@Professor 197051 wrote:
Daera you have continually expressed views which I would find non supportive of CAP and we havent banned you. We have 8100+ members who havent been banned. The only people who have been banned in months were Michael and Steven Corfman and I did that in response to the constant negativitiy I was seeing about CAP in their videos and on the message board and polls. I dont think that was uncalled for given the hostility.
We discussed these issues at length with Michael, Steven, Rebecca, Myself, Alex Pratt, Warren and Michael Casselli in London and we all agreed that we would all move forward in a more positive light and work towards building up the industry rather then constantly distracting everyone with squabbles. The bans were rescinded at that point. This illusion of mass bannings is really being over blown and it’s been done so for the negative publicity it generates. Can we please put that to rest also?
I have stated ouir policy clearly and it is fair in my oppinion. Remain profossional, postive and constructive. Discuss industry issues openly with an eye on resolution. dont insult fellow members moderators, admnistrators or your host community and you WONT be banned. Thats been true for years, when its in vogue now to believe that or not its true.
As an industry we have to have at least one positive business oriented board to congergate and WORK together. I want CAP to be that board. There are plenty of other sensationalist places to go if CAP doesnt fit your needs or desires. We certainly have the right to manage our own business in such a way that it offers the best value for our members. If the members agree, and the VAST majority do, then we have done the best we can hope for.
I sincerely hope you find value here too Daera, but please have enough faith to let us do what we do best. If you see me banning people you dont agree with moving forward please point it out to me for discussion. Fair enough? I bet you wont find it happening as often as you might believe now.
Hi Lou,
I think what you wrote is quite offensive regarding my views being non-supportive of CAP. I may not exclusively support CAP, but you’ll find that most webmasters don’t. I am actually insulted. I spend most of time interacting with webmasters and affiliate managers at CAP – I even have your portal seal.
I would have to disagree with you on the point that it is distracting everyone with squabbles. If you ever wanted to see how much players, affiliates, and casino operators CARE about the ETHICS of this industry – there is no better time for an outsider, than now. If you cannot see that, I think you need to look at the recent events from another angle.
I understood your message, but I am at ends about some parts of your post. It sends a message of ethics, but we see other things continually happening. I don’t need to list them – that’s counterproductive for what we are trying to achieve here – An open discussion about CAP Bannings.
So back to CAP Bannings, as I said before, most of the people on CAP don’t actually exclusively visit CAP they visit GPWA and AGD and other online publications for information. We read up, discuss, and open discuss about industry happenings, issues, ethics – no matter who it is.
As you’ve said – Remain professional, positive and constructive. Discuss INDUSTRY ISSUES with an open eye (your words). Because someone doesn’t have the same opinions as you on what is acceptable and not acceptable in this industry, should not mean that you can ban them – because as you said in your previous post “Remain professional, positive and constructive. Discuss INDUSTRY ISSUES with an open eye.”
When members are being banned for discussing industry issues with an open eye, and then being banned -It sends the wrong message.
The discussions I admit have snow balled into something larger – everyone wanted to know whether the things which were said about CAP were true or not – they still do.
My view, a member should not be banned for discussing industry related issues even when they are in relation to CAP, or a CAP Certified Program. Doing it – takes away transparency, and trust.