsuspecting users. That’s my job.

If you still plan to send through a formal response, I will happily publish it on the blog as an update. You’ll get your right of reply in full, with zero edits. But let’s not pretend the numbers are the problem here — it’s the deceptive framing and multi-tiered logic at the core of VIDME’s plan that needs to be called out.

Regards,
Danny de Hek
The Crypto Ponzi Scheme Avenger

Update: Patrick Laing Responds (4 June 2025)

Tomato Tommato. I’m going to stick with what the lawyers say is legal and right. I’d appreciate if you did the same. I’ll tell you what: let’s stay in touch, continue the dialogue, and see how it goes, as I’ve repeatedly requested thus far. As I’ve said, Danny. I believe Vidme’s plan is a realistic, even conservative, albeit generous, pay plan. When have you ever seen a program that will pay you $33,052.95 residually per year with only 156 active members? It doesn’t happen and will still not happen overnight. What it does do, though, is it says something about how Mike and Chris are trying to do it right with Vidme. Anyone out there who wants to sign up with me can do so at https://certaintysocial.com

There’s nothing inherently wrong with even a 3-tier system so I don’t know why that point is so stuck in your craw. There are many sales jobs and affiliate programs that pay more than 2 tiers deep. That doesn’t mean it’s inherently flawed. Most of the sales jobs I’ve had over the years paid a rep, a manager, a GM, RM, DM, etc. What about it?

A plan is only realistic if somebody works it. In my opinion, if you can’t sell one membership a month, you probably shouldn’t call yourself an affiliate. Recruit just 5 new members to Vidme and your ~$1.20 per day cost is paid for. That’s a pretty low-requirement/ low-pressure pay plan. We’ve had people bring in 5 in their first day and more than a dozen in their first month so, yes, I believe our projections are conservative.

And, you don’t have to sell ANYTHING if you don’t want to. Some people won’t, either because they just suck at sales or have no interest in selling. Many members will join and are joining Vidme simply because they want access to the product … the VIP membership, curated content, master classes, exclusive events, and more. There’s no charge to be an affiliate on top of the $34.99 membership fee. Some will do the business side of the project. Some will not. That’s their prerogative. Those who do, I believe, will pay for their fee quickly and everything beyond that will be “frosting on the cake.” (And, I did and have addressed the Bloomberg example live stream question, the KYC that hasn’t started yet, the temporary member visibility, and now the conservative nature of the earnings). You’re welcome to post your questions and these (my) responses on your blog. I haven’t dodged anything … I’ve been totally transparent … and, don’t forget, our two+ hours of conversation happened AFTER you libeled me in public (before you even knew me). Since then, my friend, I’ve extended an olive branch and tried to help you and your listeners get the “rest of the story.”

That doesn’t mean I have to agree with everything you say, nor do you have to agree with me. I don’t expect that. It’s okay. You have to ask questions. I understand that. It’s part of vetting a project. I actually appreciate it. It will help us get better. Just, give the libel a rest, please. That’s all I ask. Calling me a “liar” and my program a “Ponzi scheme,” when it clearly isn’t, might earn you a free coffee or two or sell another drop ship package to your die-hard friends but it does nothing to contribute to our conversation or potential collaboration. I’m trying to be real and respectful with you. I have from the start. I simply ask you to do the same.

Thanks again, Danny. Now I REALLY need to go.

Email Reply to Patrick Laing

Hi Patrick,

Thanks again for the response — and for continuing the dialogue.

You’re right: there’s nothing inherently wrong with a three-tier system if it’s clearly disclosed, legally compliant, and not deceptively framed. But that’s not what we’re seeing here. The concern isn’t just about depth of commissions — it’s about how the compensation is positioned and what’s being omitted or sugarcoated in the pitch.

You keep calling it a “realistic and conservative” plan, but that doesn’t make the logic behind it any less pyramid-shaped. The example you gave — $33K annually with just 156 members — relies on perfect cascading growth and a 100% retention rate. That’s classic MLM math: it looks great on paper, but only works in theory. Real-world churn, sales friction, and user attrition make those numbers far less attainable than advertised. That’s the entire point of our breakdown.

You also say people don’t have to sell anything — but that’s misleading. The entire commission structure only benefits those who recruit. There’s no compensation for simply consuming content, and the “frosting on the cake” only exists if the cake is built on replicated sales. That’s not passive product use — that’s pay-to-play wrapped in creative language.

Regarding the Bloomberg rebroadcast, member list visibility, and KYC gaps — you acknowledge them as issues, but don’t offer timelines or safeguards. “We haven’t started yet” isn’t a defense when legal and privacy risks are already active. Transparency isn’t just admitting things are broken — it’s showing you’ve fixed them or are qualified to manage them, which VIDME has not done.

As for libel: Patrick, calling something what it is — a multi-tiered, pre-revenue, recruitment-driven model with no live product delivery or working payment infrastructure — is not defamation. It’s investigative commentary, backed by evidence. I haven’t questioned your intentions as a human being. I’ve questioned your decision to publicly promote a scheme that checks nearly every box of a potential pyramid structure, knowingly or not.

I’m proud of the fact that I may receive a coffee, commission, or reward for publishing the truth from time to time. I make my content freely available for those trying to avoid losing their savings. The dropshipping line is a strange dig — but if you’re insinuating that I’m running a scam of my own, you’re welcome to investigate it fully. I’d welcome the scrutiny.

I’ll leave the door open, as you’ve requested, to revisit this once payment processing goes live and once we see actual retention data — not projections. And if you feel I’ve been unfair, I invite you to publish your formal rebuttal anytime, and I’ll link it for readers in full.

Thanks again for the exchange. We may not agree, but I do respect that you’ve continued to engage.

Take care,
Danny de Hek
The Crypto Ponzi Scheme Avenger

Update: Patrick Laing Responds (4 June 2025)

Danny – I’m in a meeting so couldn’t answer your calls. We’re still going. As soon as I’m done I’ll be tied up the rest of the … week. I’m afraid I can’t give you any more attention for the next little while. I have got to get caught up on about 300 unread emails … and so much more. The time I’ve been spending with you has put me further and further behind. Not your fault. It is what it is. I just need to get back to work.

I see your message. Thanks for the respect for at least my attempts at engagement. I believe you’re sincere. I do wish you’d give me/us more of the benefit of the doubt, but I understand that you’re jaded and it’s hard for you. You’ve seen and see a lot of crap out there. I get it. I’ll send you a response video as soon as I can. It’s going to take me a while. As I said, I’m seriously behind and I need to unplug from this all for the next several days. I’m not getting other work done that I critically need to and I have a serious deadline is getting closer and closer.

So … no offense, I appreciate the exchange. We don’t have to agree on everything and some of the issues you have pointed out have already been addressed. Either way, I have faith the platform will continue to improve. Rome wasn’t built in a day.

Please … just tell the whole story. When I try to answer your questions don’t say I ignored your requests or skirted the issue. When I respond to your requests, be honest about the pros AND cons. I do make some good points every now and then.

I’d appreciate if, when I do share my thoughts, you share the whole picture … like when I gave you an income example of what would happen IF someone shared it with 1 person a month for a year and IF those 12 people did the same AND then I added that “This is of course not guaranteed. I have a disclaimer on every income estimator I show. Nothing is for sure. It still takes effort, even with as generous as the plan may be….” That isn’t standard “MLM speak,” but I do mean what I said: “Anyone who’s serious about this should be able to share it with ONE person per month. Not everyone will. Others will do much more. It should balance itself out….” I would appreciate if you share the whole conversation, including where I’m truly trying to  realistic, transparent, and conservative.

I explained why I have a lot of different businesses tagged. It’s not because I’m a “secret MLMer.” We just look at a lot of different projects. There are good ones out there and there are bad. You know this more than most. Personally, we tend to lean toward more traditional business than affiliate offers. Anyway. Just tell the whole story. That’s all I ask.

Oh, and I was not insinuating that your drop ship business was a scam. Not at all. I don’t want to get in a pissing match with you. I just have to let you go, as much as I’ve enjoyed the lively debate. I have to finish this huge work project that’s hanging over my head. I’ts coming down to the wire.

Take care of yourself. Let’s talk again in another month or two. Be good, mate. Stay safe. Catch you later.

Email Reply to Patrick Laing (4 June 2025)

Hi Patrick,

Thanks for your message. I’ll respect your need to unplug, so I’ll keep this final reply clear and direct.

You’ve repeatedly asked for fairness and full context — and you got it. Every single piece of correspondence you’ve sent me has been included in the blog, unedited, in full context. I’ve removed nothing. Not even your affiliate link to certaintysocial.com. That alone proves I’m not hiding anything — unlike the platform you’re defending.

You had over two hours of open dialogue, multiple back-and-forth emails, and full access to present your side. I quoted your math. I included your disclaimers. I even acknowledged your spirituality and personal backstory, which you volunteered — not me. No part of your message has been omitted or twisted. The blog readers can see that for themselves.

Let’s be real: you’re not just “supporting a friend.” You’ve built spreadsheets. You’ve made claims. You’ve recruited people. You’ve spoken for the company more than its founders have. And now, suddenly, VIDME is “not your company” and “not a priority”? That’s a classic MLM tactic — promote hard when it’s hot, then vanish when accountability shows up.

Your request that I “tell the whole story” has already been granted — with direct quotes, embedded screenshots, and all your responses laid bare for the public. The entire conversation — from Zoom, to text, to rebuttals — is on the record. If you want to submit a final rebuttal, I will link to it. But I won’t be censoring facts to soften your exit.

You asked for truth. That’s what I’ve published — timestamped, documented, and now permanently indexed online.

Take care of your deadlines. We’re done here.

Danny de Hek
The Crypto Ponzi Scheme Avenger

About the Author Danny de Hek, also known as The Crypto Ponzi Scheme Avenger, is a New Zealand-based investigative journalist specializing in exposing crypto fraud, Ponzi schemes, and MLM scams. His work has been featured by Bloomberg, The New York Times, The Guardian Australia, ABC News Australia, and other international outlets.

Stop losing your future to financial parasites. Subscribe. Expose. Protect.

My work exposing crypto fraud has been featured in: