- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Ok guys its probably a better idea to let this simmer down, but I am opening the thread. Please keep discussions on a positive keel. I have to get ready for London and I dont want to see a fiasco like we had last night or its getting shut again.
I will reccomened future audits are first disclosed and discussed with the party being audited, this information can both be used in the disclosure to us as well as give the party being audited a chance to clerify things that may seem bad, but in fact are not.
This can resolve the issue of what has happened here hopefully.
I am afraid that would make the audits less effective. We have to see their behavior when they arent aware they are under test.
Could someone from Rome please address my post as this is what does not lend credibility to your cause when you choose to ignore legitimate issues.
I would appreciate you’re going back re-reading my post but I will sum it up here in case you’re too busy.
what about the 2 week period? that is ludicrous as a time span.
what about the way the cookies are overwritten? that’s messed up.
@bb1webs 195255 wrote:
Could someone from Rome please address my post as this is what does not lend credibility to your cause when you choose to ignore legitimate issues.
I would appreciate you’re going back re-reading my post but I will sum it up here in case you’re too busy.
what about the 2 week period? that is ludicrous as a time span.
what about the way the cookies are overwritten? that’s messed up.
Steve I wouldn’t want to derail this and make it a cookie thread. Having said that some of the programs that are high on your list or at least one of them do not use cookies at all but only use session tracking. I could name 3 big MGS programs that do not use cookies. But maybe this should be discussed in another thread. I do find programs who do not use cookies have loads of scope for improvement lol.
@Professor 195240 wrote:
I am afraid that would make the audits less effective. We have to see their behavior when they arent aware they are under test.
What I mean is when the audit is completed. Of course we do not want them to know they are under the light but the final results should be presented to them AFTER its completed.
Think of the future possibilities of misunderstandings gone bad, and it would be nice to see the summary or explination offered as well if things are still not appearing correct.
I was replying to this yesterday when the forum was closed…
bb1webs;195120 wrote:Hi Joshua and welcome to the jungle.So where’s the fun and games? :tongue:
bb1webs;195120 wrote:1) I’m actually inclined to give them a chance because they were not given a fair jump out of the gate if I understand correct … NONE of the second deposits were ever made by any of the testers?If true then I think the testers need to be more adamant about completing their responsibilities and being aware the damage they can cause when not …
Not exactly, some of them were, and some of them were not. Some of the ones that were, were not correctly reported in the audit, but the rest that were made, were correctly reported. There is not a single unaccounted for deposit though.
bb1webs;195120 wrote:2) Joshua, you’re far from out of the woods. I don’t even hear the sound of cars in the far distant yet so don’t light up any cigars.A) As the Prof so astutely points out: your approach to tracking leaves us older affs concerned because of the reasons he mentioned way, way back at the start of this thread and ones that I don’t think you’ve ever chosen to address. Such as the cookies not overwriting like the standard. We all know that you are setting up a situation for one person to get rich off the work of the rest of us by having that backwards way of overwriting cookies. And I am as backwards as it gets so if i understand the problem then your people should fully see the flaw and be scrambling to fix it.
This is something that was of serious concern to us the day the audit came to our attention, and has already been changed.
Now basically, the affiliate that “makes the sale” is the credited affiliate. The newest cookie will always overwrite the previous cookie, as of a few days ago.
bb1webs;195120 wrote:
Pat, why don’t you go ahead and toss up what you have for us all to see and I”m certain between the bunch we will figure out the situation to everyone’s satisfaction. (I put that one in your category Joshua because its your problem if it don’t look right. fair? And Pat seems pretty adamant there is a situationI hope what I posted yesterday clarified this for you (as well as Pat).
bb1webs;195120 wrote:C) They only last 2 weeks … a period of time that the testers obviously can’t even seem to find time to get back in and gamble so its a given there are going to be a lot of playrers that download the software and don’t actually sign up to play for a period out lasting that sorry stretch of time.This was a colossal misunderstanding. The cookies actually never had a time limit on them at all, at any time.
bb1webs;195120 wrote:D) Joshua as you can see there are more issues than just the audit and they should be given as much attention as the audit … perhaps more since there was an error with the audit.There are definitely issues, since the software is fairly new, and I’d like to thשnk Lou, as well as all of the auditors, for bringing these issues to our attention. We have every intention of being the best program we can be, and helping TopGame become best casino software choice for US players and affiliates.
I’d just once more like to point out that although there were some misunderstandings here, the audit shows that our tracking works, that our processing rocks the house, and that Rome Partners, and TopGame, are 100% serious and interested in being transparent and honest partners to all affiliates.
Once again, thanks to Lou and the team of auditors for this initiative, I for one, think this is exactly what this industry needs.
@Triple777s 195128 wrote:
all right lets break this down.
lets deal with November first. Dec. and jan. aren’t even in the picture yet ok.
Player deposits $75. no withdrawals, but my commision is negative $36 and change? why? thats over half of their dep. and thats JUST FOR NOV.???????
If I understand it correctly, the players account would have a credit of 111,57.. (75 deposit + 36,57 winnings) You have negative 36,57 for the month.
Back to the tracking issue..
Sort of glad that this was found and that it can be addressed…Many people have virtual ips… they change everytime they log into the internet… or at least once every 24hours. The problem I had was that when I downloaded, it took so long (My connection was extremely slow at the time) that I did not feel like playing anymore and decided to try at a later stage.. I am sure that this will happen more often than you think. I did not clear my cookies, as I knew we were doing the test – so wanted to make sure that everything would be tracked.. Would never have thought of the IP issue… Come to think of it – will need to check all the softwares now :Cry:
But this is definitely something you will need to look into and also something that is not really being addressed here as it has nothing to do with the report as such, since you admit it …
As for the cookie situation… nothing for me to say other than “What Professor and BB1webs said!”
Other than that.. I don’t get why people are jumping all over Rome when it is obvious that nobody really knows what happened with the reports…
Only issue I had with them was the Customer Support, which Gabriel has promised is being dealt with
This was a colossal misunderstanding. The cookies actually never had a time limit on them at all, at any time.
I looked at the cookie with Fire Fox 3.05 a few nights ago when the issue was first mentioned by the Professor and again just now.
It works the same now as it did then and I did delete the cookie.
Now basically, the affiliate that “makes the sale” is the credited affiliate. The newest cookie will always overwrite the previous cookie, as of a few days ago.
I delete the cookie before this test:
Also I’m assuming the SourceID is the Affiliate ID.I clicked a Rome Casino link on Affiliate site A and examined the cookie and it wrote it with Affiliate A. I also saw the Affiliate A SourceID when hovering over the links on the Rome Casino landing page.
I closed the Affiliate A tab for Rome Casino.
I then clicked a Rome Casino link on Affiliate site B and again was taken to the Rome landing page, even though in the address bar it had the Rome Casino URL with an Affiliate B sourceID hovering over any of the landing page links still showed Affiliate Site A SourceID in the bottom status bar.
Examining the cookie also revealed that the first Affiliate (A) SourceID was still there.
Is it the first affiliate that gets the sale or the last?
Also how come the Tracking field expires on Feb. 22 and the SourceID expires on Feb 6?
thanks
SlotplayerGuys,
This has been an incredibly trying week for both CAP and us. There was a major misunderstanding in the original report and CAP has done more than enough to alleviate my concerns regarding the audit. My only goal in stepping in here personally was to ensure that everyone was aware that there was an audit done and that our results were accidentally misinterpreted.
I have looked at this XLS sheet hundreds of times this week and even we had a difficult time understanding the meaning behind it. The reason for this was that many fields like second deposit were marked as NA. Having said that, although Robin did the audit correctly, she was missing some data and some fields were NA which were more or less “open to interpretation”. Having said that, the dust is finally settling and this was an honest mistake.
As the CEO of the Casino that was audited, I want all of you to know that since I discovered that Rome was audited, I was actually excited about it. What better way to prove to the industry that our tracking was correct and that everything was on the up-and-up. I thanked Lou for this opportunity and both welcomed and eagerly awaited the results. Once I saw them, I knew something was amiss and so Gabriel, Michael, TopGame, and I went to work on trying to find out how this could have happened.
Though I hope our reputation has been restored, we’re good sports and this was their first audit. We’ve learned a lot from this past week and the audit in fact revealed something about our tracking that you guys didn’t like. The Professor in fact, pointed out that since our tracking credited the first affiliate to send the player and not the last, this could be taken advantage of and recommended changing it. Without this audit, we may never have known that our system was antiquated in this way and he and CAP deserve a lot of credit for finding the issue. However, it’s important for me to reiterate that Rome did not benefit in any way from the tracking working in this manner. We still tracked the player and we still paid the affiliate for the player.
Though it will probably happen before Feb 1 (We are testing now), we will be moving to a completely cookiless system on Feb 1 that will always track to the last affiliate that sent the player. I want to thank all of you here for your input and in helping us to improve our affiliate program. I am the first to admit that it needs some work but our performance in terms of conversion and processing is the best in the industry. TopGame updates our system every two weeks with kinds of new features and reports so check back often if you’re interested to see how we’re doing.
Thanks for your patience and understanding and we hope that since the audit proved we are honest and our affiliates have told you we perform very well, we’re hoping you’ll give us another shot.
Thanks again,
JC.
Hi SlotPlayer,
I apologize as I actually gave Gabriel the wrong information. Please forgive me as I’m not a very technical person. The original time to live on the cookie was one month and our system has not been changed yet. On Feb 1st, the system will be revised to a cookiless system that will track and credit the player to the last affiliate referral, not the first. I had told Gabe it was implemented but when I checked with tech, they told me they wanted to test and make it live Feb 1st. Currently, the player is still being tracked to the first affiliate, not the last. Please understand that we can’t make such sweeping changes in a moment’s notice. We will probably have it live before Feb 1st but that’s what development asked me to quote them at worst case. UPDATE: System will be ready on Monday.
Apologies,
JC.
slotplayer;195285 wrote:I looked at the cookie with Fire Fox 3.05 a few nights ago when the issue was first mentioned by the Professor and again just now.It works the same now as it did then and I did delete the cookie.
I delete the cookie before this test:
Also I’m assuming the SourceID is the Affiliate ID.I clicked a Rome Casino link on Affiliate site A and examined the cookie and it wrote it with Affiliate A. I also saw the Affiliate A SourceID when hovering over the links on the Rome Casino landing page.
I closed the Affiliate A tab for Rome Casino.
I then clicked a Rome Casino link on Affiliate site B and again was taken to the Rome landing page, even though in the address bar it had the Rome Casino URL with an Affiliate B sourceID hovering over any of the landing page links still showed Affiliate Site A SourceID in the bottom status bar.
Examining the cookie also revealed that the first Affiliate (A) SourceID was still there.
Is it the first affiliate that gets the sale or the last?
Also how come the Tracking field expires on Feb. 22 and the SourceID expires on Feb 6?
thanks
SlotplayerMy friend, I apologize for not returning to you earlier. Please understand that yesterday, The Professor closed the thread before I could get back to you and I’ve only just now become available again. Here in Israel, our Friday is like your Saturday so I was spending some much needed time with my family. It’s been a pretty difficult week for us as you can probably imagine. Nobody is ignoring any issues and especially not issues articulated as clearly as yours. Please allow me to answer:
There was never a 2 week TTL on the cookie. It was one month and still is. I apologize for this misunderstanding but that IS what I told the Professor on the phone. I was mistaken and as I’m not so technical an individual, I had confused that with something else. Please look at our old cookies and you will see this for yourself.
The answer to the rest of your question can be found in my most recent post.
Thanks for your patience and I apologize for not being available sooner but the Professor just recently unlocked the thread.
Kind Regards,
JC.
bb1webs;195255 wrote:Could someone from Rome please address my post as this is what does not lend credibility to your cause when you choose to ignore legitimate issues.I would appreciate you’re going back re-reading my post but I will sum it up here in case you’re too busy.
what about the 2 week period? that is ludicrous as a time span.
what about the way the cookies are overwritten? that’s messed up.
Hi Peralis,
When our new cookiless tracking goes into effect Monday, the IP changing issue will be resolved. Thank you again for helping to bring this important issue to our attention.
Kind Regards,
JC.
peralis;195282 wrote:If I understand it correctly, the players account would have a credit of 111,57.. (75 deposit + 36,57 winnings) You have negative 36,57 for the month.Back to the tracking issue..
Sort of glad that this was found and that it can be addressed…Many people have virtual ips… they change everytime they log into the internet… or at least once every 24hours. The problem I had was that when I downloaded, it took so long (My connection was extremely slow at the time) that I did not feel like playing anymore and decided to try at a later stage.. I am sure that this will happen more often than you think. I did not clear my cookies, as I knew we were doing the test – so wanted to make sure that everything would be tracked.. Would never have thought of the IP issue… Come to think of it – will need to check all the softwares now :Cry:
But this is definitely something you will need to look into and also something that is not really being addressed here as it has nothing to do with the report as such, since you admit it …
As for the cookie situation… nothing for me to say other than “What Professor and BB1webs said!”
Other than that.. I don’t get why people are jumping all over Rome when it is obvious that nobody really knows what happened with the reports…
Only issue I had with them was the Customer Support, which Gabriel has promised is being dealt with
Please let us know if there are any other questions or issues.
Both Josh and I will be in London, and are more than happy to meet for coffee or drinks.
Please feel free to contact me any time for questions: gabriel[at]romepartners.com
Best,
GI think if anything Rome has come out on top because of this audit. Everyone has seen first hand how responsive and how deeply they care about affiliate concerns.
