Verry high payouts

[nadiaasoma]

I just saw 2 programs with a verry high payout and
"random payouts" up for the seal of approvel.
That is so funny!

I am staying to vote for Rewards Divine and The Owl Post,
and than I'm out!

I will vote because Lexie and Eva still want the approvel.

I think it has no meaning anymore.

Marian

[AloraLyric]

I think you hit the nail on the head!
The seal is now worthless. It has become a popularity contest to satisfy webmaster egos.

[DAzHiredGun]

I understand what you are saying, but what would you suggest we do? The voting process was originally decided upon by Rob and Keith. From what I can determine, there were only five or six programs that were awarded the "Seal" during the time between May, 2002 and mid-December, 2002. At that point, there was a renewed interest in the Seal of Approval, perhaps due to Rob's post (on Dec. 5, 2002) outlining the new requirements.

Perhaps it has become a "popularity contest", but isn't that an underlying factor in why the Seal is awarded; because, a particular program is popular and well liked by its members? So much so, that by nominating and voting, the members get a sense of returning a reward for rewards received.

If we take our members out of the process, then we would be perceived as being prejudicial by selecting only the programs we wanted. If we allow the members to nominate freely the programs of they own chosing, then the process becomes a popularity contest and the Seal loses its value. We seem to have been placed in a "no win" situation, at present.

How should we determine who deserves recognition, if not through program membership and voting? Should we simply do away with the "Seal," ignoring the members' recommendations? Does it mean anything to know which programs are recommended by the people that actually belong to them, people that have benefited in some way?

I ask these questions in sincerity. If I did not value your input, I simply would not have responded; and, that applies to anyone who happens upon and reads this thread. If anyone has suggests, or comments, concerning the current method of awarding the GPTBoycott Seal of Approval - please post them here.

Thanks,

Ron

[AloraLyric]

I actually like the process as it is now, for the most part.
The ultimate decision relies on the four of you.. but I just wonder if you guys pay attention to the votes when you approve programs?
I mean, seeing things like " 20! (could be better...)" Does that not say something? lol

Perhaps explaining what these numbers mean would help? I'm not certain many people would pay attention, but it couldn't hurt anything.

Those are really the only two suggestions I have. There were more, but somewhere in the process of typing this, I forgot them.. lol

[nadiaasoma]

I know there is a problem and there are no simple answers.

I would like to have the 20 point system explained,
I'm not sure what they mean, so I give them 20!.
Thats because English is alien to me.

The nominations should be started by a moderator.
The discusion about a program could be verry usefull and fun,
but it should not automaticaly lead to a voting.
There are standards.
For me one of them is can I reach a payout, without referrals, within a reasenable time.
And ofcourse do they pay on time.

Thanks for reacting

Marian

[Poncer]

One thing is that people who vote all 20s for each programs is not really doing it from their heart, or not being fair. I never give everybody all perfect 20 when I vote them. People should think things through before they vote. All the programs out there are not 100% perfect.

[in2travel]

I feel that the Seal still has some meaning. Otherwise I wouldn't nominate or vote for a program if I didn't think it did.

Does this mean that the program will still be around in 6 months or a year? Who knows.

Maybe the issue can be revisted every 6 months or so? So you have the original nomination, then it has to get another 20 votes when the time comes to keep the Seal.

Let's face it. Situations change, WM's may not be able to keep their site due to various reasons, or a once good program could deteriorate due to lack of participation / funds / advertising, or you could simply unsubscribe for your own reasons.

Many factors come into it.

As for the voting and the marks, you are voting compared to the other programs you are in. If you feel there is one better out there, then nominate your own. When I have voted, it's been my own experience with the WM and the program. I don't see why my marks should be lowered. If you have a problem with a site, then vote for it and give it the marks you think it deserves.

Thems my thoughts!!!

[in2travel]

Sorry guys but I don't understand how you can't understand - Rate this program out of 20.

1 being the lowest - 20 being the highest.

The mods can't tell you what to compare it to. It's your own personal jusdgement. There is no right or wrong.

Just because a program is nominated, doesn't mean you have to go and give it 20's across the board - if YOU think it doesn't deserve it. Give it whatever score YOU think is appropriate. This is not a popularity forum. No one else has the right to tell you how to vote - and if they think they do, report them to a moderator.

I don't see why you all think the Seal has no meaning any more. Look at the amount of programs there are out there and compare it to the amount that have the seal.

As for programs with higher payouts, why shouldn't they be nominated? People work very hard to get downlines, advertise etc. RewardsDivine payout is only $13.00 - not high at all compared to some other programs. It might take a little longer to reach payout, but if you participate, it can be done.

I'm not having a go at anyone - please don't take my comments the wrong way. I'm just stating my opinion - not trying to provoke anyone.

Thanks

[summersun]

I think you are quite right the in2travel.

If there is something that would change on the approval voting, it would maybe be to clear out to members who vote that they should NOT compare the sites to other sites they are a member of.
I think the only proper way to vote for a program is to look at that one program with an objective mind.

And for the 20 and 20+++ votes, i think that not one single program is perfect, so if a program get's all 20's it isn't rated properly.

I have seen it on the voting that is going on for my own site, some members voted all 20's, but i think that's not right, i too make mistakes, and i have a cac, so there are bugs in the script, i try to solve all problems that arise as good as i can, but when a member is hit by a bug in the script, how can they vote 20 for software reliability?

That's just one example, i think that we just should all be shaken awake, and rate the program as standing on it's own.

Just my thoughts, and just as in2travel, this is not meant to be against anyone, i appreciate that my site is voted for very much and i like getting good votes, but i think that for me the seal has more value when my sites is rated faily, and i can't speak for other webmasters, but i think that maube there are more that feel teh same way.

I see the seal as the final recognition of my site, wich gives my site a standard where people can see what my program is worth.

peter

[AloraLyric]

Originally posted by Poncer
One thing is that people who vote all 20s for each programs is not really doing it from their heart, or not being fair. I never give everybody all perfect 20 when I vote them. People should think things through before they vote. All the programs out there are not 100% perfect.

OR.. they don't understand the marks.. :) but I agree w/ya


In2 - First of all, you have to be a member of the program to vote on it. If I don't like a program for whatever reasons, I'm not going to be a member (either by unsubbing or simply not signing up in the first place) - therefore, I can't vote.

Secondly, *I* understand what those marks mean. 20 is "perfect" meaning no room for improvement. I see 20's across the board all the time, but is any program run by a human ever really going to be "perfect" ?

Just because YOU and I understand those marks doesn't mean that others do, and that has been supported now. A simple explanation of what the numbers mean could help. The mods aren't saying what to "compare it to" - they are explaining what the numbers mean so you CAN compare it. :)

And... as for the higher payout programs.. well, why doesn't someone wait until a real cashout (FULL cashout) is paid before nominating and approving? Heck, the sites with the smaller payouts seem to have to pay 50 billion and 3 people - all on time - to be approved.. lol

[AloraLyric]

Originally posted by summersun
And for the 20 and 20+++ votes, i think that not one single program is perfect, so if a program get's all 20's it isn't rated properly.

but i think that for me the seal has more value when my sites is rated faily, and i can't speak for other webmasters, but i think that maube there are more that feel teh same way.

I see the seal as the final recognition of my site, wich gives my site a standard where people can see what my program is worth.

peter

Exactly! :)

This was why I said "the seal is now worthless" - bc programs aren't being rated fairly.
I'm not trying to attack any one person.. or program, for that matter. If a high payout site really deserves the seal, then great! But looking over the votes and seeing people write that things could be better and then still giving a 20... well...
It should be taken into consideration before approving the sites... perhaps a program doesn't deserve the seal after all, but people just didn't know how to rate it, so gave a 20?

[nadiaasoma]

I did not say that I do not rate a site, I just have a problem with
the meaning of the toppics. So when I approve a nomination
I vote all 20.
I should be more specific about why I vote yes.

And when I mention high payouts. I mean $500!!!!
I feel verry strongly about that.
You are free to like such a program but I think It should
never get the seal of approval from this forum.

Marian

[DAzHiredGun]

Looks like someone has hit a nerve with this thread; but, I see no need for tempers to flair. We're here trying to work out a problem, right?

Looks as if the most prevalent issue has to do with scoring. Frankly, I've never had the scoring explained to me and rarely participated in the voting process - until I became part owner. The end result is based on percentages taken from totalling the scores in each category. Percentages being based on parts of 100, then 20=100%, 15=75% and so forth. The minimum score allowed is 87%, the equivalent of 17.4. Anything below 17.4 does not meet the minimum requirement.

Yes, AloraLyric, we do pay attention to the scores, as well as the comments, lol; I'm the one that does the percentages. However, neither the comments, nor + marks, affect the score in any way. Some are viewed as excitement, some as sarcasm. Personally, I find it difficult to believe any program deserves a perfect score, but scoring is the voter's decision, not mine.

As to programs with high payout, the real question is "do they pay?" If so, why shouldn't the program be given equal consideration for the Seal? I have used programs with a higher payout than I liked, but also had points that I used for advertising; so, therein lay the value of the program, for me.

That brings another question to light. Considering the number of votes concerning payment, how does one evaluate a program effectively, yet claim "I haven't been paid yet, but..." ? Should voting be restricted to include only those who have been paid, since two/fifths of the process concerns payment?


Ron

[in2travel]

I thought the whole point of voting was that you are an active member of the program you are voting for. That way you are voting for all the 5 categories - based on your experience with the company. And yes, I think you should only be voting if you have been paid out. I didn't realize that people are voting anyway - even if they are not member. That defeats the purpose.

As I said before, maybe the voting can be revisited every 6? months. If the standard of 87% is not met, then the Seal is taken away. The problem there is getting members to come back and vote. Or perhaps the co-owners can read through the folder here that have discussions on the approved programs to see the type of feedback they have there. If they feel negative comments are coming in about a program that has the seal, then maybe they can ask for the program to be voted on again. I'm not talking about just one negative post - but several.

I thought the whole point of this forum was to reward the programs that have a certain standard they maintain, and to boycott the ones that don't do that. Perhaps giving a company 20's all round may not be the correct thing to do because as you say, there are certain problems with sites/scripts. However, go to any forum and compare the "praises" to the "complaints" . The complaints far outweigh the praises. So why shouldn't the companies doing the right thing be awarded the Seal? We're quick enough to jump up and down and post when a company does something and everyone yells "scam", but what about when a company is doing the right thing? It's not that the seal doesn't mean anything, it doesn't mean anything to US. I would hope that program owners would disagree and tell us that the seal does mean something.

Perhaps there could be brief descriptions on the categories we are voting on. I don't think it's the marks that people don't understand but rather the categories being voted on. Perhaps with better clarification, the voting will adjust accordingly.

Again, I am only stating my opinion. I don't have a solution but perhaps with all of us discussing issues like this, we may come to one.

[nadiaasoma]

You should see my temper when I'm angry Ron, lol.

Yes they do pay.

They pay a verry select number of members who manage to
get a lot of referrals who will work for them and don't reach payout themselves.

As for me I don't join those programs when I'm alert enough
to notice the payoutlevel.
Gpt-boycot has contributed to my vieuws about this issue
and I'm sad and angry to see a seal of emproval go to
those programs.

I shal not be voting because I'm not a member, the responsebility
is all yours as owner.

I would like some more information about the technical part,
conserning the voting, such as bugs etc.
It would help if the more experianced member give their opinion when they discuss a program.

Marian

[in2travel]

Hi Marian

Those sort of high paying programs LOL. I thought that because you mentioned high payouts and then Rewards Divine and The Owl Post in you original post that you meant THEY had high payouts. Sorry. My misunderstanding and I appologize.

And I am not a member of very high paying programs either. Otherwise my grandchildren would be clicking and payout would still not be in sight - LMAO. Of course, there are members that can get the downlines and put in the time to make these work - but I'm not one of them. Sheesh - I get 20 referrals and I'm over the moon!! But for those that can reach payout, then I guess they have the right to nominate and vote. It's just not something that I can offer an opinion on as I am not a member.

[nadiaasoma]

Oke in2travel,

I am a grandmother, in my case my grandchildrens grandchildren would have to click.

thanks for your opinion, you do have one.

Marian

[Poncer]

Jays-PaidMail was nominated because not just the high payout, but because members could earn a lot of money faster than other sites. I happened to earn like $10 per month one time without any refs.

[nadiaasoma]

Wow, thats $120 a year!
You only have to click for 4 years.

sorry Poncer

Marian

[Poncer]

Well, I joined last April, and have earned a total of more than $110. That includes the signup bonus, the referral bonuses, and what I have earned from my downline.

[nadiaasoma]

You can only cashout referralbonusses when they reach payout.
And they never will.

Poncer be a social guy or girl choose some good ones!

Marian

[shaykedelik]

is it possible to make kinda like a dropdown list for every category & meanings?
like customer service:
5= responds in a few hours
to
1= never heard from them

or something to that effect so at least everyone who votes have something to base their votes on...
if not, just make a desription for every score...

some people give perfect 20's kuz they think that its a great site & wm!

[AloraLyric]

Originally posted by shaykedelik
like customer service:
5= responds in a few hours
to
1= never heard from them

or something to that effect so at least everyone who votes have something to base their votes on...
if not, just make a desription for every score...

That would be great! :)
Something simple and brief.. but still helps voters understand better..

I also like in2's suggestion about explaining the categories we are voting on.

[Poncer]

Originally posted by nadiaasoma
You can only cashout referralbonusses when they reach payout.
And they never will.

Poncer be a social guy or girl choose some good ones!

Marian


Well, We can't get the bonuses until they cash out, but there are other things as well. Jay's is much better than CashRead because it is not a scam like CashRead.

[nadiaasoma]

I don't know if it is a scam Poncer.
We will know in about 3 years when more people reach payout,
when it is still there when that happens it is no scam.
But I don't like it, sorry.

Marian

[Poncer]

Well, we can't say all the high payout are scams which is not true since there are some low payouts that are ones. RateMail completely disappeared from the Internet, and I still have not got my request for pay in yet. :(

[shaykedelik]

and as she said, she doesn't know if it is a scam or not! just wait & see! high payout or not, no one can say for sure if any one is a scam until they've been burned!
everyone is entitled to their opinion. i don't think jay's a scam! i trust him & sherry! but there are just some others just need solid proof before they believe! so lets all just leave it at that! just wait & see! if they are still there (as well as other high payout gpt's) when people start reaching payout & they actually pay, then good! you can slap that at their face & say "see? told ya so"... if not, well, boohoo i guess!!!

[Enchanted]

Ok I am probably too late to post this but I will anyway.

About giving 20's acorss the board, let me clarify. I am one of them, the reason? We are voting based on OUR OPINION. Not what you read in other forums or what other people have to say.

If there has been a bug, it has not affected me and I have not lost anything in the process - I will give 20. Why shouldn't I? I am judging based on MY OPINION of the program.

If the payment has been sent within a few days of requesting,
I will give 20. Why? Because I was paid, and it is MY OPINION.
It does not matter to me if a member has complained about it
for non payment. I was paid, it is my opinion.

If the webmaster has given me a good response (customer
service), whether he or she has given a good response
to someone else or not does not matter. If he/ she has given
customer service which I feel is satisfactory, I will give 20.
Reason? It is my opinion.

Operating history - Any program that has been around for over
6 months without any major flop deserves to be given 20
points because surviving for that long is not easy, especially
with new programs popping up and difficulty in attracting
advertisers etc.

Fair payment rates - why not? If the minimum payout is
not a problem in MY opinion, if the referral structure is good in
MY opinion, then yes, I will give 20.

*****

So before anyone goes around saying a program is not being
rated fairly just because it is given 20 across the board, THINK
again. SOME of us rate the program based on OUR opinion,
not what you pick up from some forum.


Thanks!

[DAzHiredGun]

Well said, Enchanted !

Due to the recent questions and comments concerning the Seal of Approval, we "may" be changing a few things - hopefully for the better.

Personally, I agree that the waiting period should be extended; but, I am uncertain to what time frame. Six months, nine months, one year - which is best?

As to voting, should we change from 0-20 to 0-100, since the vote requires a minimum average of 87 to receive the Seal? Would 0-100 be more easily understood?


Ron

[Enchanted]

These are my views about the seal of approval.

1. The program should be running for at least 6 months in
order to be nominated. This in my opinion, is sufficient time
to form a reasonable judgement of the program. At the rate
the seal of approval is being given, as I said earlier, more than
90% will end up getting it. I am not saying it is bad. But look
how many disappear after a time.

2. I personally do not think the 20 votes is sufficient to give
the seal of approval for any program. For example, some
programs have a memberbase of over 10,000 and some only
about 1,500 to 2,000. If the webmaster sends a mail to all
his/her members announcing that their program is under
nomination or voting, who do you think will get the quicker
response? So I think the number of votes to get the seal of
approval should be a certain % of the entire member base.

3. The number of nominations should be limited. I think it was
there before. But I see quite a lot of programs nominated and
under voting. If you limit it to not more than 3 nominations at
a time and voting needing to be completed of the programs
that are already under voting BEFORE nominating anymore will
streamline the number of programs in both threads. I see that
voting of some programs are painfully slow. You don't need to
be a rocket scientist to figure out why.

4. I don't think webmasters should send either incentivised or
non-incentivised links to their members announcing that their
programs are under voting. Naturally members will feel obliged
to visit the link and perhaps vote. I think that it is the members
who should pass the word around in forums or whatever that
xyz program is under voting. Webmasters should not influence
members in any way.

5. Why not include more categories to vote on? Or you can
distribute the 20 points based on "poor", "average",
"satisfactory", "good" and "excellent". Say something like
this:

Poor : 4 points
Average: 8 points
Satisfactory: 12 points
Good: 16 points
Excellent: 20 points

Giving 0-100 is ok but I feel it would complicate things more.

6. Programs from which the seal of approval has been withdrawn, should wait for 6 months more in order to be
nominated once again. This will be sufficient time for the
program to prove itself again.

Ok, will post more as and when I get more ideas :)

[summersun]

uhm,


just a thought,

should it not be forbidden to send a mail to the members when voting for a site is on?
I mean, my site is up there too, but i will not send out a mail to my members asking them to vote, if i do that, it makes me feel that i influence the voting process, and i feel that it should happen without my interference?

Maybe i'm stupid, but that's how i feel on the voting, i see it as a compliment from the members when they vote.

just my 0.000001 cents.
peter

[Enchanted]

Actually, I agree with you Peter. Point 4 in my post suggests the same thing.

quote;
4. I don't think webmasters should send either incentivised or
non-incentivised links to their members announcing that their
programs are under voting. Naturally members will feel obliged
to visit the link and perhaps vote. I think that it is the members
who should pass the word around in forums or whatever that
xyz program is under voting. Webmasters should not influence
members in any way.
unquote;

[nadiaasoma]

That's not fair Enchanted, some programs are not as popular as
others. There must be room for more than just the big ones!

Besides, I think that there are members who are afraid to vote.
Afraid to lose the goodwill of other webmasters.


The question that should be asked is do we continue to have
a populairity contest or should we have standards other than
do they pay? and is the webmaster friendly enough.

I so much like your username,

Marian

[Enchanted]

Hi Marian,

What is it that is not fair in my opinion? Actually I disagree with you.

1. By sending either incentivised or non-incentivised mails,
webmasters are actually influencing members to come here
and vote for them. My point exactly, there must be room for
more than just the big ones. Programs with bigger member
bases get through the voting much quicker than programs
with a smaller member base. I personally feel that it is the
members who should pass the message around by posting in
forums etc that a program is under voting. Take Postal Pennies
for example, Peter has not sent a single mail to his members
informing them that PP is under voting and to "visit the Boycott
forum and vote if they felt he deserved the seal". I posted in
both TKO Forum and GP Forum about voting for Postal Pennies.
Why? Because I am a member of it and I feel it deserves the
seal.

2. I disagree with you about members being afraid to vote
because they fear losing the goodwill of other webmasters.
Webmasters who behave that way should close shop and
engage themselves in a business they do not have any
competition whatsoever, IF they are ever able to find one.
I like Postal Pennies, it is my No.1 program, but that would
not stop me from voting for Rewards Divine or any other
program. Why? Who says that I should not show my
appreciation of other programs run by webmasters who
are as good as Peter?

3. Actually, at this point, my opinion is that the seal of
approval has become a popularity contest with webmasters
either directly or indirectly influencing members to vote for
them.

I also feel that there should be more categories to vote on.
Some webmasters send search links (too many), and
members still give 20 across the board even through some
actually do not like search mails. Some webmasters have
a lot of competitions and other ways that a member can
earn and win free things like advertising, banner impressions
etc. These are not taken into consideration either.

I hope Rob and Ron will not get offended by my continued
posts on this. I am making these posts because I respect
them 100% and my comments are only suggestions as a
proud member of this forum.

Ok, as a last comment, would you really value something that
you can get easily or something that you have to really work
for? I appreciate things that I work hard in order to get.

Dil.

p.s. Thanks, glad you like my username.

[AloraLyric]

Originally posted by Enchanted

2. I disagree with you about members being afraid to vote
because they fear losing the goodwill of other webmasters.

3. Actually, at this point, my opinion is that the seal of
approval has become a popularity contest with webmasters
either directly or indirectly influencing members to vote for
them.

I also feel that there should be more categories to vote on.
Some webmasters send search links (too many), and
members still give 20 across the board even through some
actually do not like search mails. Some webmasters have
a lot of competitions and other ways that a member can
earn and win free things like advertising, banner impressions
etc. These are not taken into consideration either.


2. I have to disagree. *I* am one of those people who usually refrains from posting bc I don't want to lose my account at a particular site. The webmaster has been known to delete member accounts for posting things he doesn't like hearing (and yet, still got the seal of approval). If I still cared, lol, I would probably refrain from voting, too.

3. Agreed!

And about those 20's across the board... lol, well, that was my point! I know you disagreed earlier with your post about it being "YOUR opinion" but not everyone knows what these numbers mean! Not everyone considers the factor's before putting 20's across the board. Maybe you do. I still don't believe any program is perfect!

I see these votes as.. "Yipee! I like this program! 20! 20! 20!" instead of "Well, this isn't perfect, of course, but is still excellent - 18!"

Heck, maybe *I* have the numbers wrong! Maybe 20 doesn't mean "perfect" but instead, just means "great" or something. It needs to be explained better. :)

[Enchanted]

Hi,

If any webmaster deletes members for voting for another
program, then they should not be given the seal at all.
Such webmasters must be really "sick" to do it. If I knew
of such a webmaster, I would definitely name him/her and
ask him/her to roll up his/her program and put it in a place
I am not going to post here. They are "total losers" who
are afraid of competition. In other words, "chickens".

As for 20 across the board, actually, I have given less than
20 for programs I feel are sending too many search links
etc. Whatever the 20's I have given, I sincerely meant them.
You see, I don't think a program has to be perfect to get
20's. It has to perform up to our expectation. If they do,
I see no reason why they should not be given 20's.


I had also suggested to distribute the 20 points based on
performance, which I am copy/ pasting here. Then we
know exactly how much each is worth.

quote;
5. Why not include more categories to vote on? Or you can
distribute the 20 points based on "poor", "average",
"satisfactory", "good" and "excellent". Say something like
this:

Poor : 4 points
Average: 8 points
Satisfactory: 12 points
Good: 16 points
Excellent: 20 points
unquote;

** I am enjoying this conversation **

:)

[nadiaasoma]

Asking members to vote is "common goods".
Hey, even Jay Dillar did it for Fancy Cash Email.
I happen to be a member.

You are free to promote Postal Pennies, I don't like it.
I was a member for some time just because it is Dutch but
I couldn't stand it any longer.

20 Votes is a lot for a program as Rewards Divine.
She has worked so hard for this program, I admire her so much
for her persistence and believes.
I wish 10 was enough.

I agree with you that there should be more catogories to vote on,
or just more discussion about existing catogories.
I think random payouts and random redemptions are violating rights.
If I reach payout I want to be paid.
If I reach a redemption I want to redeem.
And giving members "random Payouts" is rewarding some
members above others.
I don't mean programs that are just starting and have to find their way. I think that it's oke for a while, but not in the long run.

I agree with you on the searches, I give every program one search a day.
It's a new thing, programs that send only searches.
I think it's oke but they should mention it on their homepage so
we have a choice of joining or not.

There is room for discussion.

Marian

[Enchanted]

Hi Marian,

Good to see you again :) Now for my counter-replies
(I am avoiding the word argument because this is not
one :) )

1. Just because Jay sent mails that voting for Fancy Cash
Mail was in progress, it does not make it "right". My
point is that sending mails to members about it by a
webmaster himself is "influencing" them to come here
and vote, thereby making the voting process finish
quicker. How difficult do you think it is for Jay to find 20
people to vote for any program of his? It's a piece of
cake! I happen to be a member of Jay's programs and
I wish I received mails from all their programs daily.

2. If you do not like postal pennies, it is fine. I am sure
Peter would not mind it either. He is one of the nicest
people I have had the fortune to meet and I have got
very good results promoting my ads in PP. Just for your
record, I got 14 referrals in one program from a top
sponsorship ad for "ONE" day. On that particular day,
only about 3 mails were sent. This is nothing compared
to over 35 referrals I got for Cheechong Clicks. I have
promoted my links in so many other programs and I
have never got the response I got from PP. I would say
it was "luck" if it happened just once. But the above are
only TWO examples out of many.

3. As for Rewards Divine, I simply love lexie. She is great
and deserves the seal because she is putting so much
effort into it. I am yet to come across someone who does
not like her or RD.

4. I don't see random payouts as violating rights. To me,
it adds a little excitement and expectation. Even though
I have never got any random payouts, I still like them.

5. About searches, well in some programs, you can choose.
I never search as a rule because there are certain sites that
do not pay for traffic webmasters get from asian countries.
So it is unfair for me to search not knowing whether they
get paid for the search I perform or not. So I stay away
from searches.

Yes, there is indeed room for discussion.

:)

p.s You say that you were with PP because it is Dutch. You
are Dutch?

[Enchanted]

Hi Marian,

Sorry I asked whether you are Dutch. I see that you are indeed.

:)

[nadiaasoma]

I just want to thank AloraLyric for comming forward.
It seemed a bit paranoid to think that members are afraid to vote.
I'm glad I am not.

At least you can post it here if you are deleted.

thanks

Marian

[Poncer]

Originally posted by AloraLyric


2. I have to disagree. *I* am one of those people who usually refrains from posting bc I don't want to lose my account at a particular site. The webmaster has been known to delete member accounts for posting things he doesn't like hearing (and yet, still got the seal of approval). If I still cared, lol, I would probably refrain from voting, too.

3. Agreed!

And about those 20's across the board... lol, well, that was my point! I know you disagreed earlier with your post about it being "YOUR opinion" but not everyone knows what these numbers mean! Not everyone considers the factor's before putting 20's across the board. Maybe you do. I still don't believe any program is perfect!

I see these votes as.. "Yipee! I like this program! 20! 20! 20!" instead of "Well, this isn't perfect, of course, but is still excellent - 18!"

Heck, maybe *I* have the numbers wrong! Maybe 20 doesn't mean "perfect" but instead, just means "great" or something. It needs to be explained better. :)


I know who you are talking about, and I voted, and made some criticism about the same webmaster you talked about in my voting. I still have my account there, but if we all be truthful about how we feel, webmasters may take that into account, and improve themselves. If someone yells scam to loudly about a program when it is not true, than you can expect trouble.

[nadiaasoma]

Good point Poncer.

Yes Enchanted, since all the programs are basicly promoting
their advertising to us, it would be a good thing when the
ratings should also cover the results.

Catagory advertisement.

But I must say you are probably a verry good advertiser to
get such results.
I'm around for a year and a halve and I'm not so experianced.
So I get other results!
I'm still learning.

Marian

[Enchanted]

Good idea Marian, advertising should be a category indeed.

I am not sure whether I am a good advertiser or not (probably, considering I got 17 sign ups for AYS for a non paid ad :) )
but in this instance, I just copy pasted what is in the program's front page, you know 2 cents per mail etc etc. I am learning too.

:)

[summersun]

Originally posted by nadiaasoma


You are free to promote Postal Pennies, I don't like it.
I was a member for some time just because it is Dutch but
I couldn't stand it any longer.



Hi Marian,

i am just sooooo curious what you couldn't stand about my program?

Sorry peeps, i'm off topic.

peter

[DAzHiredGun]

Originally posted by Enchanted
I hope Rob and Ron will not get offended by my continued
posts on this. I am making these posts because I respect
them 100% and my comments are only suggestions as a
proud member of this forum.


Offended? Absolutely not !! If I felt you were being less than entirely honest, I would be offended; but, knowing you as I do, that is not an issue. Your comments, as well as those from Marian and the others posting here, are more than welcome and very much appreciated.

I must apologize for not being able to respond before now. For several days, I was experiencing problems with unwanted pop-ups freezing my computer; but, more important, my Dad had surgery on an artery in his neck. The surgery was elsewhere in the state; so, I've been online very little during the past week. Fortunately, both Dad is recovering well; and, the computer problems seem to have been resolved.

Also, I must confess that I have perhaps been instrumental in one of the issues that has been mentioned. I have suggested to several webmasters, recently, that they contact their membership and advise them of the nominations and voting. I was trying to be realistic and take into consideration the member database of the respective programs versus the membership of GPTBoycott. By suggesting to the webmasters that they contact their members, I was hoping to expedite the voting process through increasing the number of eligible voters here at GPTBoycott, keeping in mind that one must be a member here in order to cast a vote. Admittedly, this was a vehicle to increase our own membership and a method of advertising GPTBoycott. Hopefully, with increased membership, we gain input, information and knowledge - which, frankly, was my hidden goal. Our knowledge base increases in direct proportion to our member base; therefore, the greater the knowledge base, the better able we are to inform and educate, which is, in and of itself, the entire purpose for the existence of GPTBoycott.com.


Ron

[CyberEarth]

Maybe the polling questions should be changed. Or maybe it's ignorance of users not knowing how much a payout actually is. I can't count the number of GPT programs I've seen that "hide" their payout rate somewhere.

A few yes/no questions like Have You Been Paid? or Have you referred this program to personal friends/family?
These things I feel are important, and there's bound to be others. At the moment this is all I can think of. Obviously a program that scores all 20's across the board, then gets a 1% Yes in Have you been paid might not be a good idea.

Just a suggestion. I find it more engaging if the types of answers required are varied.

[Enchanted]

I don't agree with you on this one Ron.

Members should come here and register because they have heard good things about Boycott Forum and because they feel it to be a forum where they can get a lot of knowledge/ insights, not just to vote for a program and then leave and never come back till someone else gets nominated and needs a vote. The only thing Boycott might end up is a big memberbase and what good is a huge memberbase without good input from the members? I am not saying that getting members to vote is not good input but that is simply IMO, not enough by way of contribution towards your unique site.

:(

Originally posted by DAzHiredGun

Also, I must confess that I have perhaps been instrumental in one of the issues that has been mentioned. I have suggested to several webmasters, recently, that they contact their membership and advise them of the nominations and voting. I was trying to be realistic and take into consideration the member database of the respective programs versus the membership of GPTBoycott. By suggesting to the webmasters that they contact their members, I was hoping to expedite the voting process through increasing the number of eligible voters here at GPTBoycott, keeping in mind that one must be a member here in order to cast a vote. Admittedly, this was a vehicle to increase our own membership and a method of advertising GPTBoycott. Hopefully, with increased membership, we gain input, information and knowledge - which, frankly, was my hidden goal. Our knowledge base increases in direct proportion to our member base; therefore, the greater the knowledge base, the better able we are to inform and educate, which is, in and of itself, the entire purpose for the existence of GPTBoycott.com.


Ron

[DAzHiredGun]

Originally posted by Enchanted
I don't agree with you on this one Ron.

Members should come here and register because they have heard good things about Boycott Forum and because they feel it to be a forum where they can get a lot of knowledge/ insights, not just to vote for a program and then leave and never come back till someone else gets nominated and needs a vote. The only thing Boycott might end up is a big memberbase and what good is a huge memberbase without good input from the members? I am not saying that getting members to vote is not good input but that is simply IMO, not enough by way of contribution towards your unique site.

:(



OK, you don't have to agree, LOL. I happen to agree with you about WHY they should come here. I still remember how I got here. It was quite by accident, after running some terms through a search engine. When I first came here, I thought I was going to get paid to boycott something, LOL. After reading a few posts, I realized that getting paid here WAS NOT the idea behind this site. Then, I wrote about EmailTreasures and "met" a lot of nice folks through that thread, including Rob, Taff and Keith. The rest is history, so-to-speak.

But, that was the whole point. How do they get here? I had never heard of forums before this one; I guess that's why I've always considered this "home." If there are others out there, like me, who have never heard of this place and perhaps never will, except through an e-mail sent by a webmaster whose program is being voted on; then, heck yes, I want them to send it. I want the people to come here and vote; AND, hopefully they will look around, like what they see and come back.


Ron

[nadiaasoma]

I think it's a good thing, all sorts of people voting for a program they like.
There should be straight questions to answer, like CyberEarth
mentioned.
But if you want more people coming in we should promote
the homepage. We can do that!
Please put a link up here.

Marian

[aaronavouris]

That's why I stopped voting in the first place, because tons of people would give all 20's to a program when none deserves it.

Well, that and the Seal has gone completely away from the intention that it was supposed to have when Rob, Keith and I derived it...


Originally posted by summersun
I think you are quite right the in2travel.

If there is something that would change on the approval voting, it would maybe be to clear out to members who vote that they should NOT compare the sites to other sites they are a member of.
I think the only proper way to vote for a program is to look at that one program with an objective mind.

And for the 20 and 20+++ votes, i think that not one single program is perfect, so if a program get's all 20's it isn't rated properly.

I have seen it on the voting that is going on for my own site, some members voted all 20's, but i think that's not right, i too make mistakes, and i have a cac, so there are bugs in the script, i try to solve all problems that arise as good as i can, but when a member is hit by a bug in the script, how can they vote 20 for software reliability?

That's just one example, i think that we just should all be shaken awake, and rate the program as standing on it's own.

Just my thoughts, and just as in2travel, this is not meant to be against anyone, i appreciate that my site is voted for very much and i like getting good votes, but i think that for me the seal has more value when my sites is rated faily, and i can't speak for other webmasters, but i think that maube there are more that feel teh same way.

I see the seal as the final recognition of my site, wich gives my site a standard where people can see what my program is worth.

peter

[AloraLyric]

Originally posted by aaronavouris
That's why I stopped voting in the first place, because tons of people would give all 20's to a program when none deserves it.

Well, that and the Seal has gone completely away from the intention that it was supposed to have when Rob, Keith and I derived it...
Completely agree!

Will anything be changed? Or are we just posting for the heck of it (hey, I needed more posts anyway..lol)?

[DAzHiredGun]

Originally posted by AloraLyric

Completely agree!

Will anything be changed? Or are we just posting for the heck of it (hey, I needed more posts anyway..lol)?

Yes, I happen to think some changes will be made. There is a thread started in the mod folder concerning some of the things being discussed here, as well as one or two other threads on the site.

I'm concerned about the entire process and have a number of questions bouncing around in my head.

To mention a few, for instance:

Is the waiting period long enough prior to nomination?

Should the number of required voters be increased (in %) in direct proportion to the member base of the program being considered?

What other areas should be tested aside from the five currently in use?


Ron

[Enchanted]

1. Ok, first IMO, I still think a program should be around for at least 6 months for it to be nominated. Just because a program with a low minimum payout has paid dozens of members does not qualify much in the "OPERATING HISTORY" (I think I named the category correct....). How can anyone vote on "operating history" if the program has been around only a couple of months or so?

2. Yes IMO, the number of voters should be a % of the entire memberbase. For example, how difficult to you think it is for a program like Jays to get 20 votes against a program like Rewards Divine? Their memberbases are so ... well you cannot even compare. So is it right that each program has to get 20 voters to get the seal?

3. About more categories, I think its mentioned somewhere in this thread. :) :) :)


Also Ron, if you want Boycott Forum to get more members, maybe you should ask the webmasters whether they can display the boycott banner instead of them saying "my program is under voting, if you feel I deserve the seal, please vote for me" which IMO is influencing members.

I am open to that knock on my head lol.

[nadiaasoma]

A small list with questions before voting can make people
more aware of what they are doing.
Maybe even starting a proces of learning about gptr.
It is a major goal of this forum isn't it?

Marian

[DAzHiredGun]

Currently, there are two programs, MailingHeaven and QuickRewards, being nominated for the GPTBoycott Seal of Approval. These are the last two nominations to be accepted until further notice.

Largely due to the number of questions, observations and comments that have come forth in this thread, concerning the process of awarding the GPTBoycott Seal of Approval, nominations have been suspended. The moderators are currently discussing and evaluating these issues.

Your thoughts, comments, suggestions and/or recommendations are welcome. Be assured, ALL comments will be considered. I am of the opinion this is as much YOUR "Seal" as it is our's; you should have something to say about how it is awarded.


Thanks,

Ron

[mrbike]

As Artie Johnson once said: "verrrry interesting". I hope that I am not too late to post to this thread. I am sorry that I can't remember who said what, but I'd like to address a few of the items that have been discussed. I think that one of the best ideas that was brought forth was the idea of drop down boxes to base your vote on. It would remind those of us what all of the catagories are, and maybe give a better point value of each of the catagories. As far as the all 20's votes goes, there is no program or person that is perfect, but I base my vote on, if I have a problem, was it handled professionally, and to a result that was acceptable with me, and is the site the best that it can be with the scripts that they are running. I think that the voting catagories should have a cap based on the sites scripts. For instance, I like the sites better that have a timer, and want to give that site a higher vote. Maybe we could come up with a system where If a site doesn't have a timer, it would only be able to get 15 out of 20 points, This would have to be voted on by the members of this forum, to see what the most desired aspects of a program are. This should go across the board for all the catagories. The higher the pay out is on the site, the lower the point value should be. If a site has been around only 6 months, how can most people (who don't have a lot of referrals) rate a site for payouts that has a $500.00 payout limit. Maybe the waiting time should be longer for the sites that have a high payout amount. Is it possible to give a site a higher rating based on, say, randum payouts, or other goodies that the site offers, such as referrals for signing up for certain programs? These are just some of my thoughts. Thanks for listening!

[Enchanted]

Have you ever considered a member having a particular number of posts here before being allowed to vote? Eg. at least 10 posts or 12 posts before posting? I see that some members first post is at the nomination stage/ voting stage or after voting stage.

No good.

[DAzHiredGun]

mrbike, it's never too late to post here. You comments are welcome and appreciated.

Enchanted, in a word, no. Personally, I have not considered a required number of posts, or a required time frame as a member here. I doubt it's ever been considered - BUT, it definitely will be! Like you, I have also noticed an increased number of voters having only 1 or 2 posts. However, I am more inclined to think longivity with the respective program should be of more concern than length of membership or number of posts here at GPTBoycott.


Ron

[DAzHiredGun]

Let me toss this thought out.

Considering 2/5s of the vote has to do with Payment History and Payment Rates, doesn't it stand to reason that for a voter to be able to adequately rate the program, the voter should have been paid? How can one effectively rate Payment History without having been paid?


Ron

[nadiaasoma]

There are programs where I rather get paid with an ad-redemption.

My favorit program is Mokercash, I can get so much points there,
when I want to advertise something I can do that as much as I like!

That should count too, it does for me.

Getting paid is not allways my first concern, but I do look at my
earnings too.

Even with low payout-programs it takes a while to reach
payout without referrals.
A better rule could be a membership of at least a year.

Marian

[nadiaasoma]

I suggest that we close this thread.
See what the moderators come up with and than discuss it
in a new thread started by Ron.
Verry high payouts will always be on my list of posting but
I let it rest for now.

Marian

[BaroqueXena]

I have to confess to being one of those people who voted 20's right across the board, but I can't think of any faults that Emaillionaires has.

I just wanted to say one thing about advertising the board and the seal of approval, you might be able to say that you can't send out emails advertising that you are nominated, but what about posting in forums? There are so many forums around that it would be difficult to monitor that. Also, if you did say that you couldn't post anywhere asking people to vote then what about people who post slating the program, saying that it shouldn't be up for nomination and urging people to vote against it?

[DAzHiredGun]

Personally, I am not opposed to sending e-mails out, or posting in forums, to inform members of a program's nomination or the voting process. There have been some eyebrows raised at incentivised e-mails being sent out by program owners, alleging "votes were bought", essentially. I happen to look at it as paid advertising. Whether or not a person votes is a decision that remains with the individual, not the webmaster.


Ron

[BaroqueXena]

Hmmm........ I seem to have left that last post half way through, sorry I had to take a phone call and I was rushing it.

To finish that thought, if you were to stop people advertising that their program was up for nomination and somebody else started telling people to not vote for them or rather, give really low scores, then the webmaster would not be able to come back and reply, in case it was seen as promoting their program.

[BaroqueXena]

Originally posted by DAzHiredGun
Let me toss this thought out.

Considering 2/5s of the vote has to do with Payment History and Payment Rates, doesn't it stand to reason that for a voter to be able to adequately rate the program, the voter should have been paid? How can one effectively rate Payment History without having been paid?


Ron

I completely agree and not just random payments either. I have voted for one program and I have reached payout and been paid by it. I was going to vote for another one that I had also been paid by but I was too late, voting had ended - darn time zones! How about saying that to vote for a program you need to be a member of it (why vote if not?) and should have been paid by it? Or should have reached payout, you could have been scammed and want to give 0 marks for the payment categories.

[DAzHiredGun]

Originally posted by BaroqueXena
To finish that thought, if you were to stop people advertising that their program was up for nomination........


I am simply NOT going to do that. I do not feel I have the right to tell a webmaster not to promote his/her program.


Ron

[DAzHiredGun]

Originally posted by BaroqueXena
....... darn time zones! How about saying that to vote for a program you need to be a member of it (why vote if not?) and should have been paid by it? Or should have reached payout, you could have been scammed and want to give 0 marks for the payment categories.


LOL, I can't do anything about the time zones, Xena, LOL ! But you're points are valid. I would think that ONLY program members would vote; however, we, Boycott staff, really have no way of knowing for certain. I hadn't considered your example of reaching payout but payment denied. I'm glad you brought it up.


Ron

[Enchanted]

I thought it was pretty obvious that you need to be a member to vote for a program? How else can you "vote"?

I still feel that when a program is under voting, it is the members who should pass the word around, not the webmasters. I have posted in forums about it and I have seen some other members do the same. The members of this forum belongs to other forums as well. They can pass the word around.

[mrbike]

I have a couple of thoughts that I'd like to express. I personally don't have a problem with a gtpr owner giving me a paid email to look at the voting. Hey, a payment is a payment. There are some sites that advertize that they never send out an email that isn't paid. If we are going to continue to have such a low number of people voting about a site before we give out the seal, it only makes sence to send out an email to all of the members as soon as the owner knows about the voting, and the owner may not have any paid ads to send with the notice, hence the paid email to vote. I would like to see the amount changed so that it would be a percentage of the members of the site. The only problem that I would have with any owner sending out an email to notify the members of voting, was if a member got deleted for a low vote! About the payment issue, someone said that you should have to be paid to vote. I agree, and I don't. Before you shoot me, let me explain. If I belong to other sites that the owner has, and have been paid from them, on time, and the whole amount requested, why wouldn't I take that into consideration when I vote for his new site? If the owner has no other sites, and I haven't been paid, then I personally don't vote, but that's just what I do. In that aspect I agree that you should have been paid before you vote. Random payouts: that shows me that not only is the owner willing to pay, but rewards his members by paying out early. I personally think that random payouts should go to really active members, but I can't control who is paid and who isn't. I like the idea of a certain waiting period for voting on the site, even if it is owned by an owner of other sites that pay.

[DAzHiredGun]

Originally posted by mrbike
About the payment issue, someone said that you should have to be paid to vote. I agree, and I don't. Before you shoot me, let me explain. If I belong to other sites that the owner has, and have been paid from them, on time, and the whole amount requested, why wouldn't I take that into consideration when I vote for his new site? If the owner has no other sites, and I haven't been paid, then I personally don't vote, but that's just what I do. In that aspect I agree that you should have been paid before you vote. Random payouts: that shows me that not only is the owner willing to pay, but rewards his members by paying out early. I personally think that random payouts should go to really active members, but I can't control who is paid and who isn't. I like the idea of a certain waiting period for voting on the site, even if it is owned by an owner of other sites that pay.

Good point. There would be no reason to suspect non-payment from the site being considered, if you've received payment from another site owned by the same webmaster.


Ron

[nadiaasoma]

Random payouts are BAD BAD BAD, lol.

There are not enough emoticons here (b)

Marian

[freeandeasy]

Originally posted by nadiaasoma
Random payouts are BAD BAD BAD, lol.

There are not enough emoticons here (b)

Marian

Why are random payouts bad?
My ptr has a $10 payout minimum (officially), but several times per month, I bring up a list of the members who have reached $3.
Then I check their accounts one by one. If they are ACTIVE, I pay them.
So I "unofficially" have a $3 payout, but only for ACTIVE members. This is one of my ways of rewarding them.
So, what is wrong with early payouts?

[mrbike]

isn't getting an advertixing for your actions getting paid? if you are active, and earn an ad for your activity, I consider that a "payment". Payments don't have to be "cash in your account". There are several sites out there that only pay by giving you ads. The last time I checked, there is another one out there that makes you send ads because they only pay your referal earnings in advertizements. I don't like that site and haven't joined, but that is my perogitive. I also got a free ad from another site because I made a suggestion that they used. That free ad got me some referals at another program that I'm a member of, so didn't I get paid cash in a way?

[DAzHiredGun]

I agree completely. Action rewarded is payment, regardless of the form it takes.


Ron

[mrbike]

I like your idea, but i have a further suggestion for you. why limit it to those who have $3.00 in their account. Lets say that I have been a member for 2 months and you have sent out X number of emails, and I have clicked on all of them excluding search emails (I hate searches) why not include me in the list of eligible people for a random payout. I know that is a lot of work for you, maybe only go back 30 days. That shows that I am an active member even though I haven't been a member for long.

[freeandeasy]

Originally posted by mrbike
I like your idea, but i have a further suggestion for you. why limit it to those who have $3.00 in their account. Lets say that I have been a member for 2 months and you have sent out X number of emails, and I have clicked on all of them excluding search emails (I hate searches) why not include me in the list of eligible people for a random payout. I know that is a lot of work for you, maybe only go back 30 days. That shows that I am an active member even though I haven't been a member for long.

I do have a new upgrade in my script that allows me to very easily see how many clicks each member has made, and I fully intend to take advantage of it.

I DO reward active members, not JUST with early payouts (that's only giving them what they have already earned on their own).

I also give active members other rewards, like free referrals, free ads, etc.

BTW, members who click on ALL the paid links, including all searches, will reach $3 in a couple months, even if they have NO refs. And some of them are doing it regularly!

[nadiaasoma]

No, I am a verry active member and still not approving random
payouts.

You don't need a tos if you randomly do whatever you like!

Why set a payout?

There are rules and you should act by them just as we MUST.

Redemptions are fine by me I use them a lot.

Programs that pay only with redemptions, I don't join, as well
as programs that give "lucky" incentives. I don't want to be
lucky, I want to have rights.

I do think that a $3 payout is not as bad as a random payout
from a highpayout program because most of their members will never reach payout.

Still I don't like it.

Marian

[in2travel]

Marian

What's there NOT to like about early payouts? I don't know about you or anyone else, but I appreciate the fact that a webmaster will pay me early for being active. Firstly it shows me that they are paying attention to the effort and amount of work I put in and secondly, I know that they are in a financial position to pay members. Better that way than to have no contact from the webmaster until payout and then you get deleted, the program disappears or payout takes 18 months.

You don't have to take the early payout. I think FreeAndEasy also has the option of not receiving an early payout if you don't want it.

I think webmasters should run their programs as they see fit. Especially like the webmistress of FreeAndEasy. And the payout there is $10.00. It's not high.

I'm sorry, but I just don't understand your argument at all!!

[nadiaasoma]

Hi in2travel,

You may be right, I don't know freeandeasy or her program.
Random payouts are becoming fashionable, I just hope they are not going to replace normal payouts.
I was a member of Pocketjingle and I left because Brenda was rude to her members, but most of all, she even "did" random
adredemptions. That means that one could only have a redemption when she felt like it. I think she started the random payouts, but they were instaid of normal ones. I became kind of itchy for random anything.
And it's not true that it is a sign of creditability, Most of them
do it because there is not enough money.
I do think that when they want us to play by the rules, they should do so too.

Marian

[in2travel]

I think there is a bit of a misunderstanding here.

FreeAndEasy is offering the random payouts AS WELL as the members who reach payout.

So it's not - one thing or the other or only the members she feels like paying. Let me give you an example of what she's done so far, which is why I nominated the program for the seal of approval -

1. I reached the $10.00 payout and got paid immediately
2. Frequent competitions
3. Rewards (cash and advertising) for active members
4. Always helps members and other webmasters
5. Responds quickly to any queries

This is one of the best programs I am involved in. I wouldn't bother praising a program or a webmaster that I didn't think deserved it. I don't think I've ever seen Cathy write a mean word let alone be rude to anyone - lol.

I hope that this clears things up.

[freeandeasy]

And then there are the free referrals I give to ACTIVE members, and cash prizes over and above their earnings...

[mrbike]

Ok free, ya sold me, I just went and signed up for your program! lol. As for the comment about making random payments because the owner can't afford to pay out at the redemption amount, that is crazy. If a webmaster was doing that I'm sure that his or her program would be blacklisted, boycotted and he may even get tarred and feathered-lol. I also look at the TOS as the minimum allowed, almost like a guarentee or a "law" if you will. I guarentee to pay you when you reach $10.00, but I may just pay you earlier than that if you are an active member. Can't beat those odds. The owners have enough trouble keeping active members, and I applaud any owner that comes up with a good way to keep their members a clickin'. What it really boils down to is If an owner has these things in his program they should get a higher vote than those who don't. Remember that most members don't have much of a downline if any at all, and at that rate even with a great program, one that sends out lots of links, if you get paid once per year for your actions, consider your self lucky. Also remember that some members won't do searches (me), and others can't because they live in the wrong country. That is also something that needs to be addressed in the voting. How many paid ads did the owner send out in the waiting period to be eligible to start voting, and how many of those were searches. If we want this seal of approval to mean something, there has to be standards.There is already one program that was boycotted because the payout was too high, isn't it the same thing with a lower paying site if all the owner sends out is searches?

[nadiaasoma]

Originally posted by in2travel
I think there is a bit of a misunderstanding here.

FreeAndEasy is offering the random payouts AS WELL as the members who reach payout.

So it's not - one thing or the other or only the members she feels like paying. Let me give you an example of what she's done so far, which is why I nominated the program for the seal of approval -

1. I reached the $10.00 payout and got paid immediately
2. Frequent competitions
3. Rewards (cash and advertising) for active members
4. Always helps members and other webmasters
5. Responds quickly to any queries

This is one of the best programs I am involved in. I wouldn't bother praising a program or a webmaster that I didn't think deserved it. I don't think I've ever seen Cathy write a mean word let alone be rude to anyone - lol.

I hope that this clears things up.

You make it sound as if I made a personal attack at your
favorit program.
I wish we could discuss these things in general. lol.
Congratiolations to freeandeasy, I didn't know your program
got the seal.

Marian

[Enchanted]

Ok, why not wait till the mods give us some direction once they analyze everything we've said so that maybe we can help them to fine tune the suggestions?

[mrbike]

I agree with Enchanted in one way, but I have to post this in reply to what she has posted. Granted, we have, in this post, given the moderators a lot to think about, and I think that this thread has had a lot of good things to say. I think that we should keep up the posts, as the voting process is something that should be continually modified as new and different programs are introduced. Until recently, I had never heard of a gptr program that will delete you if you don't sign in to the members area once per month, no matter how may links that you click, yet I belong to at least two of those-my fault, I admitt, because I didn't read the TOS word for word, but once you have read several dozen, they all start to sound the same. I know that I'll be more carefull in the future about reading the TOS. I also had never heard of a program that only will pay you your referal earnings in the form of advertizing. Thank goodness that I ddn't sign up for that program. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that any of these programs are a bad thing, just that you have to be careful. This by is by far the best of the forums out on the net about gptr, and I wish that all owners would have to join before they start sending out paid emails.

[nadiaasoma]

I agree that this is a great forum.
I spend to much time here instaid of leaving!

Marian

[mrbike]

LoL, nadia, I too am guilty as charged, but if we don't read these forum threads, how are we to learn!

[DAzHiredGun]

I'm glad to see you two are enjoying the forum. It makes it worthwhile to see comments such as those.


Thanks,

Ron

[in2travel]

Hi again Marian

No I didn't take it as a personal attack - LOL.

I just wanted to clear things up for you. The way I understood what you were saying, was that Cathy will only pay a certain number of members monthly because she lacks the funds. But that is not the case at all.

The random payouts are for active members. So she has a way to track who is clicking and who isn't. I guess it's her way of saying thank you to her members. She also pays the members that reach the $10 payout as well.

FreeAndEasy is one of the first programs I joined so maybe I am a little biased. I just don't want you to have a negative impression of this particular program. Cathy tries so hard for her members and I really feel she doesn't get the credit she is due.

I hope I have explained things for you. Take care.

[nadiaasoma]

I never mentioned Freeand easy.

What's the matter, do you think she can't speak for herselve?

Marian

[in2travel]

I'm sure she can speak for herself Marian.

I just thought you might appreciate a members point of view instead of a webmasters.

We all have different ideas of what makes a good program. You state your reasons, I state my reasons. I don't think either one of us is wrong or right. I just thought that you had the wrong impression of the payouts for freeandeasy so I just wanted to point this out. That's all.

Difference of opinion is a good thing. Keeps these forums busy LOL. Now what would DAz do if we all thought the same way?

[nadiaasoma]

You are welcome to discuss anything but I don't like to be
patronised.

Keep posting, Marian

[in2travel]

Do you think I patronised you???

I hope not cause that's not what was intended.

[nadiaasoma]

Well, in the future, please don't try to explain things to me unless I ask for it.

Marian

[in2travel]

OK Marian.


I don't have time to deal with childish behaviour. You started commenting about a program that you didn't even belong to. If you can't recognize the sincerity in a post, then that's your character flaw, not mine.

As for explaining, well you better bet your butt that I will if you say things that I happen to know are incorrect. Get your facts right before commenting. Again, if you don't like it, that's your problem.

Sorry DAz. Enough is enough and today I've had it. Wrong day to mess with me.

[Rob]

Please guys... try and stay on topic and calm down.

I know tempers can run high... but still. What's needed is thoughtful suggestions on how we SHOULD run the Seal Of Approval.

Rob

[nadiaasoma]

Originally posted by Rob
Please guys... try and stay on topic and calm down.

I know tempers can run high... but still. What's needed is thoughtful suggestions on how we SHOULD run the Seal Of Approval.

Rob

The seal is a farce with you posting that you got a random payment
from Jayspaidmail.
Tell me what is the difference between a boycotted program like Richmails and Jayspaidmail?

Marian

[Rob]

I never once posted that I got a rendom payment from JaysPaidMail - I never got a payment from that company at all because I've never been a member.

I received a $9.28 payout from JaysPaid2Read where the minimum is $5.00, once.

The differences between those two programs are endless.

I agree with you - the Seal has become farsical in a sense because I think the voting procedure is not a valid enough way of determining if a program is worth of the Seal or not.

What we need are ACTUAL SUGGESTIONS to help us reverse this.

Rob

[Kyu]

I haven't gone through and read all of the responses, so if I cover something that was already covered, please bear with me. I'm on a limited time frame, and I would like to give input now while it's on my mind. I'll get back in and read the rest and ammend my post later if need be.

I have found that when you give a user an easy way out, such as voting numbers without really having to think about the question, the voting gets rates that may not always be realistic.

In the past with these types of things, rather than using one to 10, a person is given a question, and then a list of possable answers. Each answer to a question grants a certain number of points. For example, the following:

=====
Please answer honestly the question below. If your answer does not match any of the listings below, please check the closest one that applies.

Q: "When contacting the webmaster with a question, how long does it take the webmaster to respond to you?"

A1: Within 12 to 24 hours.
A2: Within 24 to 48 hours.
A3: Within 48 to 72 hours.
A4: Within a weeks time.
A5: Longer than a week.
A6: Rarely ever get a response.
=====

Several of these types of questions would give a points. The points would be averaged to give a proper rating to each topic of the program. At the end, an overall rating would be generated. If the overall rating was high enough, it would be awarded with the seal.

Note, this could also take into consideration for payout rate, which seems to have been an issue in earlier posts. Make a topic for it. Questions about normal payout, random awards and prizes, etc. Higher payout rate would give less points, meaning other topics would have to be extremely high to make up for the higher rates.

All of this type of system is easilly achieved using Macromedia Flash. Javascript can do this as well, though its usually not as reliable.. It took me awhile some time back when I was making a survey, though it works extremely well. And I am sure you have people around who have better Flash skills than my own.

Not only could this be useful regarding the voting, but it would be easy to have it generate a text document for the program being voted on, which then could be given to webmasters to show where memebers believe that there program is lacking. Providing ways for sites to improve is a way to promote positive change.

To avoid the minimum votes, and the member base complications, voting should be given a time duration. Member accounts of this board can easilly be taken into consideration with Flash, which means each user here gets one vote. So even if a site sends 20,000 members here to vote, it all gets averaged out, and when time is up, a rating is produced.

= Kyu =

[in2travel]

Hi Kyu

I like your suggestion. It sounds like it may spread the voting out a bit more evenly. And it will give a guideline for the people who are unsure of how to vote the way it is set up now. (Me included)

The only thing I can think of at the moment is the payment issue. Would you then take into consideration the TOS of the individual program you are voting for? Say it says payments will be made in 30 days, and you get it in 2 days, how do you score that? And what about the random payouts? Will they be taken into consideration or will it only be if you have actually reached the payout level? Or are you saying to have standard time frames to vote for, irrespective of the TOS of the program?

Any ideas anyone? On the whole though, Kyu's suggestion seems to be pretty good.

[in2travel]

Originally posted by Rob
Please guys... try and stay on topic and calm down.

I know tempers can run high... but still. What's needed is thoughtful suggestions on how we SHOULD run the Seal Of Approval.

Rob


Rob

When my posts are misconstrued, you better bet that I am going to defend myself. It may not be the right thread to do it in, but I am not going to let things "slide" when my intentions were to clarify misinformed posts being made.

Yes things have gone off the topic in this thread, as they do in most threads, LOL. Maybe you could take all of the valid suggestions out of this thread and start a new one. This topic started out as high payouts, then turned into the "Seal of Approval". Perhaps others coming to the board are not even aware that this is being discussed as the topic reads high payouts. Don't stone me, LOL. Just a suggestion.

[Kyu]

Originally posted by in2travel
The only thing I can think of at the moment is the payment issue. Would you then take into consideration the TOS of the individual program you are voting for? Say it says payments will be made in 30 days, and you get it in 2 days, how do you score that? And what about the random payouts? Will they be taken into consideration or will it only be if you have actually reached the payout level? Or are you saying to have standard time frames to vote for, irrespective of the TOS of the program?
Okay, I'm still reading responses as I can. I'm working on things. I'll respond here and add some other comments I have here in this post, and probably more as I try and finish reading this post.

When I mentioned payout, I was talking about the minimum payment issue. For example, in voting, a program like Jays-PaidMail might actually lose points, due the $350.00 payout minimum. So everything else in the program must be top notch for them to actually come anywhere close to being able to gain a high score.

Things like the random rewards, quickly obtained advertisement redemptions, and point redemptions for cash might bring them some more points to even it out. Note, I am not passing any judgement upon Jays program. I know it has a seal, and know enough about the program to use it as an example.

Another note to go onto this, as I just got past the posts about members being afraid to vote, is that though the admin of GPTBoycott will be able to see who has voted, and what they chose for answers, nobody else will be able to know. This will allow everyone to vote (expecting they are honest about having a membership to the program being voted on). So even those with some poor opinions, can vote honestly (in their opinion of the program), which should make for a nice balance.

= Kyu =

[in2travel]

OK. I understand what you are saying now.

I don't know anything about Jay's programs at all. I also think as far as the payments are concerned, that you should only be able to vote in this category if you have actually been paid. Which is why I brought up the random payout issue. I don't know if Jays does this or not, or how many other programs do, but would this classify as a "payout"?

Unless in the actual voting under payments it actually states
Have you been paid?
Yes
No
Requested but still within TOS period
Requested but over TOS period
Random Payout
I don't think I'll ever see my money (LOL)

Or something to that effect with a different point score to the options?

Providing we are going to be voting on the same categories as what we are now, the only one I can see a bit of difficulty with is the payout and how to set that up fairly.

[Kyu]

I'm not sure I wish to word this like I'm going to, though at the moment I feel it might be the only way to make this response.

Really, what I may be suggesting is a complete change to the whole process. Going through and taking everything about any program that might be important regarding it's voting, and placing it into the new format. Let me try and do another example, I'll do my best to make it brief.

Included with the below can be a really simple calculator to help those figure out the math. Something that will allow you to put in the minimum payout rate divided by the average earnings per week

=====
Category: Payment & Redemption

Q1: For this program, what is the minimum that you are able to be paid your cash balance? (actual cash, not advertising)

A1: Not a cash based program.
A2: Can reach payment every month.
A3: Can reach payment every 3 months.
A4: Can reach payment every 6 months.
A5: Can reach payment every year.
A6: Will take more than a year to reach payment.

Q2: How often have you been paid cash by this program at the minimum payout rate, if ever?

A1: Never been paid cash by this program.
A2: Have only been paid cash once.
A3: Have been paid cash 2 or 3 times.
A4: Have been paid cash 4 times or more.

/* Any more cash questions, the repeat same type of thing for redemptions of advertising etc */

Q6: Have you ever recieved a bonus, random cash or advertising, or a prize through this program that you view as a good value?

A1: This program does not offer any of the listed extras.
A2: Never recieved any of the listed extras.
A3: Have recieved the listed extras once or twice.
A4: Have recieved the listed extras three or four times.
A5: Have recieved the listed extras five times or more.

/* etc etc... basically, if you can think of a good question that would pertain to most programs, it would be easy enough to add to the voting system. */
=====

So there would several categories, and several questions in each one. At the end, each category would be given a rating. And if the program does not have such incentives, basically, it cues the to not count that question in the average.

Though more complicated to code, you could go about it so the moderators here discuss, and then set options for knowing what the program offers, and the script would ask all questions applicable to the program. Just to avoid cheating. As much as we want to believe nobody here would do that type of thing, it's an "SEP" or "not in my backyard" type of belief.

I hope that helps in explaining. If this type of idea were to be used, I would guess it would be easy enough to open up a quick post to ask everyone the types of questions that should be asked. Weed through them, compile them, and add them to the scripting of Flash.

= Kyu =

[in2travel]

Sounds pretty reasonable to me.

For the first one though, maybe you should also ad the option
A7 My grandchildrens grandchildren might reach payment
(ROFL)

Sorry. Straying off the topic again. Can't help myself. LOL

I guess the mods will need to look at it and see if it's a viable option.

So mods? How about Kuy's suggetions??

[nadiaasoma]

Originally posted by Rob
I never once posted that I got a rendom payment from JaysPaidMail - I never got a payment from that company at all because I've never been a member.

I received a $9.28 payout from JaysPaid2Read where the minimum is $5.00, once.

The differences between those two programs are endless.

I agree with you - the Seal has become farsical in a sense because I think the voting procedure is not a valid enough way of determining if a program is worth of the Seal or not.

What we need are ACTUAL SUGGESTIONS to help us reverse this.

Rob

I'm verry sorry, I'm not gonna take a look I believe you.
I appologise for my mistake.

Marian

[nadiaasoma]

Originally posted by Kyu

Okay, I'm still reading responses as I can. I'm working on things. I'll respond here and add some other comments I have here in this post, and probably more as I try and finish reading this post.

When I mentioned payout, I was talking about the minimum payment issue. For example, in voting, a program like Jays-PaidMail might actually lose points, due the $350.00 payout minimum. So everything else in the program must be top notch for them to actually come anywhere close to being able to gain a high score.

Things like the random rewards, quickly obtained advertisement redemptions, and point redemptions for cash might bring them some more points to even it out. Note, I am not passing any judgement upon Jays program. I know it has a seal, and know enough about the program to use it as an example.

Another note to go onto this, as I just got past the posts about

members being afraid to vote, is that though the admin of GPTBoycott will be able to see who has voted, and what they chose for answers, nobody else will be able to know. This will allow everyone to vote (expecting they are honest about having a membership to the program being voted on). So even those with some poor opinions, can vote honestly (in their opinion of the program), which should make for a nice balance.

= Kyu =

I think a $350 payout , and for that a long waiting periode to
reach payout, cannot be compensated by a good support
or reliable software
One can only reach payout with a large downline.
The voting would be done mainly by other webmasters.
That was not what GPT-boycot was all about.
I think the seal can only go to a program where everyone can
reach payout within a reasenable time-periode.
And I think that other programowners should be excluded from
the votingproces.

When I suggested a short list with questions I was thinking of a
realy short list, just a few questions, we don't want to scare or
bore people away.

Marian

[Kyu]

Originally posted by nadiaasoma

I think a $350 payout , and for that a long waiting periode to
reach payout, cannot be compensated by a good support
or reliable software
One can only reach payout with a large downline.
The voting would be done mainly by other webmasters.
That was not what GPT-boycot was all about.
I think the seal can only go to a program where everyone can
reach payout within a reasenable time-periode.
And I think that other programowners should be excluded from
the votingproces.

When I suggested a short list with questions I was thinking of a
realy short list, just a few questions, we don't want to scare or
bore people away.

Marian
Some people feel that a high payout site might be worth the time, due to advertising redemptions, prizes, bonus rewards, and random payouts. I refer back to another post where someone mentioned that there are certain programs they are with for the advertising benefits, and not because it has great cash rewards.

And the benefit of the system is that all members of the program, even high payout programs would be able to vote, and it would lower the voting with a lot of members clicking on the fact they have not yet recieved a cash payout.

The idea if for a balance. It should average things quite well. If only a few people reach payout, it should reflect that. If the site only has 1,000 members, and another site has 30,000, it won't matter all that much, because it is taking an average.

And the reason for a lot of questions is to gain a realistic view of what the program is like. If the program is really that important to you, then clicking 50 to 100 check boxes to answer questions should really be too much of an issue.

= Kyu =

[in2travel]

What about having the Seal also reflect the voting - if the program is approved.
So say have a gold, silver and bronze Seal.

If the payouts levels are going to be points of issue, can't the Seal reflect that in some way? Or the overall vote reflect the "level" of the seal?

If I sign up for a program that has a high payout, I know this from the start. Unless of course the TOS change. So I have the option of joining or not joining at the beginning. I don't think high paying programs should be penalized if they are in fact paying their members out. It may not be something I choose to join, but obviously there are many others that do and are satisfied.

I guess without getting into the nitty gritty of the voting and having a number of different categories, then everyone will start viewing it as useless again?

[freeandeasy]

Originally posted by nadiaasoma
And I think that other programowners should be excluded from
the votingproces.

This is unrealistic.
For one thing, most site owners do NOT get large downlines.
I (for example) do occasionally get a big one, but in MOST cases I get from 0 to 2 or 3 on the first level, maybe a couple on the second level.
I know this is the situation with most site owners.
Those who build big downlines are the ones who own several programs and/or have a program or two with a huge membership.

Now consider non-owners, like ppprk and usdollars, who build large downlines. Would they have to be excluded from voting?
I think not!

To be fair, everyone needs the chance to vote, if you want a democratic process.

[Enchanted]

I agree with Freeandeasy. There are lots of members out there who have much bigger downlines than program owners. Therefore, they should be given an opportunity to vote.

[Poncer]

Originally posted by nadiaasoma


The seal is a farce with you posting that you got a random payment
from Jayspaidmail.
Tell me what is the difference between a boycotted program like Richmails and Jayspaidmail?

Marian


The difference between the two? Well, you get paid random payments from Jay. As I hear, you never do get paid by Richmails. At least Jay shows he does pay.

[nadiaasoma]

Originally posted by Kyu

Some people feel that a high payout site might be worth the time, due to advertising redemptions, prizes, bonus rewards, and random payouts. I refer back to another post where someone mentioned that there are certain programs they are with for the advertising benefits, and not because it has great cash rewards.

And the benefit of the system is that all members of the program, even high payout programs would be able to vote, and it would lower the voting with a lot of members clicking on the fact they have not yet recieved a cash payout.

The idea if for a balance. It should average things quite well. If only a few people reach payout, it should reflect that. If the site only has 1,000 members, and another site has 30,000, it won't matter all that much, because it is taking an average.

And the reason for a lot of questions is to gain a realistic view of what the program is like. If the program is really that important to you, then clicking 50 to 100 check boxes to answer questions should really be too much of an issue.

= Kyu =

Yes, and the people who want to be a member of a high payout
must do so, by all means.
I'm saying that such a program does not deserve the seal of
approval from this forum.
You can't mesure that by voting, it's not that simple.
It has also been mentioned that when a person has been paid
by other programs, of the same owner, one can asume that the
high payout will pay too.
Thats absurd, because nobody can tell if the high payout will be there in about 5 years, when most people that don't give up and
keep on clicking all those ads, will reach payout.

If there is going the be a seal of approval to programs, it should
be given to a program that has proved itselve, by being
reliable and trustworty in it's payouts and customerservise,
and not to all the new programs that come up each day.

[nadiaasoma]

Originally posted by Poncer



The difference between the two? Well, you get paid random payments from Jay. As I hear, you never do get paid by Richmails. At least Jay shows he does pay.

Hi Poncer, there is also Mike's, does he pay randomly 2?

It's not the sexy one I don't approve of, it's all the high payouts.

Marian

[Poncer]

Mike has paid several people already, so people so reach the payout there which some did vote on here. The problem is that we need to keep the two different high patout seperate because we don't want to label the harmless ones like Jay's and mike's with the likes of Richmails, CashRead and Nitroclicks.

[nadiaasoma]

Originally posted by Poncer
Mike has paid several people already, so people so reach the payout there which some did vote on here. The problem is that we need to keep the two different high patout seperate because we don't want to label the harmless ones like Jay's and mike's with the likes of Richmails, CashRead and Nitroclicks.

And Dollarslove, it was a hard decission to get rid Of Dollarslove,
I liked it so much and I had some downline.
But their adredemption sucked and reaching payout wasn't an option.

Marian

[nadiaasoma]

I do get your point Poncer, I just don't have the right englisch
words to express my thoughts in a proper way so I will have to improvise.

Marian

[DAzHiredGun]

Originally posted by Kyu
I'm not sure I wish to word this like I'm going to, though at the moment I feel it might be the only way to make this response.

Really, what I may be suggesting is a complete change to the whole process. Going through and taking everything about any program that might be important regarding it's voting, and placing it into the new format.

Though more complicated to code, you could go about it so the moderators here discuss, and then set options for knowing what the program offers, and the script would ask all questions applicable to the program. Just to avoid cheating. As much as we want to believe nobody here would do that type of thing, it's an "SEP" or "not in my backyard" type of belief.

I hope that helps in explaining. If this type of idea were to be used, I would guess it would be easy enough to open up a quick post to ask everyone the types of questions that should be asked. Weed through them, compile them, and add them to the scripting of Flash.

= Kyu =


Long time, no talk, Kyu. Glad to see you here. Congrats on the mod status at Orlafla.

Actually, you've hit on something we (mods) have been looking at and discussing, off and on, for months and finally arrived at the decision that the entire voting system, in its current state, needed a complete "overhaul." For me, the key questions have been:

1. How do we go about doing it?

2. What questions are relevant?

3. How do we simplify scoring, making it more easily understood?

4. What method will generate the largest response, eliminate cheating and maintain voter anonymity for those who may be wary of voting for fear of recourse?


Not being a "computer whiz" - I'm doing good to turn the blasted thing on and "wait for it to light up." Personally, I appreciate your suggestions and consider them to be moving in the direction we wish to take.

Does that kinda answer your question, in2, LOL ?


Ron

[DAzHiredGun]

Originally posted by in2travel
What about having the Seal also reflect the voting - if the program is approved.
So say have a gold, silver and bronze Seal.

An interesting suggestion; thanks, in2.


Ron

[DAzHiredGun]

Originally posted by nadiaasoma
......... I just don't have the right englisch
words to express my thoughts in a proper way .........

Marian


Don't worry about that, Marian. I'm having trouble expressing my thoughts, too. Please, continue with your suggestions. I appreciate your interest.


Ron

[nadiaasoma]

That's nice to read, thank you Ron.
But I was under the impression that our suggestions were done
and that we would wait untill the mods come up with their
sugestions or plans, before we would discuss things furder.

Marian

[in2travel]

Hi DAz!!!

LOL. Yep. Thanks for answering!!

I like Kuy's suggestions so far. If that can be refined in some way to make it fair on whether the program offers low or high payouts, then you may have a winner there.

I think one of the problems at the moment is that ideas are being posted, but no hard copy is being made. Someone should gather up the ideas, and come up with some sort of plan so that it could be discussed further. You'll be able to refine the ideas from that hard copy. If I'm making sense, that is. LOL

You regretting telling me to keep you busy yet??? hehehe

[Kyu]

Originally posted by DAzHiredGun
Long time, no talk, Kyu. Glad to see you here. Congrats on the mod status at Orlafla.It has been quite awhile. I have been trying to do what I can for the programs I support. Helping them with moderation, scripts, or anything else I can do in the short periods of time I have between work, programming, and life.

Originally posted by DAzHiredGun Actually, you've hit on something we (mods) have been looking at and discussing, off and on, for months and finally arrived at the decision that the entire voting system, in its current state, needed a complete "overhaul." For me, the key questions have been:

1. How do we go about doing it?

2. What questions are relevant?

3. How do we simplify scoring, making it more easily understood?

4. What method will generate the largest response, eliminate cheating and maintain voter anonymity for those who may be wary of voting for fear of recourse?Again, I would suggest going with Flash. I will see if I am able to find someone to make a quick format about the things I have suggested to show it to you. Flash is able to read from other database input, which could check things like how long they have been a user here, how many posts they have made, and make a sliding scale based on that input (if desired).

You could keep it really short, though as you know, the more factors, the more detailed the feedback. And going by the means I suggested previously, the user wouldn't really have an idea regarding the rating, they would just answer the questions. The program would give the percentages when they were finished. This would allow the user to just answer the questions, would having to think too much regarding scoring.

Using the example of when a webmaster gets back to you. All the voter would know, if that they chose "Within 48 hours", though the program would know the point value of that answer and calculate it. Again, you have to trust that people are being honest. Though, if two out of a hundred lie, giving what they think will score best, the others will even it out.

Also, if cheating becomes a big concern, dropping a percentage of the highest and lowest would be able to get you a good mean. Let me check with some of my programmer friends and see if they can make an easy template which can be modified without needing to be a whiz in the field.

= Kyu =

[DAzHiredGun]

Thanks, Kyu. That would be a tremendous help.


Ron

[Kyu]

I should have you a sample product of what I mean by the Sunday or Monday night. I am reinstalling Flash right now. Sadly, this would have been easy cause I could have just changed the survey one I made, though as I mentioned before, my computer died, and I lost everything.

Maybe someday I'll have enough money to be able to buy a new computer. Though for now, I am just happy enough to have this computer that my sever admin loaned to me.

I'll keep checking in and giving you updates as I have them. Sorry this is taking so long. Really wish I wasn't so rusty, and things in my life would run just a tad smoother.

= Kyu =

[in2travel]

Hey Kyu

I think you're wonderful to help.

[mrbike]

Kyu's ideas for voting are by far and away the best idea that have been presented so far. I really like the idea of "blind voting" in other words, not knowing what answers reward what points. I think that keeps the voting more real, and lends more credibility to the seal. I do question the idea of keeping the member's name off of the voting. If you are an honest owner, you should want to rectify the problems of your site, and if you aren't and delete a member for voting the way that he did, you don't deserve the seal!! I'd like to add a couple of things to what she has said. On the idea of contacting the webmaster, one of the options for voting should be something like, "I haven't needed to contact the webmaster". I question the options about how long did it take you to get paid. Let's face it folks, we all have bad weeks, and even months where the money just isn't there, and giving more points for paying out in a shorter time than the tos states may be something that needs to be looked at real closely before it is instituted, don't get me wrong, the quicker I get paid, the better I like it. Also after the question about being paid should be a follow up question like: How many people are in your down line? 1-20, 20-100, 100-500, 500-1000, 1000+, and finally What's a downline? LOL. I shouldn't be laughing at that last question, as that is my answer for most of the programs that I belong to! Also, with all of the low payout sites that are springing up out there, how many times have you been paid? I don't know how you can give a point value to that question, but if you have no downline, and have been paid more than once by a certain program, it shows that you know what you are talking about, because you must be an active member. It also may weed out those votes that are fake. If you have no downline, yet you say that you have been paid by a $25.00 pay out program 10 times, and it has only been around for a year, the voting software could send up a red flag that says look at this vote. Of course if there are any gptr programs that actually pay out $250.00 a year to one that has no down line, send me an email and I'll sign up lol. I also like the Gold, Silver, bronze idea. Maybe the higher the pay out, the lower the seal value can be? Look at it as an incentive for the owners to keep their payouts as low as possible? Also on the pay out issue, if you always run an ad, because you want to instead of being paid cash, the owner shouldn't be penalized in the voting. That is your personal choice, and something that shouldn't affect the seal one way or another. It would be a different story if You have to run an ad with your earnings, such as the program that only will pay you your referal earnings in the form of an ad. On a different note, I don't think that 100 questons is out of line as far as the voting goes, as long as the voting can be done quickly by clicking on a box that most closely gives the answer that you want to give. That will stop the people from voting that really don't care about a site one way or another. Maybe there could be a small group of people to test the software once it is written to see how long it takes to get through a certain amount of questions? {my hand is up to be a guinea pig} I know that if there is a site that I really like, or really hate for that matter, I would be willing to spend 15 minutes to give this site a vote. 'nuff said this time!

[blueunicorn]

Umm I'm a webmaster of Paidhitworld.com and my payout is $5.00 but when I run an ad or email I randomly pick 5 or 10 people that have money, any money the lowest I've paid is 1 cent the highest is $3.15.

I do this because I like to reward my active members. That will encorage them to do more.

I don't want anyone in my program to have to be 105 before they get paid. The Dream is after all to make money on the internet. I believe that it can be accomplished without anyone having to suffer. Wether it be WebMaster or Member.

Whenever the seal is available again I would like my members to be aware of it and vote accordingly.

I've been in a lot of programs that had no interest in any kind of seal and didn't pay.

Web-earners appeared to be an honest program paid like clock work then ran without paying his members. So by that rights that has been talked about in this forum he would have got the seal he was active more than 6 months, paid his members and his members were happy for the most part. But he still would have ran. You just can't tell for sure what anyone will do. Time usually does tell but not always.

Thanks
Cindy
The Blue Unicorn

P.S. Sorry for the bad spelling and grammer.

[nadiaasoma]

With a payout of $5 it's nice to have random payouts.
With a payout of $500 it's a scam.
But than again $5 can be impossibel to reach when there are
only searchlinks, points- and cheap links.

I hope you'll agree that a program should at least exist for
more than a year before you can say something about it.

I will try your program and maybe if the seal comes up again
we will meet again.

I wish the smilies were working, lol.

Marian

[blueunicorn]

Okay a year it is then for sure we'll meet again. Still in meantime you could join my program, gain the easy points in the PTC section and the occasional email. Then go to my forum and win money and prizes today in my auctions. The only cost is your time which is very valuable indeed.

As with any program actions speak louder than words. If they do my program they will be rewarded and if they don't they will be the ones weeping and wailing that they can't make any money.

For every action their is a reaction. Sometimes what people forget is that for every non-action there is also a reaction.

Thanks for the kind words.
See you soon!

PS. I would really like to have the seal. To me it as an important piece of proof that at least 20 folks like my site. However, if more than 20 like it. I wouldn't complain either.

[DAzHiredGun]

Originally posted by nadiaasoma
...... maybe if the seal comes up again we will meet again.

I wish the smilies were working, lol.

Marian


The Seal WILL be back, Marian; and, hopefully, the smilies will, too. We've had to prioritize a few things and looking at the voting process is among them. It has taken longer than expected, primarily due to my two month absence from here during a recent court term; but, we're working on it and want you to be able to award the Seal to those who deserve it. BTW, I don't anticipate it taking a us a year, LOL...


Ron

[blueunicorn]

Okay I've been reading the posts.

How about age categories. 6 months active service, 1 year active service, and so on?

How about membership categories under 500, 501 to 1000, 1000 plus?

How about min payout under $5.00, $10, $50, $500?

That way you have leveled all the play fields to be fair. The small programs would be up against other small programs and med to large would be up against their like brothers/sisters.

Perhaps levels of the Seal of Approval kind of like the the levels for Diamond Web Award.

Agreed you must be a member of GPT Boycott and the program your voting on.

A place to report webmasters that kill accounts for negative feedback and so many neg feedbacks their seal should be revoked.

Just some ideas -- the only thing is the more you define it the more complicated it will be.

Thanks
Cindy
WebMaster of PaidHitWorld.com
The Blue Unicorn

[maryscurios]

I think the size for the site should be considered too if it isn't already. It's much easier for a site with 17,000 members to get a certain amount of votes than it would be for a site with 1,000.
Voter should also have to be a member and have been paid.

[StashuJ]

I may be talking when I should be listening again but I will say that I think the "popularity contest" stance is a big problem with any programs given the seal of approval.

Certain programs have been known to pay the members in cash or points to vote for them. That practice should be banned right off the bat. I know of one program on the approval list which I have long since quit that did that almost daily when I was a member. What she does now, I don't know and I don't care but I always thought that it was wrong for her to pay people to vote for her program and I honestly believe that is the only way it came to be on the approval list to begin with.

I believe that the whole board should be more of a place to warn unsuspecting people of the scams out there like Tasias and a few others as opposed to a popularity contest among webmasters. At the same time, I also believe that to boycott a program, there should be substantial and proven evidence. Very few programs have even been in business long enough to warrant any seal of approval because the situation seems to change daily but a scam is still a scam and needs to be nipped in the bud.

I hate to emphasize the negatives as opposed to the positives but unless the program members nominate the "approval list" without interference from the webmasters the whole process is useless.

[JaysPaidMail]

hmmm So in reading this ( well about 80% of this thread )

I still don't understand when or If it's comming back ?

I think Enchanted & blueunicorn made some really good points :)

I like the idea of the seal based on the different payout Catagories

[StashuJ]

Once again, I may be talking when I should be listening.

I personally would like to see more programs on the list of those who have received the seal of approval. I think the boycott process is far more meaningful than the one by which approval is given. It's that popularity contest issue.

I believe that any program nominated for the award in the first place should have at least a 6 month proven track record and the nominating member should have been paid at least once in a timely manner and maybe even have run an ad or two. That in itself would keep the people with the huge payout plateaus from gaining approval before they proved that they could come across when the time comes to put up or shut up.

Factors such as payouts, solvency and the speed with which they send out paid ads to the readers are legitimate concerns. Are the terms clear and concise or are they garbled so that you need a corporate lawyer to explain what is expected of you as a member? The number of members should be verified--look at CashRead saying they had 100,000 members after they were in business for about a month. That is nonsense! There are cases where fewer members are better because a lone webmaster can only keep up with so many accounts and that is where things get out of hand and programs that started out well respected quickly turn to garbage. Example:Tasias.

I don't know how webmasters get the word that this board even exists but I know the methods by which it becomes a popularity contest.

Webmasters pay their subscribers to come to this board and vote for them. Somehow that hits me wrong in that it puts pressure on the subscriber to vote against his/her own conscience to pease a webmaster who is dangling money under his nose. Can you vote for Joe Shmoe today and Jack Frost tomorrow? Just because they offer you money to do it? There are lots of lemmings out there. Maybe those people who give all those glowing reports of half-baked programs think the webmaster has some supernatural power to punish them if they say what they really think. I think that the webmasters should be prohibited from paying people to vote for them. Maybe one of the questions on the voting screen should ask if the voter arrived here on a paid link. And, if so, that factor should have some degree of negative impact on the final decision about whether or not the site achieves the seal of approval.

[SelfSupportive]

Originally posted by StashuJ
I think the boycott process is far more meaningful than the one by which approval is given. It's that popularity contest issue.

I tend to lean this way too now. It seems the Seal program has been inactive for so long now that it means nothing. I would like to see it scrapped altogether. This site is called GPTBoycott, not GPTSeal, if you know what I mean. Perhaps it is better to focus on that one side of things.

At the very least, any program that received the Seal under the old measures should need to earn it again, or it is inherently unfair, and surely, in a voting/seal context, fairness (both real and perceived) is the number 1 priority.

As it is, it seems to me it really brings down the tone of this site, with suggestions of the opposite - unfairness. Surely if the seal program is suspended (from new nominations), the whole section should be removed - otherwise it gives the impression that their is possibly some favouritism going on. (Please note I am not suggesting there is any corruption, but that is the impression it gives off).

Now, barring that idea (get rid of it completely), there are big problems to contend with if you wish to retain it, but make it fair. The number of variables involved is immense, and they are not simple relationships. What many scores mean would be dependent on other factors, so they can't just be easily added, to get an overall score.

Finally I can't see any way around the incentivisation issue. People bribing their members to vote is corrupt, but it also seems wrong to disallow telling members at all, as that sways the voting to only include those members (of the community) who are already active members here at this forum. And a bribe may not be actual $/points reward - you only need to look at some ways that programs get their members to vote for them in 'Top 100' type sites to realise there is a problem. Yes, it turns it into a 'popularity contest', which may indeed (in a way) be what is required, but it's a misleading one.

I suggest scrapping the Seal totally, and put all efforts into the Boycotting system. :yinyang:

Afterthought: Beenpaid.com now provides a great Seal of Approval program, which could offer a good alternative.