Hi again,
you know Pina I must have read the first 15 or 20 pages and then gave up because it was all or most was the same.
now after reading only a couple of pages (I think 30 and 31) ... well after reading that and viewing for instance ...
To: Job Applicant
From: Boaz Sassoon ("Vidal" to his friends)
Subject: Writing Sample
Dear Sir
Further to your recent application, please complete the following assignment in no more than twenty minutes.
You are required to write a brief story, about a one legged cross eyed leprosy sufferer who likes to play at All Slots casino. The more morally abhorrent and offensive the better.
It's important that whilst at the beginning of the story the main character seemingly has nowhere to turn, the introduction of All Slots casino should turn the characters life around and make everything better in the world and happy and rosy!
Please note: Extra credit will be given for indicating how playing at online casino's can prevent bankruptcy, unhappiness, criminal activity and death.
Good luck!
Boaz
It looks to me like from reading the above ... that they were shooting for a "tongue in cheek" approach ... much like some commercials you see on tv which make such outrageous and bold claims that nobody in their right mind would believe them .... and they didn't stop to think that since they are targeting the down on their luck that the outrageous claims might not be viewed as so outrageous: that they might actually believe.
Its just very hard for me to lend credibility to this whole situation since the text is so absurb.
Now that all said: even assuming they are guilty of knowingly using such tacky text: I don't have a big problem with them unless/until they don't pay somebody or their games are proven to not return random fair-odds results.
the thing is: is that if you are going to blacklist every program for having bad judgement, then in my opinion these programs are not only guilty of that: but also of intentionally setting out to break contracts they themselves made. And I'm speaking of Referback, Fortune and it seems like there was another,... oh I remember, and vegas partner. All three tried to change terms retroactively on contracts they held with us affiliates. In each case the programs were called on their actions and eventually (after considerable hell being raised) they made things right. And in my opinion breaking contracts is much worse than a tacky SEO campaign.
That is just a sample. Nearly every program at one time or another has been way out of line and then when we affiliates called them on it: they changed things back or made them right and affiliates kept on promoting them.
I have considered this heavily long before this issue ever came up and I came to the conclusion that if I wanted to have anything to list on my sites that i was gonna have to come down off my high horse .... so to speak.
That was when I decided to look for the most important aspects of a program and judge it accordingly ... from strictly a player's standpoint. Because ultimately that is what the player is concerned about.
And what is a player's biggest concern? Is it the casino's standing amongst the community (ie - whether or not the casino is using questionable SEO tactics), or is it that the player gets a fair-odds game and then IF able to beat the odds, get paid?
of course that answers itself.
JF's aff program doesn't do me any favors. That's why i only list them on the page where I list all the casinos i promote. they enjoy almost no other exposure.
But I can't see blacklisting them for this matter, as unsavory as it may be.
It would be different if they hadn't agreed to take down the offensive material. That would be a no-brainer reason.
But they've aknowledged and taken full responsibility for the matter, and as long as I don't find out they are still up to no-good a month from now; I won't be taking them down.
But I totally respect anybody else's decision to do so.