What do you think of the CAP banning frenzy?

[arkyt]

Yup. Everyone wants to be friends and/or maintain the status quo until it's their character that's attacked and dragged through the mud.

I understand webmasters who see how completely futile all this fighting is. However, if we don't fight, CAP will continue to manipulate situations, bully and intimidate, "borrow" content at every opportunity, and otherwise monopolize the entire industry.

God help you all if they can't be stopped.

You know me JT, I've been at the wheel for years. Both sad and glad that the same time - sad its taken others so long to see what myself and others have professed for years, glad that others are finally speaking out against it, which is permitting others to see it. Unfortunately, based on years of experience I don't expect anything at all to come of it, but the same old - same old...

Heck, it wasnt that long ago that GPWA was banning members at the direct demands of CAP. It wasn't until dozens of members spoke out against the bannings that they were upgraded to moderated status.

This industry could truly be so much better if those who had a position of influence would use that power in a meaningful manner instead of only trying to pad their own wallets. IMO the industry doesn't need another magazine, another radio show, or video channel, and certainly not another conference.

This side of the industry needs to be about fairness and equality for each and every member of the community in every respect. Possibly this newly agreed upon alliance will be a renewal of an elementary concept that has been brewing for a long time. Then again maybe I have it all wrong, maybe these sort of ethically based changes have never happened because the community doesnt want them to ... Time will tell, but as I have alluded to, based on history, its tough to be overly optimistic.

[worthy]

It was about a year ago that I suggested something of this sort. I even bought the domain AffilaiteUnion.org or .com or such... I forget, because it was met with such immediate resistance that I abandoned the idea within a few days.

Thanks for confirming, I then immediatelly conceived that it a fair idea.

[TheCPA]

The concept of charging members was heavily discussed at one point here at the GPWA.

This was when there were NO Forum Fees, Etc..

After a lot of discussion, it was decided that it just wouldn't work at any price.

25 bucks was more than wanted to spend, or even could afford to pay in many cases, {and we didn't want it to be something that meant people couldn't join}, and nightmare of just trying to collect it would be another massive hassle to boot.

Some people just completely rejected the notion altogether as ridiculous, while others SAID they would pay more to cover those folks,....but we all know how that really works out in the end.

The idea was to not have to charge programs for forum to keep the monetary conflict of interest out of the equation, which is an excellent concept, IMO, but membership dues probably would never work well online.

In other words, even back then, it went over like a "Fart in a Spacesuit" , so don't feel too bad about it!

The concept does sound good on the surface, but in reality, it would never endure the test of time.

[worthy]

The concept of charging members was heavily discussed at one point here at the GPWA.

This was when there were NO Forum Fees, Etc..

After a lot of discussion, it was decided that it just wouldn't work at any price.

25 bucks was more than wanted to spend, or even could afford to pay in many cases, {and we didn't want it to be something that meant people couldn't join}, and nightmare of just trying to collect it would be another massive hassle to boot.

Some people just completely rejected the notion altogether as ridiculous, while others SAID they would pay more to cover those folks,....but we all know how that really works out in the end.

The idea was to not have to charge programs for forum to keep the monetary conflict of interest out of the equation, which is an excellent concept, IMO, but membership dues probably would never work well online.

In other words, even back then, it went over like a "Fart in a Spacesuit" , so don't feel too bad about it!

The concept does sound good on the surface, but in reality, it would never endure the test of time.

Pretty sad that some folks want everything for free. Now they can see for themselfs what they can get for free. You allways get what you've paid for.

[TheCPA]

Pretty sad that some folks want everything for free.

Agreed, in some cases, but not all.

There are always a good number of newer affiliates that are spending every dime they have just to survive while they try to break into the business.

The GPWA was always good about helping those folks develop, and we didn't want to shut them off or out of the loop.

It wasn't about wanting something for free for some of them.

But yes, there were certainly some cheapskates too!

[Webzcas]

Wow! This thread is still going after a full week?? Thanks for all the publicity Michael, maybe this forum should change their name from GPWA to CAP since we seem to be the hottest topic on the boards.

Is it any wonder? You seem surprised as to why this issue is of paramount importance to many affiliates? Let me enlighten you then. This issue is very important to the gambling affiliate community due to the direction the management of the largest gambling affiliate community are taking. As such it affects all of those whose interests they represent.

Glad you guys were banned, seems like you're more interested in "forum drama" than making money. Come on over to CAP when you're ready to take yourselves seriously as affiliates and actually make some cash, otherwise you can stay here and keep on crying over spilled milk.

The inclusion of the emoticon and the contents of the above are nothing but a lame attempt at flaming. For the record, many affiliates who have commented in this thread have done so constructively. Furthermore, many of us already make a very healthy living from the industry. However some choose to make their revenue without regard for others.

I guess Casinomeister's newsletter from 2003 summed up the GPWA members drama fetish the best. Sad to see things haven't changed in over 5 years...

"...there are a number of webmasters who spend far too much time in other peoples’ portals arguing about this or that in other people’s message boards, when they should be concentrating on their own "portal", policing it up and ensuring that they are promoting legitimate enterprises."

That was 5 years ago. The GPWA has changed ownership twice in that time. Casino City having purchased the GPWA from Casino Glen back in 2006. By the way have you spoken to Bryan recently asking him if the views he expressed 5 years ago remain the same today? No? I thought not. I can assure you he has said nothing of the sort to me and I normally touch base with him once a week or so.


Again another poor attempt at deflection and flaming. Not very professional at all.

[Webzcas]

Reading this thread, it sounds like the affiliates at CAP are a cold, uncaring bunch with nothing but their own profit in mind.

I think their actions speak for themselves.

Nothing but further from the truth Dom. As a member of CAP I truly appreciate and am proud of what the membership have done over the years since I started participating there.

This thread is not about the affiliates who without CAP would not be the entity it is today. This thread is about how CAP as a business is moving forward. Having been out of the loop for a considerable amount of time this year, I come back to find that CAP instead of working with organisations such as the APCW, AGD and CAC, is trying to push them out of business.

Add to this their "Certification Program", the banning of the casino city team from their forum and their perceived strong arm tactics on other industry bodies operating in their marketplace. It all leaves a bad taste in my mouth to be honest.

This thread is not about the members of CAP, but the actions the management who own and run CAP have taken recently.

[GamTrak]

I applied and was approved at PAL a few days ago and now I can't get in and my PM has gone unanswered.

So is PAL not allowing me access because I'm a mod at CAP?

[Webzcas]

I doubt it. More likely it has been setup so you have to be invited, which is silly IMO. Check the thread concerning the formation of the alliance in the Announcements Forum.

Someone who has posted in that thread will send you an invite.

If I decide to join I also will have to be invited by an existing member as would anyone else.

[GamTrak]

I doubt it. More likely it has been setup so you have to be invited, which is silly IMO. Check the thread concerning the formation of the alliance in the Announcements Forum.

Someone who has posted in that thread will send you an invite.

If I decide to join I also will have to be invited by an existing member as would anyone else.

I did get an invite, I accepted and I was a member and now I'm not.

Someone deleted my membership and I want to know why. This is what Lou is being accused of, but I've never posted or caused trouble at that site so what happened?

[Enke]

Hey Robin,

I'm not sure what happened with your invite, regardless check your email, I have sent you a new one. Of course you would be a welcome member to PAL. Apologies for any confusion.

-Jeremy

[mojo]

I did get an invite, I accepted and I was a member and now I'm not.

Someone deleted my membership and I want to know why. This is what Lou is being accused of, but I've never posted or caused trouble at that site so what happened?

Hey Robin, I don't think they would do that! I have to point out the irony of this.

Unless it actually happens to you, you don't know how it feels to be tossed out and devalued. Affiliate programs pay money to contact us in the forum venue. Many of us get tossed out so how do we do business? We go elsewhere is all. From a business point, the programs perhaps should study if they are getting the full benefit from the affiliate community or if it is diminishing due to the bannings.

Cap has been doing this kind of thing for years as we have seen. This thread was bound to happen sometime, somewhere.

I hope it works out for you. No one should punish you for being a mod! Since PAL is part of the alliance, this sort of thing will not be seen.

[GamTrak]

Hey Robin,

I'm not sure what happened with your invite, regardless check your email, I have sent you a new one. Of course you would be a welcome member to PAL. Apologies for any confusion.

-Jeremy

Thank you very much Jeremy.

I'm a little sensitive these days and hope I was not rude.

Thanks mojo!

[Sissy]

I understand how it feels to be banned from a forum that I never posted anything wrong in also.... but I am "small potatoes" too.... obviously.

[GamTrak]

I understand how it feels to be banned from a forum that I never posted anything wrong in also.... but I am "small potatoes" too.... obviously.

What forum was that and when? What did you do about it?

[Sissy]

What forum was that and when? What did you do about it?

It was the APCW and I did nothing.. wasn't worth my time. but thanks for asking.

[Tristan]

The concept of charging members was heavily discussed at one point here at the GPWA.

In my opinion, that was a bad idea at the time and still will be for a long time yet, if not indefinitely.

It creates a high barrier to entry. In a small community like gaming affiliates, it would have just driven people elsewhere and led to the forum dying a slow death.

Pretty sad that some folks want everything for free. Now they can see for themselfs what they can get for free. You allways get what you've paid for.

No offense intended, but it's not free at all. You're just not in the paying demographic

The gaming affiliates get what the Sponsors - Affiliate programs, pay for.

For the record, the GPWA fees are very reasonable, we get everything that was promised and we're a very happy sponsor.

[mojo]

The gaming affiliates get what the Sponsors - Affiliate programs, pay for.

I would never put you on the spot Tristin. I'm just commenting on this because of all of this.

Sponsors would like to reach as many affliates as possible for their money. Affiliates need contact with affiliate sponsors. It's a win/win.

With all the banning, and no sign of that stopping anytime ever, there may be a decrease in exposure for affiliate sponsors.

It's really none of my business what is charged. Glad to hear GPWA is reasonable. GPWA is also honest about it. Nothing wrong with charging to cover costs to run a forum. No one wants to see over the top charges however. That takes money out of all of our pockets.

There is another forum that has a different idea. The GIA (Gambling Industry Association) is free for Affiliate Programs to have a forum there. It's still small but there is no conflict of interest.

Just my .02 and strictly my own opinion.

[Chips]

I did get an invite, I accepted and I was a member and now I'm not.

Someone deleted my membership and I want to know why. This is what Lou is being accused of, but I've never posted or caused trouble at that site so what happened?

Let me know if you get this sorted Robin, I take personal responcibilty for you as I sent you the invite. I am sure it had to be a glitch. MSN me or PM is fine.

[GamTrak]

Let me know if you get this sorted Robin, I take personal responcibilty for you as I sent you the invite. I am sure it had to be a glitch. MSN me or PM is fine.

It's all good now Chips! I do appreciate all that you have done for me over the past week!