- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
We should definitely continue to post our results.
I also think we should begin posting our testing results in the public area. Maybe Professor could set up a sub-forum specifically for that topic?
I’d request that you do not post your results until ALL testing has been completed
At the very least DO not post them in public areas.I believe anonymity is an essential element in protecting the integrity of the entire testing process.
Furthermore, if a particular test results in statistical discrepancies at least one additional follow up test should be performed using the exact same criteria as test one. If test two ends with similar results then might need to formulate a theory as to what is occurring – examine links/depositing methods, locations, casinos, programs, etc … possibly changing the methods and test again.
I am certain there’re a multitude of potential excuses a program can and would provide if you go to them unprepared / empty handed. So collecting and documenting all transactional activities is fundamentally crucial to the testing process and to any and all eventual outcomes.
😎 😎 😎 😎
I agree that for the particular round of testing that you’re conducting we should hold off on posting any results.
But I think having a separate forum for the test results in the public area would be a great service to our members, both affiliate programs (honest ones anyway) and webmasters.
It would be nice to see if Prof could set up a “testing forum” in the private area where data can be presented – then once all potential holes in our evidence had been filled we could then present it to programs and to the publc.
That’s what I was looking for – some way to display information discretely.
Hi,
as many know I’ve been testing for years. In an attempt to gain the most untainted results possible; and to avoid the possibility that a few programs are smart enough to employ these precautions to avoid detection, here is the criteria I follow
use someone that is not affiliated with OG except as a player
never use someone in a geographical zone that can easily be “untargeted”.
for example, if I were going to cheat, and shaving players was my chosen method of doing so; you must figure that one would prefer this done in automation.
Furthermore, random shaving would be much smarter than selective shaving, though that has not proven to be the choice method for many places, simply because you aren’t picking the same scab all the time.
but here are the main things I would do to avoid being caught, simply because you’ve got to figure these are the most likely ways people are going to test.
always show any sign-ups with these details
same area code as webmaster
same zip code
same county, region, state
same last name as any put into a database of affiliate names and other names known to be a possible threat to this way of cheating.then I’d just randomly shave a % of players.
I’m not a greedy person and if I were to cheat at all, I would be very happy with that plan. But a more greedy person, who is likely to be the person that chooses to shave in the first place; will probably have no qualms about sitting down and picking out the fat birds despite the extra time it would involve. When that happens, it becomes much harder to catch them and that is when having a personal relationship with a few of your bigger punters is almost paramount.
I’m not saying all of these methods are used, in fact, most places don’t respect us enough to even bother to make sure our own damn names will show up in a signup, but those are also the most easily avoided do to bad reputation preceding them. There are probably some places that have incorporated more sophisticated means and I imagine some of the above is part of that plan.
Places that selective shave also would fall into that category though they think they’re being smart. If I hear more than a few complaining about bad bottom line from a program, it isn’t too hard for me to add 2 + 2 together.
I think the biggest thing we have to fear currently in the way of shaving players, is not shaving conversions, but rather the siphoning-off of proven players that continue to gamble every month.
I’m working on a way to counter-act that even moreso than my current methods however and have a good idea I’m going to follow up on.
I think the biggest thing we have to fear currently in the way of shaving players, is not shaving conversions, but rather the siphoning-off of proven players that continue to gamble every month.
AMEN – I have no doubt this happens ALL THE TIME!
One of the things APCW does is “test” or “audit” casino stats.
In addition to BB1’s recomendations, I also use proxy servers whenever I can… switch deposit methods between NETeller & FirePay & PrePaid ATM… Wipe my hard drive clean between particular audits (to avoid the chance a cookied download is lurking about)… clear my browser of all history & cookies… and delete all files (offline too).
So far APCW has discovered some odd things, which I post in a sterile tone in the members area, so that webmasters can decide for themselves their own course of action based on what was said by the casino vs. the APCW experience.
APCW continues to test and report these results, but only tests full members (of which there are currently six). I do not state when or if audits will be (or have been) conducted so that they are always a surprise, and so that (if an audit occured a week ago) I can continue to watch the program with the participating webmaster.
I will be happy to help if needed… and if I can
So far APCW has discovered some odd things, which I post in a sterile tone in the members area, so that webmasters can decide for themselves their own course of action based on what was said by the casino vs. the APCW experience.
Odd things = sterile tone = decide for themselves = NOTHING is going to change!
What this industry needs and has needed for a long time is a show of affiliate solidarity. We need to be a unified front – one that will stand up for what is right and fiercely fight any and all injustices! Without a reputable and respected watch dog site affiliates will always be subjected to unfair treatment.
With all due respect an individual or small group of a few have little if any chance against the big guy. A year or so ago we had a group that was on its way to becoming this unified group, but a few inexperienced and greedy individuals failed to see its full potential as a sanctioning body. Today, no group and/or site embody a collaborative unity and consequently “odd things” are increasingly going unchecked, unchallenged, and unfixed!
It is my belief that the longer you permit someone to take advantage of you and/or get away with injustice the more difficult it will be to correct the problem in the future. If as a whole we do not fight back against such atrocity then we as individuals are destined in the long run to fail.
It is imperative that we unite and put partisanship aside for the betterment of our industry as a whole. To not do so – can and will – result in continued unfairness, mediocrity, and eventual extinction.
I surmise that the saying “Together we stand, Divided we fall” … is not only a truth, but moreover a call to battle. Its time to get down and dirty – clean up and take out the trash.
What Arkyt said is perfect to the letter!
It has been said to me many, many times. I have said this many many times – both in private conversations and on this forum.
The dilema is finding webmasters that we all know we can trust. There are a lot of webmaster – pardon me for suggesting this – who will fall in and go along with any plan that will boost their income, only to turn around and bit their “friends” in the arse in the name of the alimighty buck.
Although I am certain that 100% of us agree we need to have a cohesive association of webmasters to watch-dog this industry, far to few of us are willing to risk upsetting any program that is earning them money. I have noticed all too often that webmasters will give programs all kinds of leeway if they (the webmaster) are making a good income with them.
Therein lay the dilema.
I wonder sometimes If I will ever be rolling in the dough unless I relax my principles. Lucky for me that I am relatively new at this, so I have the luxury of being able to be picky, since shutting down a marketing campaign on my site won’t cost me many thousands of dollars to make a point! Several hundred or a thousand, but not thousands for any one program. Not yet, but soon
Alas, it is for the same reason that shutting down a marketing campaign on my site will make not a ripple make!
I wrack my wee brain constantly trying to come up with a workable way to police the affiliate programs effectively, and it always comes up short. Nothing seems to overcome the lack of involvement by webmasters who are intent on earning money at the expense of this industry. (In other words, when money is the bottom line, and webmasters can be bought – the more affluential ones – what choice do the rest of us have but to fall in line?)
I’ll continue to do my small part – by booting any program that is shafting us, and by carefully selecting casinos to promote to be as sure as I can be that they are not shafting my players, and are giving all a good time.
I am always open to any suggestions or ideas you guys may have to help us make this industry honest and equitable.
One solution occurs to me – that the medium sized and smaller portal operators come together and feed each other’s growth through strategic marketing and such. Increase our branding potential, earn a reputation in the industry and become strong enough together to really make a difference.
Originally posted by arkyt
What this industry needs and has needed for a long time is a show of affiliate solidarity. We need to be a unified front – one that will stand up for what is right and fiercely fight any and all injustices! Without a reputable and respected watch dog site affiliates will always be subjected to unfair treatment.The trick is trying to do so successfully without creating another GPWA. Doesn’t anyone remember that the biggest names in the casino business didn’t want to have anything to do with them? Remember how being a GPWA member became a bit of a joke because of all the in-fighting, bad-mouthing, and flames?
I hope that the APCW will eventually be able to pull weight for webmasters. But to do that, while avoiding the GPWA downfalls, takes dicipline. Sure, if I catch a program dead-to-rights cheating you can bet your left testical (for all you guys out there) that I would inform every member and post in forums. But one cannot just create a truly respected and powerful organization in a few months… or even a year.
To grow into an association of webmasters that produce results, we not only have to be united, but professional in speech and demenor. We have to have facts and proof. And when we do, we nail the S.O.B.’s ripping us off… Then, the sucking sound you’ll hear will be all the other affiliate programs butts as they pucker-up.
Originally posted by arkyt
Today, no group and/or site embody a collaborative unity and consequently “odd things” are increasingly going unchecked, unchallenged, and unfixed!Odd things do take place… some odd things result in us getting ripped off… but not all are deliberate cheats. We need to be sure a programs really is cheating us before we as an organization (ANY organization) can lay blame. To throw out conjecture and speculation (i.e. GPWA) can actually result in implosion…. members leave, along with the respect of the industry.
You want to help build a united front? Help me, then! If it takes getting involved then let’s go!
Originally posted by arkyt
I surmise that the saying “Together we stand, Divided we fall” … is not only a truth, but moreover a call to battle. Its time to get down and dirty – clean up and take out the trash.Yup. But it must be done properly so you don’t throw out the baby with the bath water… or, in our terms, the good programs with the bad.
I chose the name for this project very carefully… making certain the word “professional” was in there. And I started in as the GPWA was going under, so I was very cautious about appearances. Many affiliate programs where very reluctant about joining another “webmaster association”.
In time, I hope I can build this into a powerful tool for us.
I Agree with you J Todd.
Isn’t it horrible how one psycho can have such a negative impact on our industry? Well it can’t if we don’t let it.
The very fear of creating another GPWA seems to have frozen things in time and space.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but the most prominent reason the GPWA has gone downhill from a promising start, is the actions of one person, as well as power tripping on the part of a select few.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but this person seems to be suffering from several personality disorders – narcissistic PD and anti-social PD. Hell, I don’t even know the woman, have never had direct contact with her and was never a member of the GPWA, but I can see clearly from reading her posts and announcements that this is a person who thrives on attention, who absolutely revels in conflict and has a deep-seated need to be in control, and has a very remarkable tendency to blame other people for what she is doing or has done (transference).
If everyone who has an issue with her would jsut ignore her when she gets provocative, it would stop. Attention and conflict are her motivators and without them, she will lose strength. Kryptonite for psychos is depriving them of attention and reactions.
Changing focus: I think we are heading in the right direction with testing casinos. By not forming an affiliation or direct partnerships we are not in any danger of becoming a GPWA. By testing independently and pooling our results, we might just accomplish something.
Again, I have to repeat this: if the larger affiliates do not back negative testing results with action, then we don’t have a lot of power. All the exposed fraudulent activities on the part of the affiliate programs won’t mean dick without united action on all of our part.
The APCW is a great idea, and is very professionally run by Integrity. There are a lot of programs not members there, however, so we are testing others ourselves.
The results of APCW tests are rather ellusive. I would like to see them included in the monthly reports, at least – a running score with each casino’s test results (i.e. tests: 5, passes: 4, fails: 1, comments: ____________. But, since I don’t pay any dues, and I don’t do any of the work there, I am very reluctant to demand or even suggest anything – I know my place!
lolI’m not going to comment on the GPWA, as I was never a member there. I will say that in all my dealings with her, Dominique has been terrific–a standup person, and very helpful.
I will say that I think J Todd does a fine job running APCW, and I’m proud to be a member there, as well as a contributor here at CAP.
I’ve also enjoyed and appreciated the help and advice I’ve received from the other members here: Fergie, Chips, bb1, Mongoose, aleph, Antoine, Arkyt, Classics, and the Professor.
I feel like, as a group, you’ve become more than just posters on a message board. You’re now friends of a sort, some closer to me than others, but friends and colleagues all the same. And if I’ve left anyone out, it wasn’t intentional, and I apologize.
And I don’t think that, as a group, we have very different opinions on these issues. I think we all agree that testing the casinos’ tracking is appropriate. And I think we all agree that holding the casinos accountable for the results of the testing is important too. I think we differ somewhat on the how and the when of some of these things, but I don’t think we differ on the necessity of actually doing the testing on a regular basis.
Everyone in this thread has made very valid points. Since this is, by nature, an informal group of people, I think the mere fact that we actually are this organized in our testing, and that we are showing this much solidarity, is really pretty impressive. I’ll be interested in seeing how the rest of this testing plays out.
