- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
I just re-read the entire “article” again and there are a few more points I found disturbing also:
1. While we arent hiding, I didnt think a public listing of the officers in our company without our consent was necessary or desirable. I can’t speak for Lyceum, but I doubt the directors of their parent company would be amused either. How did this add to the “fun” aspect of the spoof?
2. At CAP we never discuss private meetings we may have had in public. This is a basic rule of business and to do so is very poor decorum. Discussing meetings they may have had with Warren publically without our consent was very objectionable. How did this add “fun” to the spoof?
After this I will step out of the conversation as I don’t want to “over read” what this spoof really was. Also I genuinely like Michael and GPWA and dont think this “joke” was meant to cause hard feelings or damage to the relationship.
I am guilty of the “fun” pet selling and never thought about all the “real” people that this happens to every day Professor, thanks for pointing that out I am going now to remove that application.Yeah I know Bonustreak, at first I didnt understand what this “pet” thing was either as I am new to Facebook.
Probably Facebook didnt think the whole thing through when they launched this “game”, but when you really think about it anything that dehumanizes people shouldnt be encouraged as fun in this day and age. I also got to thinking about the message this sends to kids. I think a game of “tag” or something like that would be cool but “pets” are over the top IMO.
Hopefully, it can just be seen as a joke that went badly wrong. Very badly wrong.
Haha, it got me when GPWA bought bodog, but this time I was prepared.
Michael has an impressive bunch of pets there, I got to say.
It’s just a spoof and a way to get people to go to to facebook.
If everyone has their name published already in facebook or whatever social network, well, it’s public. If not, thats another story.
I have yet to even go there, never find the time…
Anyway. Michael is a good sort and it is meant in good fun and not an agressive thing in any way. The article points out our good relations, and we had the fun match with GPWA at the slot tournie which was funny.
It is misleading though, and when they announced they acquired bodog my eyes got big until I looked closer.
Thats the way I am going to approach it Fiction.
Dom would you mind terribly if I publicly listed your name and the names of your staff and any other investors or holding companies of GamesandCasino publically? I mean if its done in good fun why not? I can even mention Calvin too if that tickles your fancy? We could throw in a few private meetings or discussions we had for ha has too.
Hehe, wouldn’t mind Calvin as a pet myself :tongue:
I think I would likely be on the phone with Michael yelling about it if my private business was made public.
But like I said, I am sure no harm was intended.
Interesting points by everyone. For instance until last night I didn’t have a facebook account. So I don’t understand the FB applications. When I saw the CAP officer’s names I figured that there was something to the “game” – in otherwords, I figured that CAP was somehow involved in the joke – like it was kind of a mutual doing, and intended to lead up to some sort of member co-operation.
There are a few sites that “simulate” trading stocks, etc. I thought this might be a version of the game which had really gotten developed. So I was assuming that all people mentioned in the emails etc, were participating.
I’ll admit too when I read it, I was tricked. I thought — Michael is HOT after the CAP conferences.
I don’t have enough time to play with such devices, so if there are marketing advantages, I’m missing them – but email seems to work pretty well for me right now…
@Professor 155025 wrote:
Thats the way I am going to approach it Fiction.
Dom would you mind terribly if I publicly listed your name and the names of your staff and any other investors or holding companies of GamesandCasino publically? I mean if its done in good fun why not? I can even mention Calvin too if that tickles your fancy? We could throw in a few private meetings or discussions we had for ha has too.
Hey Professor, I’m in Macau now, so it’s the middle of the night here, and I need to go back to sleep, but I did want to at least take a moment to quickly respond to this comment. What I said about roles CAP staff members was already published on the web on the about us page on the Affiliateprograms.com website. Just take a look at the following web page: http://www.affiliateprograms.com/aboutus.aspx. The same was true about the folks associated with Lyceum Media. I’d never publish information about anyone in this industry that was not public already.
I certainly didn’t intend this to be anything other than the very best sort of funny playing around that “friends” do from time to time. And I have to admit that the funny exchanges I had with Calvin after we did this with Bodog last week encouraged me to do it. He thought it was a real hoot, and let me know he thought it was so funny he was going to write about it in his blog. He has now done that, and you can see here on Calvin’s blog. I really do agree with what Calvin say’s about social networking applications. They are going to prove extremely important over time, and in ways that people who have not played with them can’t really appreciate.
Maybe later when I’m awake I’ll say a little more. I really just intended this as fun and games like when we did the CAP versus GPWA tournament a few months back. But I also view it as being really important for anyone involved in marketing on the web to develop a good sense of how social networks are used and what they can accomplish. It’s really a whole new and different world out there, and one I’m personally spending a tremendous amount of time wrapping my head around. And I believe that world will become as important to affiliates in the not to distant future as search engines are today.
Michael
Michael I consider this a serious breach in trust and the relationship we had with the staff of GPWA and yourself. Had we been consulted prior to this I would have asked that you not involve us in this. I would certainly never had done this to you. Discussing Private Meetings is a serious breach of privacy and business decorum and was not funny or amusing. Your subsequent condescending post to Alex over at GPWA was crass and unprofessional and inflamatory. While I thought this might have been done in jest the more I examine the post and that thread the more I am lead to believe this was a malicious and calculated act. You also could have damaged a publicly traded company by your actions and that is also unacceptable. I am going to close this thread and ask that you contact me personally when you are back stateside so we can discuss this directly. I hope that conversation is held in confidence.
In the mean time we are suspending the staff of GPWA (not its affiliate members) from access here at CAP and PAP, at our events, gatherings and parties and in our publications.
Hopefully we can work this out as professionals when you get back and mend some of these fences you steam rolled today.
