eCOGRA needs to make a decision about JACKPOT FACTORY... NOW!!

[jetset]

I doubt whether it will be this afternoon, and in any case I am with Spear here - better a cooly considered and legal reaction than a rushed and possibly botched effort which would be welcomed only by the organisation's opponents.

This is not a webmaster arbitrarily calling the shots as is his or her absolute right on their own property, but a legally constituted and internationally active company in a position of authority over another company and considering a possibly punitive action that may have serious legal and business consequences.

I have just called Andrew, who btw has been trying to deal with this and board meetings in addition to his normal job and leading a tough training session on (ironically) Responsible Gaming.

Believe me, he is well aware of the situation and is monitoring it closely, at the same time taking the procedural steps that are required in terms of eCOGRA constitutional and legal advice.

Apparently the immediate and arbitrary pulling of a seal is not quite as simple and straightforward as posting "just take their seal". Seals can be revoked, no question - but the lawyers say that procedures and justice must be properly served.

In a justifiably superheated atmosphere such as this, an instant reaction would be more to the liking of everyone. I share the views expressed by many here regarding JF's debacle and the fact that it has still not pulled down all of this contentious rubbish.

But eCOGRA does not have the luxury of the individual in simply joining in the general clamour before it has its ducks in a row.

I am informed that the proper legal procedures that need to be followed in these circumstances where a withdrawal or suspension of the eCOGRA seal is contemplated, have to follow the legal procedures of English Law (where eCOGRA is based) and the principles of *natural justice* (because it is applied to companies not necessarily falling under English jurisprudence).

The following must take place before a seal can be withdrawn:

(i) the eGAP rules are clear and unambiguous;

(ii) a person or entity is given a chance to rectify any shortcomings or non-compliance;

(iii) the natural justice rules are followed in relation to disciplinary proceedings; and

(iv) the eGAP and natural justice rules are consistently applied on a
case to case basis.

The three cardinal rules of natural justice are:

1. A person or entity has the right to know the case against him. This typically requires:

. adequate notice of the allegations
. adequate notice of the hearing
. adequate notice of the procedure for determining the alleged breach(es)

2. A person or entity must have a fair opportunity to answer the charges and
present his own case.

3. A person has the right to a decision from an unbiased decision-maker.

eCOGRA may well make a statement, but it is unlikely that this will happen until Andrew and the independent directors are satisfied that the legal requirements of starting the process have been complied with.

I can understand anger and disgust at this issue making posters impatient, and I can understand some of eCOGRA's critics trying to make the most of it but is an immediate statement really critical here, and should eCOGRA be discredited because it hasn't burst into print yet?

Andrew has assured me that things are happening, assisted by those of you who have been sufficiently committed to the issue to communicate with Andrew and send him examples of the offensive material.

There's no way this thread or the main one elsewhere here will be allowed by any of us to fade away, so why not give eCOGRA the space to do things properly?

[Pinababy69]

Jetset, thank you for posting that. In a roundabout way, it sounds like a statement from ECogra. At the very least, it explains their procedures to those of us not familiar with them.

I'm willing to give them time to do what they have to do. What I'm NOT willing to do is ever let this issue die until it has been resolved one way or another, and until every single one of those offending links is removed.

[jetset]

Please do not get me wrong, Pina. This is NOT an official eCOGRA statement, nor am I an eCOGRA spokesman.

My intention in posting the fruits of a long conversation with Andrew this afternoon is purely to inform the members of this board on matters of fact and perhaps explain why instant gratification is not always possible no matter how desirable that may be in some cases.

This issue is definitely receiving attention, as I am sure will become apparent when eCOGRA decides it is time to make it's official comment.

[Pinababy69]

Please do not get me wrong, Pina. This is NOT an official eCOGRA statement, nor am I an eCOGRA spokesman.

My intention in posting the fruits of a long conversation with Andrew this afternoon is purely to inform the members of this board on matters of fact and perhaps explain why instant gratification is not always possible no matter how desirable that may be in some cases.

This issue is definitely receiving attention, as I am sure will become apparent when eCOGRA decides it is time to make it's official comment.

I didn't mean to imply that you were Jet. I only meant that it gave us some insight into the inner workings of the organization, and given your conversation with him, some assurance that this is being looked after. Nothing more, sorry for the wrong use of wording. This is really getting to me in case you can't tell.

[jetset]

No problem, as long as my point is clear.

I am as angry as you are at this nonsense because it casts the industry in such a bad light as well as targeting totally inappropriate and vulnerable audiences.

And I certainly join you in having no intention of letting the issue die a quiet death.

But I continue to support what eCOGRA is trying to do, and it is important for members to realise that we're not talking here about an anonymous individual with a personal opinion, or a webmaster on his or her own turf; eCOGRA has to act in terms of its constitution and legal advice.

It is not fair or sensible at this stage to discredit or decry the organisation for doing so.

[spearmaster]

Spear... do you really think that eCOGRA has any option other than condemning ALLSLOTS & JACKPOT FACTORY after the way that they have dealt with this?

To be perfectly frank - no. But there is still a procedure they have to go through as Jetset has illustrated above and like it or not, we have to respect those procedures.

eCOGRA will lose any and all credibility they might have at this point, should they not "do the right thing" and cancel the seal, and condemn this group for the ridiculous and sleazy marketing of their casinos that they attempted to get away with.

I'll reserve judgement until they make their stance known. But if Jackpot Factory thinks they can get away with a slap on the wrist, they have another think coming.

[nielsenj]

Let us give eCOGRA time of make the right decision with regards to Jackpot Factory. To expect a decision in the Jackpot Factory case in only three days is unfair and unrealistic. eCOGRA has procedures to follow (thanks for outlining them, Jetset) and it would surprise me if we are not talking weeks rather than days until we get a responce from eCOGRA. Honestly, I do not care if it takes weeks or days as long as the right decision is made.

As far a I know this can be the first time eCOGRA removes a seal. Just as a court that is about to make a decision on new legislation, a decision from eCOGRA with regards to stripping the seal from Jackpot Factory will have consequenses not only in this case but also for similar cases in the future. It is therefore wise for eCOGRA to think the case through before they make a decision.

I am as just as appalled as the rest of you with what it have read in the Jackpot Factory thread. eCOGRA approved casinos are supposed to make honest advertising and behave responsibly. It is hard to see hard this standard being upheld at Jackpot Factory and is is hard to see how eCOGRA can justify Jackpot Factory an approved casino.

[GrandMaster]

To be perfectly frank - no. But there is still a procedure they have to go through as Jetset has illustrated above and like it or not, we have to respect those procedures.

I'll reserve judgement until they make their stance known. But if Jackpot Factory thinks they can get away with a slap on the wrist, they have another think coming.

I agree that proper procedure has to be followed, but if the police have evidence that you have committed a crime, you can be arrested and held in custody until the trial, or a probably better analogue is that if you are suspected of misconduct at work, the normal procedure in the UK is that you are suspended on full pay while the investigation is carried out. I don't understand why ecogra could not suspend Jackpot Factory casinos pending a full investigation.

[spearmaster]

I agree that proper procedure has to be followed, but if the police have evidence that you have committed a crime, you can be arrested and held in custody until the trial, or a probably better analogue is that if you are suspected of misconduct at work, the normal procedure in the UK is that you are suspended on full pay while the investigation is carried out. I don't understand why ecogra could not suspend Jackpot Factory casinos pending a full investigation.

Point taken. And I would agree that the evidence is, to say the least, overwhelming... but Andrew still has a board to answer to so he may not be empowered to even suspend without a vote being called first, and that would likely require at least a conference call when all of them can be present.

[soflat]

To me eCogra is an irrelevant entity.

Casino Meister rogued them and that is good enough for me.