Conspiracy Theory

[SunriseEarth]

---

@Dw4250 wrote:

---

@EndlessRoad wrote:

Do you by chance wear an aluminum foil hat?  LOL JK! 

I guess anything is possible but what would Chase gain from combing through these forums, and cross refencing to find out who is who?  If it is true I hope they read my posts about how they wont give me a Freedom card lol.  I just dont think there would be enough gain in paying someone to "manage" these forums. 

---

+1

Exactly.  What would Chase, BOA or AMEX gain from "monitoring" this site?  These banks are about dollars and sense.  Investing either considerable man hours or investing in highly sophisticated, NSA-type data mining software just to monitor the "activities" on here seems highly unlikely.

If there were an obvious gain for these banks (or if we were somehow giving away Colonel Sanders' secret formula!), I'm sure they would monitor.  But there isn't...so they don't.  

Sleep well, my friend.

---

+1.  This is a finger lickin' good post!

[Anonymous]

Parsing what people say on forums? Nah, too much effort. As shady head of loans at Acme Bank, I need precise, actionable data. 2 words my friend, public records. 

[CreditCuriosity]

Not going to happen OP.  I use to work for a major CC company writting software for them.  More so on the database side.  If anyone tried to query up peoples info for any reason other then a work related issue they would be fired and monitoring forums wouldn't qualify for that and you would have to have back end SQL access to do alot of what you mention.  That is what Database auditing is for to keep people from doing stuff they aren't suppose to do.  I use to work for the IRS as well and if people looked up peoples info for any other reason then work related welcome to possible prision time.

[ambivalent]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@prettylady wrote:

That's an interesting thought.  I think I'd like to work in that department.  I'd be paid to spend my days on here and it would be my actual job instead of my being here surfing and trying to fit work in hahaha.

---

It's probably like working in a chocolate place or whatever is currently desirable.   Once it becomes work, "Oh God, it's Monday and I have to get back on the [expletive deleted] MyFico site and read all those stupid posts.  I HATE my job!"

---

LOL!  But then you get to read the entertaining threads and that makes it all worth it.

[Anonymous]

---

@CreditCuriousity wrote:

Not going to happen OP.  I use to work for a major CC company writting software for them.  More so on the database side.  If anyone tried to query up peoples info for any reason other then a work related issue they would be fired and monitoring forums wouldn't qualify for that and you would have to have back end SQL access to do alot of what you mention.  That is what Database auditing is for to keep people from doing stuff they aren't suppose to do.  I use to work for the IRS as well and if people looked up peoples info for any other reason then work related welcome to possible prision time.

---

But the OPs concern wasn't about unauthorized employees doing this, it was about a team who would have this as their primary job function.

So in telecomm, we do indeed fire employees who look up the call records of their SO, or ex-SOs, or those who get a friend to do it, basically you need a valid business purpose to do this.  But we do indeed have a team authorized to do this in [cases where it needs to be done]

Not that I think what the OP proposes does happen (because of lack of worth) but it's not the case you are talking about.

[CreditCuriosity]

I can only speak for the CC company I worked for as I would be one of the people that pulled up auditing reports for upper-management and we didn't do any such thing.  I just really can't see any justifcation or practical need for OP's possible theory.   Everyone is entitled to their own opinion though.  Who knows maybe there are banks that do, but we weren't one of them

[TRC_WA]

Great... Now I'm gonna have to stop using my real name on these forums.

Ugh.

[Anonymous]

---

@CreditCuriousity wrote:

I can only speak for the CC company I worked for as I would be one of the people that pulled up auditing reports for upper-management and we didn't do any such thing.  I just really can't see any justifcation or practical need for OP's possible theory.   Everyone is entitled to their own opinion though.  Who knows maybe there are banks that do, but we weren't one of them

---

As if you'd say anything else but what you just said. LOL. Me and OP are on to your game, Mr. Man.

[CreditCuriosity]

LOL

[Anonymous]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@CreditCuriousity wrote:

I can only speak for the CC company I worked for as I would be one of the people that pulled up auditing reports for upper-management and we didn't do any such thing.  I just really can't see any justifcation or practical need for OP's possible theory.   Everyone is entitled to their own opinion though.  Who knows maybe there are banks that do, but we weren't one of them

---

As if you'd say anything else but what you just said. LOL. Me and OP are on to your game, Mr. Man.

---

Come on!  No-one is monitoring your posts and matching you up to a real customer, it's just not cost-effective.

BTW, we are a little concerned by your recent Walgreens charge for $36.77, this is the third visit in a week.   Something wrong?