SUSPENSION OF eCOGRA SEALS

[vinylweatherman]

I have logged in to Casino Action this morning, and it certainly seems like "business as usual" so far,


except,

maybe,

some players might be exercising a little more caution than usual this morning

 

[GaryWatson]

I've always been against a "Casinomeister" certification since it could easily be abused. The mission at Casinomeister is to provide information so that anyone who cares to read can make intelligent decisions on where and what to play. The casinos that I feel are "good to go" are listed on this site.

Maybe that is the way forward. There are a few certifying bodies that give false assurance to players. I wont go into portals but

www.iggba.org.uk

Probably the best of the bunch, based in the UK and most of its members are UK companies or have a strong association with the UK. Recognised by the Gambling Board of Great Britain and GAMCARE, the UK group dedicated to socially responsible gambling. Microgaming and Cryptologic, two of the major software producers, are amongst their members. This is essentially an i-Gaming industry trade association rather than an outright regulator, however their code of conduct is one of the most transparent and rigourous. A full description of the code is available at their website, but one key demand is that companies "must make freely available for regulatory inspection their hardware and software systems and procedures, together with all manual control procedures and practices." The code also ensures that members abide by the laws of Great Britain, which means they must not take bets from any jurisdiction that "specifically, in legislation, forbids its citizens from placing bets". This is a very carefully worded statement, since very few jurisdictions have legislated one way or another for or against internet gambling. It is not yet clear how the iggba views the US states such as South Dakota, which have legislated against internet gambling - some of its members accept bets from US customers, and it is hard to believe that none of these come from South Dakota.... However the association has recently shown it does have teeth - they revoked the membership of the Belize-based company Gambling Federation this year for deliberately embedding Malware in their customers' software.

www.ecogra.com

Established in 2002 by some of the major businesses involved in Internet Gambling, such as Microgaming and Virtual Holdings (owners of Casino-On-Net), eCOGRA is essentially an attempt by the industry to regulate itself. Although there is a smattering of independence involved (the board of directors that decides how sites are tested and who is awarded the eCOGRA seal of approval are independent of the sites that fund eCOGRA, the auditing of payouts is handled by Price Waterhouse Coopers) it is impossible to have full confidence in a regulatory body that essentially pays its own bills, and willed itself into existence. Source code is never offered up for inspection, unlike with land-based casinos - although eCOGRA does address this concern on its web-site, and points to the distinct advantages of results-based testing rather than source-code testing. However, no part of the ECogra Generally Accepted Practices (EGAP) verification process is truly open, and there is no standardisation of testing. Worse, many of the practices in EGAP are suggested practices, not mandatory practices.

www.kahnawake.com/gamingcommission

Founded in 1996 at the Mohawk Native Indian reserve in Canada, the KGC has not demonstrated that it is a serious regulator, and players seeking redress from the KGC have faced far from satisfactory service to date.

www.igcouncil.org

A trade association rather than a regulator, as with iggba - it does have a code of conduct for its members but the code is relatively weak and the IGC freely admits on its website that this code is not rigourously enforced by them. However the IGC can revoke membership in the event of a breach of code, and they did exactly that (along with iggba) in the case of Gambling Federation. IGC membership does confer a degree of respectability, and at least if the site is IGC endorsed it gives you someone to complain to.

www.bmm.com.au

"Established in 1981, BMM is an Accredited Testing Facility (ATF) according to the Australian scheme for accreditation of independent testing facilities for gaming and wagering systems, and is ISO 9001 certified." BMM is not a regulator, but rather an independent tester of a software's fairness. Many sites have their software (e.g. their Random Number Generator) tested by BMM (links lead to the above address - BMM Australia is a subsidiary of American company BMM),and there is no reason to doubt BMM's competence in performing rigorous and fully independent checks. However, a BMM certificate is not, in reality, any kind of guarantee that the game you are playing is fair. This is because BMM essentially leaves the regulators, suppliers and operators to decide what to test, and how it is to be tested. Potentially an operator could use a "fair" RNG but could still use other techniques to defraud players.

www.gamingassociates.com

Appears to be an off-shoot of BMM, and sister site of www.riskassociates.com.au. Currently provides risk assessment to the KGC, which seems to consist of a questionaire to those who seek a KGC license. No details are given as to what questions are asked or what answers are required. As with BMM, GA is not a regulator, and does not provide effective, transparent regulation. It states on its web-site that it does perform monitoring for the regulator KGC, via its Advanced Gambling Evaluation and Analysis Systems (AEGEAS), but the "data definition" required by GA for this process is not stated and "is subject to liason with each permit holder and its vendors". Thus there is no way for players to know which areas of the casino / poker room GA is monitoring - nor are players made aware of the results of the monitoring.

So I would say maybe fewer, rather than more bodies. Themselves, to have any kind of trust factor should remain completely transparent in all areas of concern.

Going back to Kahnawake, it failed with Golden Palace and more recently Absolute Poker. Their ability to offer reliable accreditation is severely in question. Generally portals will have a clash of interest & should not have any form of certification which can often be bought in the way of sponsorship. I still think Casinomeister is still the nearest thing to a player association but I would rather have 1 truely respectable association that 20 who claim to be. Maybe the current regime is already over diluted . Whats the point having a certified logo on your site when the actual body offering it does nothing other than charge a fee and giving false reassurances.

 

[jetset]

Can you provide the source for that description of eCOGRA, as it is somewhat dated and needs correction, Gary?

Specifically:

1) PricewaterhouseCoopers is no longer involved - Last year (see Casinomeister News) eCOGRA announced the formation of its own compliance and testing services, staffed by qualified audit specialists and IT experts and headed by Bill Henbrey. International audit group KPMG oversees the activities of this team if I recall correctly.

2) My understanding gleaned from the eCOGRA website is that software providers joining eCOGRA have to agree to full verification of their software and control systems as part of the initial inspection process before monitoring even starts. In fact much of what you have quoted regarding iggba applies equally to eCOGRA. Although a registered non-profit body, this is NOT a trade association and additionally has a formal system for handling player disputes that has made a few enemies but delivered the goods for many players, according to the periodic FGA reports and player comments.

3) The dismissive and subjective statement: "Although there is a smattering of independence involved..." referring to the independent directors who control all operational activity at eCOGRA certainly raised my eyebrows!

4) Ongame is the third (competing) major software company involved in eCOGRA and has been so for at least the past 2 years (maybe more).

5) The Gambling Federation malware scandal is now some years old, dating that quote imo.

6) The eCOGRA testing regime is standardised; that's a central function - establishing standards and demanding compliance through monitoring and reviews. That's why Casino Action is currently seal-suspended and why Jackpot City was penalised last year - non-compliance with the eGAP (standards).

7) My recollection of the IGC booting of GFED was that the public furore on message boards such as this had to reach epic proportions before they finally acted. And eCOGRA had publicly condemned the malware incident by then, despite the fact that GFED was outside its sphere of influence. I would also make the personal observation that in my own experience the IGC has been of little value to players with complaints through the years.

I accept that your positive comments on iggba as a UK trade body are fair, but in the mixed list you present of trade associations, testing companies and standards/dispute/ regulatory bodies I am surprised you did not mention the Remote Gaming Association. This has considerable clout in the UK with most of the major gambling groups as members and is working closely with Gamcare....and with eCOGRA..... in responsible gambling initiatives such as the new Code of Responsible Gambling Conduct to which the European Gambling and Betting Association (and the IGC) have just subscribed.

And if we're talking of a complete list here, Alderney and possibly Gibraltar and Malta deserve a mention as jurisdictions with evidence of serious purpose and intent to enforce, whilst the UK Gambling Commission has not yet had a chance to show its worth in a player dispute sense but has otherwise all the makings of a valuable contributor to the safety of the (UK) player.

Of course as a Casinomeister member and definite supporter, I agree with Gary that this site performs an invaluable if somewhat more informal service in providing solid and balanced information that players can use to make their own decisions, and in helping to broker resolutions between players and operators. There's none better in the gambling information portal category in my personal opinion. Yet even Casinomeister attracts often immature insults from those with a differing opinion on some issues.

In the eyes of the player each of these bodies will have advantages but also shortcomings through personal opinion and experience, or in some cases from bias or simply misperception.

As in most things, perceptions are informed by the actions of the organisation, but at least we need to give a balanced evaluation of those actions and not take from history only the perceived negatives.

 

[GaryWatson]

Sorry, I meant to add the link

Outdated URL (Invalid)

Although outdated, many of the issues are still relevant overall

 

[GaryWatson]

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

eCOGRA is regulatory body established in 2002 as a non-profit organisation by Microgaming, and 888.com

eCOGRA is partially funded by its software supplier members.

eCOGRA has been accused of lacking independence in a row over spamming by 888.com affiliates, given that eCOGRA director John Anderson is also a non-executive director of 888.com

eCogra Plays Favouritism to 888.com
Date: Monday, June 26 @ 07:03:15 EST

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

Back in early 2005 reports began circulating with regard to 888.com and its unethical practices in allowing rogue affiliate webmasters to use ill gotten copyrighted material to promote 888.com. It was also purported 888.com was turning a blind eye to these reports, which also contained evidence of blog Spamming and unethical search engine optimisation techniques. These directly connected back to subsidiaries of Cassava. Currently 888.com has been rouged (black banned) by many webmasters including a prominent industry site Casino Meister (https://www.casinomeister.com/), who incidentally eCogra promotes as a reputable casino portal.

To say it is non profit would be stretching it a little as non direct payment is quite possible from the way it is structured. To say their integrity is compromised with a clash of interests has some validity.

Im not specifically picking out Ecogra, as there is a stonger case against others but its a general question mark over accreditation in general & what it should be used for

 

[jetset]

Pretty subjective entries, I would opine - it would be interesting to know who submitted the Wikipedia piece for example, which perhaps needs more balance and a full reference to the facts - and the outcomes.

What most people unfortunately do not understand (or choose not to believe because they are so consumed by the initial funding) is that those same competing companies isolated themselves from the operational conduct of the organisation by introducing an independent board of experienced outside business people - and I'll cut 'n paste from the eCOGRA release on these guys for your convenience:

"These directors are Bill Galston, OBE, retired Chief Inspector for the Gaming Board of Great Britain; Bill Henbrey, former head of gaming services at leading international accounting firm BDO; Frank Catania, former Assistant Attorney General and Director of New Jersey Division of Gaming Enforcement and Michael Hirst, OBE, a former board member of Ladbroke Group Plc, and formerly Chairman and CEO of Hilton International."

These are hardly corrupt or docile men and have proved that they have minds of their own as well as industry, business and legal savvy.

In addition to these, but not involved in operational matters, each of the original funding companies has one seat on the full board which meets I think twice a year (that's where John Anderson's seat comes in - he was CEO of Virtual Holdings at the time and for all I know has been replaced by his successor Gigi Levy) MGS has one and Ongame has one - a total of 3 against the independent 4.

This enables the independent directors who are actually calling the shots to have direct access at all times to senior and knowledgeable executives in the companies which power the eCOGRA seal operators, but does not interfere with their responsibility for the overall running of the organisation and the compliance of operators (who voluntarily commit to the seal system at some expense in terms of time and staff involvement - not annual payments.)

The CEO and his London-based staff reports to the independent directors on all day-to-day operational issues. This is all information available on the website.

I waffled on about actions and perceptions earlier on, and I will freely concede that there have been a few errors of judgement, against which I railed along with others on the message boards. These errors are continuously regurgitated to discredit eCOGRA, conveniently forgetting that Beveridge as CEO has always been prepared to hear an appeal and is not shy to reverse a decision if he believes originally it was wrong.

Apparently forgotten, too are the hundreds of cases over the past five years where players have been assisted, not to mention other significant initiatives in which eCOGRA has become involved in the field of standards, testing and monitoring, responsible gambling codes and training and introducing best business practices.

For me, an indicator that this outfit does have a level of player credibility is the fact that players go there with disputes, or are sent there by experienced players.

And distinct from most other outfits, their complaints are openly acknowledged and generally receive prompt and courteous attention - in days rather than weeks or months.

Leading on from that is another indicator of generally fair dealing for the player - the stats put out periodically by the FGA in open regular reports on the complaints she has handled against seal casinos. There aren't too many organisations that do that, either.

Around about the middle of last year was the last one I can recall, and if memory serves me correctly over half the complaints were decided for the player, and the overall average number of complaints per seal casino per month was less than one half of one percent.

By any reckoning that's a pretty good record for 120 operational units that are amongst the best established and busiest on the Internet, carrying out millions of transactions daily for tens of thousands of players.

<sigh> I promised myself that I was not going to again get involved in these time consuming and long-winded attempts to offer an alternative perspective on eCOGRA to often poorly-informed criticism.

Unfortunately, I can't just sit back and watch an organisation that is actually trying to help the player community slagged off every time it is mentioned, with scant recognition for its contributions to a better and hopefully more player-sensitive industry.

There are always going to be contentious issues and some where the truth is manipulated on the player as well as operator side. There will undoubtedly also be occasions in the future where there is disagreement on decisions, and that's a good thing that keeps everyone on their toes if it is debated intelligently and publicised. It is also a truism that the bad usually gets more mileage and attention than the good.

But it's important - and only fair - to recognise the good too; the many cases where a fair result is brokered for the player or diplomatic pressure applied without fanfare or credit (the 'Meister will have experience of that LOL!) Or improvements in safety and fairness.

On balance I personally believe eCOGRA is doing a lot more good than harm, and I'm prepared to say so - not always a popular move when a good old slagging fest is going on, LOL!

But as much as most of us would like to see an all-powerful, totally externalised regulator/s for online gambling, that is not presently a force in the industry, so other moderating influences are needed.

ECOGRA is not a government appointed agency with massive budgets and unlimited power to take businesses down overnight (and yes, eCOGRA is a registered non-profit organisation, Gary!)

But it is nevertheless improving many aspects of online gambling that impact on players, and that needs to be at the very least acknowledged.

When I see some of the derogatory remarks made in this and other threads (example: "eCOGRA is a puppet of Microgaming") I wonder how difficult it must be for those people in London to remain motivated and determined.

 

[Casino Action]

Hi All

Please accept our apologies for the delay in our response regarding this matter.

We have been in discussions with eCogra and these purely administrative issues will be resolved shortly. We had delayed posting as we thought this would have been resolved in 24hrs, but as I am sure most of you know these kind of things tend to take longer than you would expect.

In no way has our honesty, integrity or customer service been questioned and our reputation speaks for itself!

We are expecting our eCogra seals will be reinstated very soon, but in the meantime it is business as usual.

Thank you for all the messages of support recently from a lot of well respected affiliates in the industry. (You know who you are!)

Jon
CPS

 

[vinylweatherman]

Hi All

Please accept our apologies for the delay in our response regarding this matter.

We have been in discussions with eCogra and these purely administrative issues will be resolved shortly. We had delayed posting as we thought this would have been resolved in 24hrs, but as I am sure most of you know these kind of things tend to take longer than you would expect.

In no way has our honesty, integrity or customer service been questioned and our reputation speaks for itself!

We are expecting our eCogra seals will be reinstated very soon, but in the meantime it is business as usual.

Thank you for all the messages of support recently from a lot of well respected affiliates in the industry. (You know who you are!)

Jon
CPS

I thought this was an "administrative issue", however this is a highly unusual action for eCogra to take, certainly when there have been NO SIGNS AT ALL, of anything going wrong. Although it might have taken only 24 hours, eCogra released this into the public domain in time for the weekend, so the informed community operated in a vacuum of information until now, and the speculation was that the issues had to have been VERY serious for such draconian action by eCogra, where the norm is that they remove seals AFTER problems become public, and complaints made.
As for the tournament, there was a delay in updating the scoreboard, but once fixed, it clearly showed that players were not at all bothered by the news, and competed as per normal. I cautiously worked up a prize from Thursday Thunder to 200, and cashed out at 100, and in doing so proved that Neteller instant payments were running smoothly, so no problems there with withdrawals, probably the thing that most worries players. I also won another 100 from the tournament, and this was credited in the normal time frame.

It would certainly help to at some stage clarify what eCogra found so worrying to warrant a very public suspension of the seal, even if for only a couple of days, and let players judge for themselves whether they feel eCogra overreacted in the circumstances, not something eCogra has been known for in the past when it comes to revoking seals. The last incident was with the Jackpot Factory, and it took eCogra quite some time to get to the stage of suspending the seals, first giving the group numerous chances to clean up the mess. This gives the impression that whatever the problem was, it was more serious than the very public issue that Jackpot Factory got itself involved in.

 

[Casinomeister]

I think that everyone is in a very difficult situation concerning this one. In the past, when casinos have had their eCOGRA membership suspended or yanked, these incidents were very much public player related issues. Suspension was the result of what the players were experiencing.

Here we have the indication that an administrative issue has occurred that is obviously a very serious one. It may not be something that directly affects players, but it may something that would affect them in the long run. To allow a casino (that is not meeting a standard) to display a seal could be construed as irresponsible on eCOGRA's part - even though a "fix" may be on the horizon. Perhaps the reasons for not itemizing the violations is to give the casino group time to fix what is broken with a minimal amount of public bashings.

I'm a patient guy and will wait this out to see what happens in the next few days.

 

[lots0]

Doesn't Ecogra charge these casinos a fee to be involved in there program and in order to display their seal?

 

[Casinomeister]

Hi All

Please accept our apologies for the delay in our response regarding this matter.

We have been in discussions with eCogra and these purely administrative issues will be resolved shortly. We had delayed posting as we thought this would have been resolved in 24hrs, but as I am sure most of you know these kind of things tend to take longer than you would expect.

In no way has our honesty, integrity or customer service been questioned and our reputation speaks for itself!

We are expecting our eCogra seals will be reinstated very soon, but in the meantime it is business as usual.

Thank you for all the messages of support recently from a lot of well respected affiliates in the industry. (You know who you are!)

Jon
CPS

I appreciate the posting that it's business as usual, but I would be more reserved until whatever the matter is - is cleared up.

I'm holding back making any decisions until more information is provided through normal chains. I hope that the casino and/or eCOGRA will be in the position to present findings or ensure that players are indeed in good hands within the next day or two. Removal of these seals is a very serious matter and should not be taken lightly.

Players and affiliates need to be assured that business is really "as usual". I'd hate to see a comment like that haunt you if it is not.

 

[Casinomeister]

Doesn't Ecogra charge these casinos a fee to be involved in there program and in order to display their seal?

That's a given - they provide a service and the casinos pay for this.

 

[Alexandre]

To be honest I never knew what to think about eCogra....especially after the Jackpot Factory case.
Concerning the involment of 888 and MicroGaming, I always thought it was obvious.
If you check the Director page on the actual website you'll only see 2 guys as non executive directors:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

Roger Raatgever and John Anderson (they should put Gigi Levy now)
And it has always been like that (except that it was Virtual Holdings appearing instead of 888), check on Archive.org:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

You can browse the different version of their website from this page:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

 

[lots0]

That's a given - they provide a service and the casinos pay for this.

Well then maybe it was just non-payment of fees that got their seals jerked?

I can't realy think of too many other "administrative" issues that would result in getting their seals pulled.... Except for non-payment of fees.

 

[Casinomeister]

To be honest I never knew what to think about eCogra....especially after the Jackpot Factory case.
Concerning the involment of 888 and MicroGaming, I always thought it was obvious.
If you check the Director page on the actual website you'll only see 2 guys as non executive directors:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

Roger Raatgever and John Anderson (they should put Gigi Levy now)
And it has always been like that (except that it was Virtual Holdings appearing instead of 888), check on Archive.org:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

You can browse the different version of their website from this page:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

Why is it that no one can get over the fact that this was an organization that was proposed and set up by a number of industry leaders? Who else would you have picked to begin an endeavour such as this? Shoe salesmen?

It's a shame that some people feel that there are hidden motives for anyone trying to improve things in the i-Gaming Industry.

 

[Casinomeister]

Well then maybe it was just non-payment of fees that got their seals jerked? I can't realy think of too many other "administrative" issue that would result in getting the seal pulled.... Except for non-payment of fees.

This had nothing to do with it I believe. The folks at eCOGRA are above pulling logos because of non-payment of fees.

 

[lots0]

Why is it that no one can get over the fact that this was an organization that was proposed and set up by a number of industry leaders?

Because of who the Industry leaders are and their continuing connections to current casino groups that are at the very best questionable.

This had nothing to do with it I believe.

OK, I was just speculating.
But what other "administrative" actions or lack of actions would be cause for pulling seals? Not sending in paper work on time?


Added... I don't think it is low or disgraceful action to pull seals for non-payment. It is just business and if they don't pay... they don't play.

 

[Alexandre]

Why is it that no one can get over the fact that this was an organization that was proposed and set up by a number of industry leaders? Who else would you have picked to begin an endeavour such as this? Shoe salesmen?

It's a shame that some people feel that there are hidden motives for anyone trying to improve things in the i-Gaming Industry.

Just questioning Bryan, no slandering, nothing I should be ashamed of.
I come from the SEM (Search Engine Marketing) ex-SEO (Search Engine Optimization) industry and I've seen the birth and also I've been part of such organizations.
I won't go through the history of these institutions but let's say that we had to to create a new one almost each year because "we", guys from the industry, were losing credibility just because one of our proud members was using the organization as its PR department.
Same issues or different ones were happening every year.
It's hard to federate competitors but it's even harder to federate them with the purpose of according themselves a seal of good ethics.
I'm talking about legal Internet marketing service consultancy and we had a lots of issues.
Here we are talking about egaming, a sentitive activity such as selling drugs, alcohol or anything that can create an addiction and which is still illegal in 90% of its principal markets.
So it's very normal that people like me, who don't know personnaly eCogra's staff, have reasons to doubt.
I would like to know what is your feeling about how eCogra has handled the Jackpot Factory issue ?

 

[vinylweatherman]

Because of who the Industry leaders are and their continuing connections to current casino groups that are at the very best questionable.

OK, I was just speculating.
But what other "administrative" actions or lack of actions would be cause for pulling seals? Not sending in paper work on time?

Added... I don't think it is low or disgraceful action to pull seals for non-payment. It is just business and if they don't pay... they don't play.

There are a whole load of administrative issues that this could be, and it may be that there was a perceived risk that flaws in the system could have serious consequences if exploited. Non payment of fees would not be the most serious of these, and could easily be dealt with privately by a "threat" to remove the seals if payment was not made within a period of time. The removal of the seals may indicate that eCogra could not quantify the risk that had already been created by the flaw, and could not therefore deal with this privately lest the problem had a very public impact before corrective action could be taken. This could leave eCogra wide open to accusations that "you knew, but did nothing". Whatever happens, eCogra cannot be accused of "doing nothing".

Since this is a serious sanction, it would be unwise for the industry to seek to keep what happened to precipitate this a secret, and in time we should be told what went wrong, why, how, and what has been done to address the issue. Players also need to know what risk, if any, they were exposed to, and whether the corrective action has removed such risk.

One significant issue that MAY, and i stress MAY, be important enough to warrant such action would be lapses in the systems designed to protect the personal information of players. This does not mean anything has ACTUALLY gone wrong, but just that an unnacceptable risk was present. There have been many threads relating to suspicions that player's information has been leaked outside of the secure systems, and this is not something that eCogra would want blowing up in their faces. Indeed, such an accusation was recently levelled at Casino Rewards, another seal holder, and related to the suggestion that a rogue employee had gained access to player information and was passing/selling it on to spammers.

We CANNOT assume this was the case here, this is just ONE scenario of an administrative problem severe enough to warrant yanking the seals, yet has NOTHING TO DO with the casino not having "greased the right palms" in order to keep the seals, which seems to be the main accusation being leveled at eCogra for makig this decision.

eCogra may even have learned that players were not at all happy with the handling of the Jackpot Factory case, and have thus changed the procedures from what they were then, leading to an increased likelihood of seals being temporarily suspended at a much earlier stage.
There was recently an online survey, and I am sure that the results are now available to inform and prompt change in procedures in organisations such as eCogra.

 

[jetset]

Once again I find myself in agreement with VWM's objective view here - there are any number of serious business non-compliance possibilities that could backfire severely on the player community if things went wrong, or may have gone wrong already.

Even if it is "business as usual" as the CA rep here claims.

Having identified a potential or actual problem with player-prejudicing potential, eCOGRA would be slammed three ways to Christmas if it had not acted immediately.

Look no further than the reactions of some members in this thread for an indication that as usual there are those who prefer to criticise, dredge up old issues and speculate than give some recognition for what is probably a responsible and protective move.

Yet again resurrecting the unrelated Jackpot Factory issue without commenting on its final resolution is an example imho.

That final resolution involved disciplining staff and dismissing contractors, a defined period of more intense monitoring and inspections, abject public apologies from the casino group and an agreement to donate $25 000 to a problem gambling charity.

I don't believe that would have happened if eCOGRA's independent directors had not been prepared to take on one of its three original funders and force a solution by pulling the seals.

It took a while to resolve a situation where disgraceful blackhat SEO crap was lodged in every nook and cranny of the Internet, and if you remember correctly, eCOGRA "persuaded" 888.com to set up a dedicated channel through which members of the public flagged items that were still being picked up after weeks. These were then removed. And please don't tell me that it was solely player community pressure and that eCOGRA played no role, because I don't buy that.

Let me make a prediction. We've already seen posts in this thread accusing eCOGRA of being so lacking in integrity and purpose that they would pull seals for some obscure allegation of 'non-payment' - but presenting nothing to define or substantiate this.

Now we will most likely see comments that Jackpot Factory should have been driven into the ground as a real punishment; claims without evidence that noone was really punished; claims that the $25 000 donation to charity was never paid (again without substantiation); ill-informed attacks on the integrity of eCOGRA staff like the FGA; raising the Lake Palace issue again (and there's another perspective on that too)

I could go on, but you get the drift.

Everyone has ideas on other things this outfit should be doing, or things it could be doing better and it's right to discuss these in a constructive way and even communicate them to the management. In my experience they listen.

eCOGRA is probably always going to be a controversial topic, given the past history of the industry and some committed mindsets determined to impute dishonest motivation to everything it does.

But at least be fair enough to also consider the fact that for five years now this outfit has been getting on with its professional and player protection objectives and making practical improvements to the 120 top (less 6 as of this week!) operations that it influences through the seal program.

And it has helped hundreds of players get a fast and fair hearing for their complaints and got the majority of their problems resolved by ruling against the operator in many cases.

 

[chuchu59]

I was thinking of playing at Challenge yesterday but remembered this thread and instead went to All Jackpots and Betway. Why take any risk even if there doesnt seem to be anything wrong with them? This could also be on the minds of some other players so it is important that the issue is solved as soon as possible.

 

[lots0]

OK, I was just speculating.

However, I seem to have hit some nerves with my speculation on why the seals were pulled.

We've already seen posts in this thread accusing eCOGRA of being so lacking in integrity and purpose that they would pull seals for some obscure allegation of 'non-payment' - but presenting nothing to define or substantiate this.

So why is it lacking in integrity to pull seals for non-payment of fees?

I am not saying that is what happened, but what is wrong with pulling the seals for non-payment if that is in fact what really happened?
Only a bunch of morons would continue to provide a "service" when they are not being paid as agreed...

VWM what part of "speculating" did you not understand? I also see you provided as much as I did to substantiate and define your "speculations"...

Ecogra, touchy subject... With some folks.
I guess the touchiness must come from defending Ecogra's actions or lack of actions, over and over and over and over again...

 

[Casinomeister]

...Ecogra, touchy subject... With some folks.
I guess the touchiness must come from defending Ecogra's actions or lack of actions, over and over and over and over again...

I don't think it's so touchy - I just think that some issues are dredged up repeatedly in a non-objective manner, and it's tiresome.

Most of the people who throw criticisms their way (eCOGRA's) do it via personal agendas (not saying this is you - it's a generalization) and they don't back up criticisms with constructive suggestions or ideas on how to improve eCOGRA.

There are some members who criticize and provide good ideas on how to make things better (example VWM, Jetset, etc.). Others just want to participate in a bashfest that goes in circles. What good is that? That could be where the frustrations lie.

This is a relatively new industry with many needs and opportunities. Organizations that spring up to provide regulatory or auditing/review functions sometimes have to operate by the seat of their pants. Due to the dynamics and changes that this industry goes through, it's a tough road to travel. And of course companies like eCOGRA are scrutinized by most everyone since fairness in gaming is a crucial issue, and the player community needs to be assured that organizations are up front on what they do. And eCOGRA is upfront in how they operate, and they take their role seriously.

Knowing what I know about eCOGRA and their personnel, I would be rather shocked that the seals were pulled from a casino group for the mere fact of a non-payment of services. That would deflate the seal's empowerment and would mean to players "They're safe to play at because they pay our bills". The eCOGRA branding would become flaccid. They know that - you know that - and I know that. That's a bit shallow, and would not sit right with anyone to include myself. I'm hoping that most players are keen enough to realize this.

 

[jetset]

"Ecogra, touchy subject... With some folks.
I guess the touchiness must come from defending Ecogra's actions or lack of actions, over and over and over and over again..."

Yep - in much the same way that over and over and over and over again some people feel it necessary to continuously try to portray real or imagined exclusively dark sides to an outfit and a bunch of people who are trying to make a positive difference in this industry.

Interesting to observe how the nay-sayers bristle when a more positive perspective based on fact, or an opinion at odds with their own is offered.

But it's very good to ensure a balance i.m.o.

 

[lots0]

Interesting to observe how the nay-sayers bristle when a more positive perspective or opinion at odds with their own is offered.

What I find interesting is that I am now a nay-sayer because I asked some questions and gave an opinion or two.

I guess what really binds my shorts is that because I ask a question and speculate a little, I am now against Ecogra. Man you folks need to reread what I wrote, after you get rid of those Ecogra chips on your shoulders...


Oh ya I did answer a question,

Quote:
Why is it that no one can get over the fact that this was an organization that was proposed and set up by a number of industry leaders?

Because of who the Industry leaders are and their continuing connections to current casino groups that are at the very best questionable.

And that is a fact... As long as the leaders of Ecogra have direct financial connections to the casinos they give their seal to... there is the appearance of impropriety. They will never shed the public criticisms, until the appearance of conflicts of interest and impropriety are no longer seen by the public.

I guess stating the obvious makes me a nay-sayer... Pfffttt