[bwc]

So how do we get the attention and education into the merchants that are partnered with Upromise (as well as others)??? It's one thing to KNOW all the maggotts in the shitpile; it's quite another to actually get anything done with the information, which is phenominal I might add . . . thank you Ms B

Would the first step be to contact all the merchants we find on Upromise???

[SSanf]

Originally Posted by Nova

If u promise me they are not parasitic then I will believe you.... But you don't promise me! lol!!!


I'm with Haiko, looks who's talking! LOL!!!!

better get of here before i'll need my HP!

Have a great day all!

If I said what I think of them and all parasites out loud, I would probably need to consult with my HP AND my HPs about my language skills! LOL!!

[Kellie aka Ms. B]

So how do we get the attention and education into the merchants that are partnered with Upromise (as well as others)??? It's one thing to KNOW all the maggotts in the shitpile; it's quite another to actually get anything done with the information, which is phenominal I might add . . . thank you Ms B

Would the first step be to contact all the merchants we find on Upromise???

That's one thing that you can do. In general......

Information is power. Why do you think so many bad-mouth this board? A heck of a lot comes out here that many would prefer people don't know about.

But there is about to be a whollop of factual, truthful information out there. And everyone is going to have to decide how they use that information in their business decision-making. Are people going to continue turning a blind eye for short-term financial gains? Or will people step up to the plate and use it to make sound long-term decisions which shape this Industry down the road? Will people look at the impact the decisions have made on this Industry that have impacted all negatively and learn from past mistakes? Or will acceptable practices continue to be based on individual's personal gains and the preceived dollar value of the offender? Is the Industry going to be shaped on fallacy or fact?

[Zeus]

Kellie - Why do you think so many bad-mouth this board? A heck of a lot comes out here that many would prefer people don't know about.

Best quote of the year for Kellie

[David Coppins]

My name is David Coppins and I am the VP of online shopping at Upromise. I was recently referred to this bulletin board because of the series of posts about Upromise. If anyone would like to communicate with me directly on this or other topics, I have put my contact information at the end of this message.

I apologize in advance for the long post, but I hope it will clear up some of the messages being posted here.

Thanks to Kellie?, she discovered a glitch in how we use our RemindU application. The scenario she describes only occurs when someone has dumped their cookies. Let me explain:

Scenario 1:
When someone is on our website and decides to click through to a merchant but is not cookied, they will get a page that gives them the option of logging in to receive their college savings. Secondly, they are given the option of becoming a member. In less prominence, a visitor is given a third option, which is to "continue without receiving college savings."

When someone clicks on that link, they are sent to the merchant and we continue to use the affiliate link. By all reasonable metrics, Upromise would deserve that commission since the member was on our site to begin with and was enticed to click on a merchant as a result of being on our site.

Scenario 2:
A member installs our RemindU application (by the way, we have NEVER bundled it with third parties. It is only available on our website and as a footnote in occassional emails to our current members only. And it is a positive opt-in only!). After the application is installed, in almost all cases when a member forgets to start at Upromise and they type in a Upromise partner url, they will be re-directed through the Upromise links without going to the page described in Scenario 1. The member gets a pop-up from Upromise that describes the specials and coupon codes currently active with that merchant and reminds them the % contribution they will be getting back for college savings. Members get their college savings and Upromise gets their commission.

Scenario 3:
If a member dumps their cookies and has RemindU active on their desktop, they will get sent to the page described in Scenario 1. They are faced with the options described.

After hearing about this thread, I went on a little mission to discover the veracity of the claims. This is what I found: When the RemindU application was being set up some years ago, our engineering and website people had to have a place to send people when they weren't cookied. We already had a page set up (described in Scenario 1) and they decided to point it to that page out of efficiency. No one ever thought about the ethics of continuing to use the affiliate codes if someone chose not to receive their college savings, probably because no one thought it through at all. I’m sure there are some that won’t believe me, but I assure you there was no malicious intent or questionably ethical practices being plotted in some back room when our people decided to point the uncookied to that page.

I also researched how frequently this occurred. I found out that this is an extremely rare circumstance. The revenue we receive from people clicking on “continue without receiving college savings” when directed to that page from RemindU is inconsequential to us. However, the revenue from people clicking on that link from initially browsing our website (Scenario 1) is not inconsequential and I would like to preserve that.

What are we doing about it?
It is important to us that we maintain a strong positive reputation in the industry. While I don’t think Scenario 3 is against any official code of conduct, we agree with many that have posted here that it is not a positive business practice. We are working right now to figure out how to conditionally change the “continue without receiving college savings” link when someone is referred to that page from RemindU vs. referred to that page when on our website. I can assure you we will fix the offending scenario even if it means we will give up the revenue as described in Scenario 1.

Unfortunately, I don’t have an estimated time for the fix yet. I don’t think I am alone when I say it is a frustrating experience trying to get anything changed in engineering in a company that is large enough to have slot plans, prioritization task forces, etc. etc. As soon as I have an expected date for the fix, I will re-post.

As for all the other colorful accusations about Upromise, I will post a reply separately.

David Coppins
781-707-8711
dcoppins@upromise.com

[UncleScooter]

Another "glitch" in a BHO during Q4. How convenient.

[UncleScooter]

Originally Posted by David Coppins

Scenario 2:
A member installs our RemindU application (by the way, we have NEVER bundled it with third parties. It is only available on our website and as a footnote in occassional emails to our current members only. And it is a positive opt-in only!). After the application is installed, in almost all cases when a member forgets to start at Upromise and they type in a Upromise partner url, they will be re-directed through the Upromise links without going to the page described in Scenario 1.

Let's all say it together.....C-O-O-K-I-E S-T-U-F-F-I-N-G

Originally Posted by David Coppins

Scenario 3:
If a member dumps their cookies and has RemindU active on their desktop, they will get sent to the page described in Scenario 1. They are faced with the options described.

After hearing about this thread, I went on a little mission to discover the veracity of the claims. This is what I found: When the RemindU application was being set up some years ago, our engineering and website people had to have a place to send people when they weren't cookied. We already had a page set up (described in Scenario 1) and they decided to point it to that page out of efficiency. No one ever thought about the ethics of continuing to use the affiliate codes if someone chose not to receive their college savings,

Ethics? You are concerned with ethics? Let's have a chat about taking commissions from those of us who actually work for them. Let's have a chat about resetting our return day cookies. UPromise has ethics? Surely you jest.

Originally Posted by David Coppins

What are we doing about it?

Ummmm.....come in here and blow smoke up our butts?

Originally Posted by David Coppins

It is important to us that we maintain a strong positive reputation in the industry.

You mean the same industry that the likes of you are ruining? Are we talking about the same industry?

Be a real peach and give the ENTIRE commission to these poor kids so they can go to college instead of giving them only a small percentage. Be a real philanthropist!

[thecool]

What UncleScooter said:

Gene
TCS

[UncleScooter]

Looks like we scared him off.

[Donuts]

Originally Posted by Kellie aka Ms. B

Now just in case we get, it's a glitch thingie

Umm, yeah, it's a glitch... in your ethics.

Kellie already saw your lame excuse coming:
http://forum.abestweb.com/showpost.p...1&postcount=10

UPromise uses the Top Moxie parasite:
http://www.spywareguide.com/product_show.php?id=739
"Appears to have the ability to log all activity in the click stream"
"Sends ads to your computer or changes out core links with affiliate tracking links."

[vaisg]

Sounds really innocent.

So is every visit to any of the merchants' sites justifying a prompt reminding the user of their 'obligations' regardless of where the clickthrough original comes from.

I don't think any of the other affiliates working with those merchants is the list are happy about that. Don't click through from my sites if the commission is going to someone else, heck, don't even come at all. If there is a way to detect their the BHO, I would block them off completely.

[UncleScooter]

David,
I would indeed like to discuss these issues, but I prefer to do it here in an open forum.

How does UPromise justify stuffing a cookie when shoppers are not using your web site? Do you not see that as stealing commissions from legitimate publishers?

I would suggest that you suspend all operations until you can get your "glitch" fixed. Shut your entire operation down until you can operate ethically. Right now you are NOT operating ethically so you are going against your own beliefs. To operate under this condition is a direct violation of your own ethical practices. Right?

My personal opinion is that you are wrecking the affiliate marketing industry for all of us because your company is driven by one thing. This one thing is not the desire to help others. It is GREED, pure and simple. Your programmers could have put direct links to the merchants in to use when the customer opts out of using your application to make a purchase, but they didn't. I doubt your programmers make these decisions, so I can only assume that this decision was made by someone atop the UPromise ladder.

How easy is your application to completely remove from the end user's computer? Once uninstalled, do any files remain? If so, which ones and what is/are the effect(s) of such files?

Does your application monitor packet data? Does your application alter packet data?

Please answer these questions.

Thank you

[UncleScooter]

I suggest that every concerned affiliate who views this thread send a link to it to your local NBC, ABC CBS and Fox affiliate. Most TV stations now have a consumer advocate who does stories on issues where big companies are taking advantage of others. If enough of us send links to this thread, several stations are bound to pick it up and can then help educate people about how UPromise is admittedly diverting money that should rightly go to others for their own gain and doing so under a guise of philanthropy.

[Cagles Mill]

I suggest that every concerned affiliate who views this thread send a link to it to your local NBC, ABC CBS and Fox affiliate. Most TV stations now have a consumer advocate who does stories on issues where big companies are taking advantage of others. If enough of us send links to this thread, several stations are bound to pick it up and can then help educate people about how UPromise is admittedly diverting money that should rightly go to others for their own gain and doing so under a guise of philanthropy.

It probably wouldn't hurt to also send it to every company that has UPromise as an affiliate and point out to those companies that David is openly admitting to cookie stuffing and therefore are ripping off merchants by causing them to pay commissions they shouldn't have had to pay.

[UncleScooter]

Originally Posted by David Coppins, VP of online shopping at Upromise

After the application is installed, in almost all cases when a member forgets to start at Upromise and they type in a Upromise partner url, they will be re-directed through the Upromise links...

Originally Posted by CJ Publisher Agreement

Pop up/unders are acceptable on a first party basis only when triggered by Your site content /site visit or by downloadable software applications for which You are the owner/operator. Pop up/unders delivered through downloadable software cannot engage in means that force clicks or perform redirects, or pop over a pay-per-click listing or natural search results.

Bold added by me for emphasis. Read the full publisher agreement.

Here it is in black and white folks. UPromise admitting to violating CJ's Publisher Service Agreement. How much more clear can it possibly be?

Please Mr. Coppins. Please comment on this post.

[Andy]

David,

Let's talk about ethics for a second. I have an agreement with Acme Merchant to be paid a commission on all sales they garner that are initiated by an affiliate link on my site.

They also have UPromise as an affiliate.

An end user on my site reads about this wonderful product Acme Merchant offers for sale on their site, and clicks a link "Click here to buy this item". Upon arriving at the merchant site, UPromise pops up to "remind them" about the savings. It also effectively cuts me out of the deal.

And I'M THE ONE WHO SOLD THE ITEM, not UPromise!

How ethical is that?

I'm doing all the work and receive none of the benefit from it. And you want to talk about ethics and maintaining a good reputation in the industry?

Andy

[Donuts]

They've lied to themselves for so long that they believe the crap they say.

It's a defense mechanism, which allows them to sleep and night and to face their Mom's and talk about their great business success. Freud called it projection. It goes like this...

An individual who possesses malicious characteristics, but who is unwilling to perceive himself as a protagonist, convinces himself that his opponent feels and would act the same way (this paragraph from http://www.heretical.com/sexsci/bpsychol.html)

See, he thinks he's right and just and competing fairly and that we'd do as he does if we worked there or if we were smart enough to think of doing it before him.

He's blinded himself to his own actions subconciously because it's very hard to face facts when you're a leech.

Calling this a glitch is further proof of his condition.

Those of us with our eyes open and morals intact, can see he's poaching shopping carts, not bringing any new buyers, playing the masses with promises that will go unfulfilled and he's feeling darn good about it.

So have a great thanksgiving Mr. Coppins. And know that I feel so very sorry for you. Self realization is important, for the inner you, and you've completely lost site of who you are and how you impact the many human beings around you. During the holidays, try your best to enjoy the physical rewards that your cheating brings you, it's all a shallow, self-blinded, immoral man ever gets or deserves... and it doesn't last long in the grand scheme of things.

[David Coppins]

To Uncle Scooter,

CJ has certified that our RemindU application is not in violation of their publisher agreement. If my description of what happens leads you to believe that, then my description is inadequate. If you believe it is still in violation, please bring it up with CJ.

To Andy:

you said the following:
"An end user on my site reads about this wonderful product Acme Merchant offers for sale on their site, and clicks a link "Click here to buy this item". Upon arriving at the merchant site, UPromise pops up to "remind them" about the savings. It also effectively cuts me out of the deal." (sorry, i don't know how to use the nifty quote function).

As long as you are using "afsrc=" on your site for that link, then RemindU does nothing. It is inactive. Our RemindU functionality is not designed to steal traffic from any affiliate using appropriate affiliate links whether that is from your site, an email, paid search, etc. Some applications are better at keeping up with changes than others. I think Top Moxie generally does a good job of keeping up on that.

Overall, if any of you truly believe our RemindU application is in violation of accepted code of conduct, then I suggest you contact Linkshare, CJ, and Performics and launch formal complaints. They have all reviewed the software and how it functions in much greater detail than those conjecturing on this bulletin board. They are the entities that have taken a legitimate approach to testing the software and may do so again if your concerns are voiced.

That is all I will say about this subject.

[UncleScooter]

You never answered my question.

Does your application monitor and/or alter packet data??

[UncleScooter]

A parasite VP with a "glitch" in one hand and an innacurate description of his own program in the other. Some things never change.

[Andy]

David wrote:
As long as you are using "afsrc=" on your site for that link, then RemindU does nothing.

It's my understanding that standard network links are supposed to be treated the same as links with "afsrc=1" appended to them.

The "afsrc=1" links are for sites that link out using redirects. Standard network links do not need anything added to them to be "protected."

Is that not correct?

If you are allowing RemindU to be active on standard network links, I'd say you're in violation of the terms.

Andy

[Donuts]

Originally Posted by David Coppins

They are the entities that have taken a legitimate approach to testing the software and may do so again if your concerns are voiced.

They also have an inherent conflict of interest since they profit from your theft at times.

And your arguments, like afsrc=1, ignores the real world things like return days.

But, as I said, these things are not obvious to you with your self-blinders on.

And videos posted here as evidence are also easily dismissed with your compartimentilized view of scientific authority, belonging to only the networks without regard to their inherent conflicts of interest or history of ignoring theft.

[UncleScooter]

A simple Yes/No question.
Again...
Does your application monitor and/or alter packet data??

[ToddCrawford]

Originally Posted by UncleScooter

Bold added by me for emphasis. Read the full publisher agreement.

Here it is in black and white folks. UPromise admitting to violating CJ's Publisher Service Agreement. How much more clear can it possibly be?

Please Mr. Coppins. Please comment on this post.

If this functionality is part of the Upromise EULA, then it would be in compliance. In other words, this is part of the service the end user is opting in to.

[vaisg]

Originally Posted by ToddCrawford

If this functionality is part of the Upromise EULA, then it would be in compliance. In other words, this is part of the service the end user is opting in to.

Very disappointed to hear this kind of reply from a CJ rep.

So the option left for affiliates would be to avoid those merchants in their list whether or not you're in their programs via CJ. No point getting the sales via another network and then CJ starts claiming its theirs.