So, to summarize this thread, NorbertTheOpinionated made some great and valid points about why NCWest's behavior is fraudulent and disgraceful, and certain ignorant people are unable to recognize or admit the truth. Often because they are clearly clueless about the how logic and thereby correct arguments work fundamentally.
It really is a shame that so many people (i.a., in this community) are terribly uneducated, yet want to assert their opinions. Guys, if you do not have valid arguments to substantiate your opinion, it is absolutely worthless. Feelings and subjective experiences are insufficient to form valid arguments. In context of a philosophical debate, you must stick to common and well-defined concepts. If you mix them, or base your statements on individual definitions which you did not introduce properly, then what you write is not even wrong (which means it is nonsense, which is worse than making false assertions). And you must follow the basic rules of any epistemic debate, which includes to not ignore arguments but to either agree or to refute them by adequately leading the original arguments to contradictions. But much of what NorbertTheOpinionated wrote cannot be soundly contradicted since it was valid in common philosophical terms (as NorbertTheOpinionated's re-answers strongly indicate).