Puma

[QUOTE=casinogod;632543]I do think Dave has a very good point. I realise that the sponsorship is one of the ways that the GPWA makes money (that and no doubt the revshare earned on sub affiliates), but I think there should be some kind of listing of either positive or negative things somewhere.

I see that sponsor programs can display a pop up which lists



So this in itself I think shows that the owners of the GPWA's intentions are good.

It would of course be nice to see it taken a little further listing any 'negative' points the casino program does or does not have by what 'Most' people would agree are predatory terms.

For example Fortune Affiliates Seal could be added to to show.
Negative Carry over: [B][COLOR=#00ff00]No[/COLOR][/B]
Retroactively Changed T&C’s: [B][COLOR=#00ff00]No[/COLOR][/B]
Casinos Bundled: [B][COLOR=#00ff00]No[/COLOR][/B]
Minimum Player requirement: [B][COLOR=#00ff00]No[/COLOR][/B]
All of which make it a Good program

whilst say the AffClub program (owned by Party Gaming for anyone who didnt know) would have a section that looks like this;
Negative Carry over: [B][COLOR=red]Yes[/COLOR][/B]
Retroactively Changed T&C’s: [B][COLOR=red]Yes[/COLOR][/B]
Casinos Bundled: [B][COLOR=lime]No[/COLOR][/B]
Minimum Player requirement: [B][COLOR=red]Yes[/COLOR][/B] (with Automatic account termination)

Hence obviously not a program anyone should ever consider doing business with.

Ideally the Yes's would be bold RED to help make it clear they are BAD whilst the No's would be bold Green to show they are good.

This might be a popular concept with sponsor casinos that are ultra affiliate friendly like Fortune Affiliates, but not for any that have any of the 'None Affiliate friendly' points I have listed above and there are a lot that have negative carry over that would thus get a 'red mark'.

I know it would certianly help to save me some time. Onthe bright side Affiliate Guard Dog, shows 3 out of 4 of the things I want to see quickly and at a glance. :)[/QUOTE]