Rome Partners are Certified at AGD

[TheGamblingGuru]

Post deleted..[useless info]

____
____

 

[Guard Dog]

I did read your PM and have seen your rogue list. I am just having a difficult time with all the proof, here.

We can easily re-review with additional information sent to me. It's just difficult with what we have found so far, which is mostly in the past.

 

[TheGamblingGuru]

I did read your PM and have seen your rogue list. I am just having a difficult time with all the proof, here.

We can easily re-review with additional information sent to me. It's just difficult with what we have found so far, which is mostly in the past.

So I guess my final question would then be:

What's the "Benchmark Setting" for forgiving a casino or program for hundreds of "Integrity BASED Wrongs & Bad Decisions" during their online history?

A year, 6 months, 2 years, why not 3 months?

Why now? Has management recently changed there? Or have the same management seen the "Glorious Light of Redemption" and have now decided to fly straight and make all previous wrongs regarding Players, right?

Is that their NEW PLAN?
____
____

 

[Guard Dog]

Good questions.

Previously we have forced programs that create their own problems to be problem-free for the same length of time in which they had problems.

An example is Vegas Affiliates. Their T&C's were changed to predatory for about a year. Once they changed them back, they had to go through 1 year with a 'Warning' label for those issues.

Our conversations have been around that same concept. maybe it is a flawed concept, though?

 

[dominique]

IMO, if we are going to consider all that for certification, we are going to go on a slippery slope that will have no end. In depth investigations of past conduct, arguments about what is integrity and what isn't and all of that.

We started out evaluating simply current T&Cs and flagging changes. That is all AGD was formed for. Then we included player rogue lists. Now we will deal with past behavior, spamming, blackhat techniques and what not? Where will it end? I don't think we can do a good job of this anymore. It is too much for AGD to handle IMO.

Why don't we stick to the established criteria, but add to the certificate that webmasters would be well advised to read (link to thread) before comitting to the program. Then all things will be covered and people can make up their minds.

Remember, we are here to see that no affiliate inadvertently signs up for bad T&Cs because they are too convoluted to read for many. That is our purpose.

So we take the pain out of analysing and keeping track of changes to T&Cs for people. I thought it was a big help and something no one else did. You can get a headache analysing many of these clauses, and oft times there is an extended exchange with the programs where we get them to clarify the terms.

I really think we have enough on our plate, and we are limping badly behind in keeping up as things are.

If we include any more criteria, we will be inefficient on all aspects.

 

[Simmo!]

Any form of certification, accreditation etc is going to have these issues. Where is the line drawn? There is no right answer and you'll never keep 100% of the people happy 100% of the time.

My suggestion: if AGD had a page for each program with all the T&C alerts (which is what I primarily LOVE AGD for) and then an archive - a history - of links to relevant threads where the program (or software) was the subject of a discussion. With the date clearly shown.

That way AGD is simply a factual resource and it removes opinion and potentially disagreeable decision making which is what causes issues on any website or forum. The affiliate then has the tools to make their own decision, which we all do anyway

 

[dominique]

Any form of certification, accreditation etc is going to have these issues. Where is the line drawn? There is no right answer and you'll never keep 100% of the people happy 100% of the time.

My suggestion: if AGD had a page for each program with all the T&C alerts (which is what I primarily LOVE AGD for) and then an archive - a history - of links to relevant threads where the program (or software) was the subject of a discussion. With the date clearly shown.

That way AGD is simply a factual resource and it removes opinion and potentially disagreeable decision making which is what causes issues on any website or forum. The affiliate then has the tools to make their own decision, which we all do anyway

Exactly, that is what I think AGD is for, to give affs the opportunity to make up their minds based on solid, factual, non-subjective information.

I don't want to start seeing individual opinions involved in certification - you can find these opinions on any message board, including here. They don't need to be certified.

The certification only applies to T&Cs at this time. We don't actually certify programs, we certify T&Cs.

Certifying programs is a whole other ball game, and not one I think I want to be involved in. Been down that road too many times already.

 

[Guard Dog]

My suggestion: if AGD had a page for each program with all the T&C alerts (which is what I primarily LOVE AGD for) and then an archive - a history - of links to relevant threads where the program (or software) was the subject of a discussion. With the date clearly shown.

That way AGD is simply a factual resource and it removes opinion and potentially disagreeable decision making which is what causes issues on any website or forum. The affiliate then has the tools to make their own decision, which we all do anyway

Maybe you can contact me. I would be interested on how this might work.

 

[Guard Dog]

In each forum, the sidebar shows information about the Affiliate Program. How often is that viewed? I have gotten plenty of questions asking about that information (not knowing it was there).

I could place links to important threads about affiliate programs (might take a lot of time to manage), but would anyone read it? Would it then serve to properly notify affiliates that a program *may* have issues?

 

[Perc]

What if you added a sticky thread to each program forum, labelled "Issues Past/Present" and instead of you having to find all the information, webmasters can post their issues. Link to the thread in the sidebar under "Are Casino Earnings Bundled" and call it "Past and Present Issues" or something similar.

That way you guys can handle the T&C's and everyone else can post the problems they have had in the past. Saves you work and allows the community to participate and warn others about issues that have nothing to do with T&C's.

Then when someone comes here looking for good programs, they can find that the T&C's are certified, read the issues people have had with them, and decide for themselves from there.

Thoughts?

 

[Guard Dog]

What if you added a sticky thread to each program forum, labelled "Issues Past/Present" and instead of you having to find all the information, webmasters can post their issues. Link to the thread in the sidebar under "Are Casino Earnings Bundled" and call it "Past and Present Issues" or something similar.

That way you guys can handle the T&C's and everyone else can post the problems they have had in the past. Saves you work and allows the community to participate and warn others about issues that have nothing to do with T&C's.

Then when someone comes here looking for good programs, they can find that the T&C's are certified, read the issues people have had with them, and decide for themselves from there.

Thoughts?

That is pretty much exactly what my thoughts were. I think the people who can 'add' to the link list would HAVE to be affiliates with a minimum number of posts (like 50+). I wouldn't want anyone to be able to post links

 

[Simmo!]

The downside to that is that you are more likely to get just the bad things and not the resolved issues along with issues that either don't get resolved publically or are incomplete.

For an affiliate trying to make a judgement you might end up giving an unbalanced impression.

Ideally an issue wouldn't be posted to a casino's profile until it has been resolved or the discussion has reached a natural conclusion. There are always two sides to every story and if something was added too early it might give a false impression.

Having affiliates putting the information in makes sense but there ought to be a "finalisation" button which AGD staff have to press to release it to the profile page.

Personally I prefer the option of AGD staff adding links when they think something is worthy. The major issues are what this should be about really - historical issues that attracted a lot of attention and there will probably only be 1 or 2 a week, maybe even a month, tops, if that. IMO you don't want the profile page cluttered up with minor issues.

 

[bonustreak]

I think the staff adding the links is a good idea as well because as Simmo said we remain unbiased. I think his idea is perfect

 

[Perc]

I started thinking the same thing after my post, it might not actually save much work as these threads would need to be tightly moderated, or all the info gathered behind the scenes to be posted by AGD staff.

It was just an idea to get all the major player and affiliate issues in a central location for each program, so that AGD staff can just concentrate on policing the T&C's and affiliates can focus the other issues. I understand that this is basically already done, but there is no centralized location for all the big issues.

Maybe some kind of Testimonials/Reviews section for each program, where affiliates can write about their experiences? You could also add a vote-up system so people that have had similar experiences could vote for a review to move it up rather than writing the same thing. The most voted-for review would then be displayed at the top as the most common experience. Of course reviews and voting would have to be restricted to affiliates who have a decent amount of posts.

Also, maybe instead of calling a whole program Certified, say their T&C's are certified. Like Simmo said, where is the line drawn? You aren't really recommending these programs, you are saying the T&C's are good to go, correct?

"Rome Partners T&C's are Certified at AGD" rather than "Rome Partners are Certified at AGD".

 

[dominique]

"Rome Partners T&C's are Certified at AGD" rather than "Rome Partners are Certified at AGD".

I agree. Right on the button.

 

[lots0]

The certification only applies to T&Cs at this time. We don't actually certify programs, we certify T&Cs.

your kidding... Right?

I have a very old policy I follow... Once a crook always a crook.

Theives don't stop being theives because they don't get caught for one year and they don't stop being theives because they 'clean up' there T&C's.

AGD have 'approved', 'certified' or whatever you want to call it some of the worst of the worst... and saying you are only approvoing their T&C's... is well at best a cop out.

Please close my account. Really just close it and delete my info... Thanks.

 

[bonusgeek]

I really don't get why people are calling them crooks. As far as I know they had some cashflow issues on the affiliate side which was resolved. Not ideal I know but it is what it is and since then their payments have come in like clockwork every month.

On the player side I know there have been some past issues, but if they are crooks because they had software glitches then I guess microgaming should be labeled crooks since they had a rigged double down feature. If you look back far enough I am pretty sure every software has experienced glitches, especially in their infancy stage. I do know they took their time to put things on the table about the software glitch which I think was a mistake. But didn't they reimburse all players affected with that?

If they are crooks because there were late payments then I guess the other 100 programs that had late payments over the past several years are crooks too.

If they are crooks because one idiot rep on crack said some stupid things to a player then so be it. I personally don't think one idiot rep defines a brand, especially considering I've had numerous chats myself that would blow peoples mind... But everyone is entitle to their opinion.

But as far as I know they haven't stolen anything from affiliates. And while I don't spend a lot of time in the player forums, to my knowledge I thought they worked very hard to turn things around. I completely understand why people are negative about Rome, and I don't deny there have been some issues in the past. I don't necessarily think some of these issues are so unique to Rome that they should get painted with a rogue brush while other brands-softwares with similar issues get a pass. But whatever..

They do a good job with my traffic, better than most and I honestly don't feel like I am putting players in a bad spot by promoting them. To my knowledge they pay players accordingly now albeit not as fast as they would like, but their terms do state 30 days. So if anyone has any information on current issues or players not getting paid, I would sure like to know about it because I do promote them. It's hard to stay on top of everything in this industry.

 

[magic79]

Kinda got off track here...started out talking about Rome, went to a disscussion on AGD and back to Rome.

I want to put in my 2cents.

I am a small time affiliate and member of some forums, post on occasion, and rant when I feel it is justified. I had a problem with a late payment from Rome and did go on a rant at GPWA, and a little here.

Bottom line. It got fixed, I got paid and I got a satisfactory explanation, with no future problems since. You can see in my past post at GPWA and others that I always tried to stay open, polite, and in communication with Rome.

Some people may have bigger problems, but I am now happy with Rome and they continue to make money for me and Pay Me

 

[Vladi]

My 2c on the "certifying T&Cs" vs information about past issues and player issues...

I actually find the past affiliate issues and player issues to be far more important in deciding whether to sign up with a program. They are a much more useful barometer to use in judging their business ethics and competence. Like the Guru more or less said, if a program that has had no major change in management or ownership does the dirty on you once, what's to stop them from doing it again?

While I think you do a great job here at AGD monitoring the T&Cs of the programs, lets face it the T&Cs are not worth the paper they are written on with most of these programs. Any of them could make a judgement call that they will make more money by pulling a Bwin or a Grand Prive and what are you or I going to do about it? Fly to Belize or Costa Rica or wherever and take them to court?

To put it in perspective, I stopped all traffic to Rome and it won't be restored whether their T&Cs are certified or not. However if it was confirmed that they were consistently paying players within days rather than weeks or months (if at all) like all the crappy Top Game casinos, and paying their affiliates on time, and restoring missing jackpot money etc then there is a very small chance that I might reconsider. No amount of changes to T&Cs would change that.

To the guys spitting their dummies out of the pram and crying that they want their accounts closed, stick around and be part of the solution. Where else are you going to go? CAP? GPWA? Don't make me laugh. This is just about the only decent sized and ethically run gambling affiliate community I have come across. All the rest are in it first and foremost for the money. It needs people like you (and me) who don't agree with this decision to help steer the ship. Leaving only makes it worse.

 

[KasinoKing]

To the guys spitting their dummies out of the pram and crying that they want their accounts closed, stick around and be part of the solution. Where else are you going to go? CAP? GPWA? Don't make me laugh. This is just about the only decent sized and ethically run gambling affiliate community I have come across. All the rest are in it first and foremost for the money. It needs people like you (and me) who don't agree with this decision to help steer the ship. Leaving only makes it worse.

I agree with that 110%!

KK