LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
The poster's accusation was, in my view, unnecessarily provocative and downright rude. Certainly counter productive and distracting.
I'm as much against spamming as most here, but I think that individual cases have to be put into perspective. Take the present complaint for example.
Carmen Media is a large company that has been in the business for many years. The way in which industry marketing works means that just about any old Joe with a computer can become an affiliate marketer trying [for reward] to generate new players for the online casinos.
Whilst there are many affiliates who progress and become successful, ethical and professional affiliate marketers, there are still beginners who lack knowledge and experience...or those who couldn't give a damn anyway as long as they get the bucks, steering players to questionable outfits and spamming without conscience.
In a company like Carmen Media, we're talking about thousands (perhaps tens of thousands) of what are essentially unqualified marketing amateurs plugging away trying to make a buck. And literally hundreds of thousands of player transactions every day.
That's quite difficult to police, and the real test of outfits like Carmen Media is what their affiliate management contractor or division does when blatant cases are reported to them.
All of which brings us back to the question of accreditation. Should a company like Carmen Media's accreditation be pulled on the basis that a probably miniscule percentage of its overall effort has involved spamming from an affiliate?
I would suggest that the answer lies in what it does about it - if it is not prepared to take action against the affiliate concerned, then it does not imo merit being accredited (because it is effectively condoning the activity complained of)
But remember, the bad conduct possibly constitutes only a very small percentage of activity from a company that is generally fair and above board (here's where everyone since the millennium can chime in with a personal negative experience btw )
I've noticed a tendency to use the accreditation system on this forum as a whip with which to flog accredited operators on personal issues by taking Bryan personally to task for accrediting the operator concerned.
This is often done without regard to the generally solid reputation and massive volumes of business that such successful companies often have in relation to the number of complaints made against them (or their affiliates).
My perception of the accreditation system is that it is intended not as a sword to hold over the head of operators, but more as a guide to players that a particular operation generally hews to a system that gives the player a fair and safe gambling experience, and one in which the operator will be responsive in the event of a complaint to CM, making resolution easier and more certain.
Whilst I can understand that anger and the frustration of the moment can lead to rash postings and even defamatory accusations, a sense of perspective, objectivity and balance is always important too.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by jetset
Bookmarks