I want to apologize for the delay in my response. The delay was based on my wanting to have more complete information about the progress of ovidiubusi's payment, because it would not have felt right to answer the general question without responding to the specific situation at the same time.
Thanks for posing the question in such a clear manner. I think this is on several people's minds and it is helpful to have an opportunity to answer.
The question you asked can be broken down into two parts. First, are there different expectations for professional responsibility between the different sponsorship levels? And second, what is expected of sponsor programs?
To answer the first part of your question, the Platinum, Gold, and Silver designations refer to the level of finacial support the program provides to the association and the degree of marketing publicity provided in return. We try to make this clear by stating that the designation refers to the selected promotional package in the overview on the program directory page.
To address the second part, of what the criteria are, we make an effort to make sure it is clear that "sponsorship" signifies an advertising relationship between an affiliate program and GPWA. Because of that we specifically avoid language that claims a greater level of research than that (such as certification or audit). At the same time, one of the things that binds together everyone who works here and defines our ethos is that it is important to us to advance the industry and to work only with people that we feel comfortable making known to others.
Based on this, there are a number of programs that we've rejected as prospective sponsors. We also require that each sponsor agree in writing to abide by the GPWA Code of Conduct, which is incorporated by reference into all sponsorship agreements. This commitment that we require has been especially important because programs that were once-reputable sometimes change their behavior, and on several occassions we've suspended or terminated sponsorships based on code of conduct violations resulting from a shift in how the program treats affiliates.
Our own knowledge and the program's written commitment is one step, but not sufficient. Once we've satisfied that step, the other key ingredient to ensuring accountability is that we try to provide an open environment for raising issues. This is vital because thoughtful, caring people disagree on what is the right thing to do in a given circumstance and we want our members to make decisions based on the full breadth of information. And we try to do that ourselves as well. One of the results of relying on independent judgement rather than deferring to external sources is that sometimes we'll draw different lines than others -- for example, Casinomeister, eCOGRA, and Affiliate Guard Dog all have recommended brands in circumstances where we've actively decided against allowing sponsorship, and the reverse is true with cases where we're working with a program that others have chosen not to work with.
To summarize my overview, the sponsorships are a marketing agreement between GPWA and the sponsor program and we try to use descriptions and language that reflects that, but as people who want to work in a reputable industry we turn away or end arrangements when we can't feel comfortable with a particular program.