Recognition for September's Active Members

**-Shay-** · 6 October 2013, 10:55 am

Originally Posted by universal4

Don't forget that sometimes some people do not have time to change reviews or creatives and just redirect the traffic instead.

Rick
Universal4

Understood. That is an entirely different issue (in my eyes at least). For those who can't or don't want to change their reviews, I'd prefer to see a 1 liner stating that a site is crap. That way, at the very least - those visitors who don't click aren't going to fall victim from the "credible by familiarity" bug - meaning if they see it enough and do not see negative reviews, they automatically feel as if the site is credible.

**universal4** · 6 October 2013, 2:20 pm

And also don't forget that some people that speak out against one group that you feel is untrustworthy might also promote another group that you feel is untrustworthy.

And then we also shouldn't forget that not everyone agrees on who is untrustworthy and who isn't.

And not everyone even has the time to change all their reviews, or add disclaimers etc, and sometimes all they can manage to do is get the links changed or redirected somewhere else.

Rick
Universal4

**edgarf76** · 6 October 2013, 4:12 pm

inor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:Cambria; mso-fareast-theme-font

inor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Cambria; mso-hansi-theme-font

inor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font

inor-bidi;} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} --> </style> I would like to address @shays comment which I know is not directed at any individual or company. The reason is I have written reviews on companies that I used to work with, but have learnt not to work with currently.

I like to write the positives about companies, as well as stating the negatives in a nice way. I have found that I have put my foot in my mouth when I wrote the reviews about companies because I thought they were good at the time but learnt that they were not.

I choose not to have a blacklist of my sites; the reason is I do not want to make enemies. I am sure many people may think that is a weak thing to do or perhaps you are not providing your readers with the correct information.

The reason I do not want to make enemies is I have learnt in my life that I get a lot further with friends. If I do not like people/companies I do not do business with them.

At the same time I find myself as I go through my sites to update them I change things around meaning re-directing links. As far as telling my readers my updated opinion about a company, I am trying to figure a way to do so, without looking foolish, as I have written positive things about them.

In conclusion, I am still learning which companies are good companies to do business with, and am still in the learning process. If anyone has any questions or suggestions please ask.

**-Shay-** · 6 October 2013, 7:56 pm

Originally Posted by universal4

And also don't forget that some people that speak out against one group that you feel is untrustworthy might also promote another group that you feel is untrustworthy.

And then we also shouldn't forget that not everyone agrees on who is untrustworthy and who isn't.

And not everyone even has the time to change all their reviews, or add disclaimers etc, and sometimes all they can manage to do is get the links changed or redirected somewhere else.

Rick
Universal4

Regarding the matter of one person may find someone trustworthy that I (or someone else) does not - completely understood. I wasn't speaking about companies who are on the fence of trustworthy (i.e. - shady, but at the end of the day they pay).

What I was referring to specifically is companies who have a huge backlog of cashouts of 180+ days and outright scammers who just close up shop and open another site under a different company name/brand and continue to rinse/repeat.

I also understand there's only 24 hours in a day. However, do we not have a responsibility to update our content when/if there is a significant change (company goes rogue)? If we do not make the time or choose not to, are we not passively aiding in the theft? But really, that wasn't my main point either. My post was more directed at those who will promote anyone willing to pay the stated fee on their "rate sheet" that they circulate - regardless of the history or character of the payer of said fee.

**-Shay-** · 6 October 2013, 9:03 pm

Originally Posted by edgarf76

I would like to address @shays comment which I know is not directed at any individual or company. The reason is I have written reviews on companies that I used to work with, but have learnt not to work with currently.

I like to write the positives about companies, as well as stating the negatives in a nice way. I have found that I have put my foot in my mouth when I wrote the reviews about companies because I thought they were good at the time but learnt that they were not.

I choose not to have a blacklist of my sites; the reason is I do not want to make enemies. I am sure many people may think that is a weak thing to do or perhaps you are not providing your readers with the correct information.

The reason I do not want to make enemies is I have learnt in my life that I get a lot further with friends. If I do not like people/companies I do not do business with them.

At the same time I find myself as I go through my sites to update them I change things around meaning re-directing links. As far as telling my readers my updated opinion about a company, I am trying to figure a way to do so, without looking foolish, as I have written positive things about them.

In conclusion, I am still learning which companies are good companies to do business with, and am still in the learning process. If anyone has any questions or suggestions please ask.

Nothing wrong with this approach (in my opinion) providing you tell your visitors the whole truth, nicely bluntly or however you choose.

**edgarf76** · 6 October 2013, 9:14 pm

it has become very time consuming, because i did not set my website up correct when I first started. Now, I have my affiliate links in my wordpress theme, for instance myurl.com/visit/affiliatesite but before I changed themes I inserted each link directly.

Another thing is when I first made my sites, I did not set up the categories and tags well, so I have reviews that are not in the review section.

**celena** · 7 October 2013, 3:22 am

Congrats all

**AE-Stephen** · 7 October 2013, 5:42 am

Congratulations to everyone who made the list

**universal4** · 7 October 2013, 2:07 pm

We also must not forget that some affiliates run their portals on a part-time basis.

There are also a boat load of affiliates that have had to go back to a 9 to 5 grind or have had to take on other jobs or other projects due to sagging revenues or revenues thta never materialized they way they had hoped or needed.

I know a very long list of affiliates that would just LOVE to spend more time updating their sites and removing dead wood or programs that may not necessarily be the best to promote, but just don't have enough hours in the day to get back to them as fast as preferred.

I agree that there are a lot of "media sellers" and those who run larger sites and drive a lot of traffic that appear to accept just about anyone willing to pay the "fee", but I caution anyone to make snap decisions and pre-judge an affiliate based strictly on who they are currently promoting, or who they might have on their home page.

There are also times when an affiliate makes an agreement with a group only to find out later they may not want to continue the agreeent, but sometimes they are under contract and have no choice but to complete the terms of that agreement.

Sure you can sit back and say "Just pay the money back and end the agreement" but that is not always so easy to do for those that are not sitting on fat wallets and live from one month's commissions checks to the next.... (I find that most of the larger affiliates do NOT understand this fact, or if they did at one time they FORGET what that was like)

I am not advocating for affiliates not to try and keep up with these points, but to pre-judge them in my opinion is wrong, and sometimes it is those affiliates that need to spend more time here, investigating those groups that are not necessarily the best to promote (even on sites you mentioned were so good at not promoting the bad guys) and they may also be the affiliates that need the guidance and help that exists here at the GPWA.

The GPWA is more about helping affiliates learn and understand some of these points, and determine who is more safe to promote for the safety of players and afiliates alike.

That is one of the things that make discussions like this healthy, since it helps affiliates with all sizes of wallets understand how important some of this is, and often inspires them to try and pay more attention to this, but to follow the single example of any ONE affiliate and their recommendations is not the way to go in my opinion.

Rick
Universal4

**alin04** · 7 October 2013, 2:46 pm

Shay you want the truth? You can't handle the truth!

I don t know what others do, but I when I have a problem with a bookie, casino or poker room, I stop promoting them. But I will not erase my content to please one or two affiliates.
And one more thing, we are not all profesional affiliates, some of us are beginners.

**-Shay-** · 7 October 2013, 3:23 pm

Originally Posted by alin04

Shay you want the truth? You can't handle the truth!

I don t know what others do, but I when I have a problem with a bookie, casino or poker room, I stop promoting them. But I will not erase my content to please one or two affiliates.
And one more thing, we are not all profesional affiliates, some of us are beginners.

You got me. I can't handle the truth. LOL

No, on a more serious note - I know that there are many different levels of affiliates in terms of commitment, experience, etc. I am glad that this is provoking conversation amongst part time affiliates & newer ones. While "the universe of gambling affiliates" was my broad audience with my "message", I was really talking to the full timers and "media companies" who do in fact know better and have time.

I think that we as gambling affiliates do have a responsibility to state the facts, paint an accurate picture, or at the very least steer potential players in the right direction (or away from the wrong direction).

I applaud you if you quit promoting someone you're having problems with. And I also understand if you were not willing to erase content in no longer promoting said problem company.

However, ponder this - Suppose a poker room was in your #1 spot and your selling points were good games & speedy cash outs - of which you cite in your review that cash outs are processed in 3-4 days - both in text and in your "selling points". To be fair, suppose it was true when you published your review and assigned that room the #1 spot on your site.

Now, suppose that very same poker room is now backlogging every cash out request that is submitted to them and they've not paid a single player in over 180 days.

Should players who hit your site know that cashing out is a problem?

Should players at least know that while it was true when you wrote, it is far from accurate now?

Should the site be removed from your #1 spot?

What does this do to your credibility if someone deposits at that site - based on your review - and runs into that logjam of a "pending" cash out?

Do you (as the affiliate / author / reviewer / webmaster / "expert") have any accountability to your visitors who might follow your recommendations?

And again, by "you" I mean that in general. I just think that we as an industry need to raise the bar a bit in terms of who we promote and how accurately we do so.

**alin04** · 7 October 2013, 4:51 pm

Should players who hit your site know that cashing out is a problem? Yes

Should players at least know that while it was true when you wrote, it is far from accurate now? Yes

Should the site be removed from your #1 spot? Yes

If you find on my site one poker room or casino that not paid a single player in over 180 days(and I don t know that) I will remove them.

**edgarf76** · 7 October 2013, 5:26 pm

This has turned out to be one of the most educational recognition thread I have seen so far. It has given me better ideas on how to handle companies I do not want to work with anymore. Excellent Conversation!

**Sergej_AGR** · 7 October 2013, 5:38 pm

@Roulette Zeitung
Thanks

**muffincrumbs** · 23 October 2013, 7:54 pm

Originally Posted by MichaelCorfman

Just a quick note to say that the algorithm we use to determine most active posters is not simply based on the number of posts. It also considers length of posts. So two different folks with the same number of posts could actually be in quite different places in the lists.

Michael

That's really cool. The GPWA is a sophisticated and well-oiled machine.

Thanks for the shout-out.

Thread: Recognition for September's Active Members

LinkBack

Thread Tools

Search Thread

Display

The Following User Says Thank You to universal4 For This Useful Post:

The Following User Says Thank You to edgarf76 For This Useful Post:

The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to universal4 For This Useful Post:

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to -Shay- For This Useful Post:

The Following User Says Thank You to alin04 For This Useful Post:

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to edgarf76 For This Useful Post:

The Following User Says Thank You to Sergej_AGR For This Useful Post:

Posting Permissions