TraderC may have gotten confused while using an earlier "build" of the platform, under a prior pricing structure, or he may have encountered an unhelpful customer service rep., or his judgment may be clouded by his emotional reaction to the events he's described (including the 1-month period during which he had to endure separation from his $100).
Whatever the explanation, his experience does not in any crucial respect, square with mine, though I will grant that some aspects of transaction data (specifically relating to tax preparation) were inferior to CyberTrader or other brokers I've used, but, in the end, the data were all available (and downloadable), and didn't really require too much work to turn into an adequate gain/loss statement. Otherwise, under the current set-up, all critical information is instantly available and continuously updated, either on-line or through the platform - commission charges appear immediately, and, under the per-share pricing structure, are extremely simple to calculate. In this respect, TS is a lot better than CyberTrader Pro was (at least when I using it) - on Cyber, you'd have to wait 'til later to figure out your P&L post-fees/commissions.
Finally, possible inadequacy in service or product offering does not equate with dishonesty. Nor do broken promises, unless it can be shown that the intention was to deceive. Last, even if some individuals were guilty on all counts, I do not believe that some new client plotzing over a data fee and not receiving immediate satisfaction from whoever he dealt with justifies tarring an entire brokerage with the brush of "dishonesty."
Anyway, because I find the heading of this thread prejudicial, manipulative, somewhat offensive, and quite possibly itself "dishonest," and because further I consider the event that apparently inspired TraderC to begin it to be trivial, I'll refrain from posting here any further.