ECA: Hal Halpin's Latest Statement: Changes are Coming

Status
Not open for further replies.

caltab

CAGiversary!
Feedback
20 (100%)
The new discussion thread is located HERE.


Latest update:

I recommend everyone read Hal's latest statement, it's his best statement to date and I believe shows the ECA finally has gotten our message. In it he offers better explanations for what happened with the auto-renew function, promises to notify members of changes to terms of service, and even apologizes.
http://www.gameculture.com/2009/12/...lpin-eca-head-discusses-membership-complaints

Disclosure: GameCulture(the source of this statement) is published by the Entertainment Consumers Association.

Can you give us a synopsis of what happened over the past week?
Sure. Back in September we had an intersection of a few things happen within a brief period of time: I wrote a guest editorial in one of the leading games magazines, at the end of which I provided readers with a coupon code for a free trial membership.
Stopping there for a minute, in hindsight, what was the result of that action?
Well, I have to say that I didn't think the decision through thoroughly-enough. My logic was that readers who took the time to read the piece, which focused on some of the more important and topical issues facing game consumers, were people we wanted as members. In the few seconds that it took to type, I didn't consider that one of those readers would run over to their computer and post the code, sans editorial - and in retrospect, it appears obvious.
Next, there was an issue with discount codes from a partner?
Well, sorta.’ We were being supplied with batches of codes from that partner for some time - about six months. And the organization had been growing steadily for the past few years, so one of the challenges we both had was anticipating the redemption rate, batch to batch...which meant accurately predicting new membership growth. That's an unknown quantity for any new business, but more so for a new non-profit that's cutting a new path. But the more time went on the better we got at understanding the influencers, like trade and consumer shows, advertising, co-marketing efforts, promotions, etc.
That's where detractors repeatedly point to the new free trial members being problematic?
It's correct that our critics keep saying that, but it's a false statement. Yes, there was a bump in new membership acquisition during that period, but it was modest... comparatively speaking... and we knew it was coming, so we requested a larger than normal-sized batch. That request was met with more than we asked for and an emergency back-up batch being supplied.
And how did those assumptions and projections play-out?
Pretty much as-expected. Our partners - this one included - were thrilled with our growth. After all, more members equals more potential customers. And with there being only a few in each category of business, that's a great strategic advantage for the merchant. Competitors, who we hadn't yet contracted, were very likely losing customers. And the partners were essentially getting new loyal customers from a very different demographic than they have traditionally. The discount of 10% could easily be rationalized as customer acquisition expense, though I have no insight into any of our sponsor's thinking or rationale. It could have just as easily been that they wanted to support the org and believe in what we're building and doing.
So the influx of new comped members wasn't an issue?
Not at all. We were all pleased. And it seemed as though - even though many of the new members weren't folks who read the article - they quickly got what the ECA is and that there's a lot more to it than all of the perks and discounts.
And next...
Next, we depleted the codes pretty quickly...a bit faster than expected, but not by much. Plus we had the back-up batch, which we implemented fairly quickly. After six months of experience, users were familiar with the process and knew the timeframe required for the merchant to create new unique one-time use codes, get them over to us, and for our IT folks to upload them into the back-end. The problem came when users found that each batch of codes were programmed slightly differently and if you exploited that difference you could essentially "game" the system - tricking it into "stacking" with codes from a different batch.
What did that "stacking" entail?
We notified the partner that there was an issue with their programming and that there was an exploit that some -albeit very few - people were taking advantage of. Those users were reporting that they could stack the coupons. Instead of getting 10% off, they could get 20%.
Wow. Once that got out it must have been pandemonium?
Not really. The partner requested a code attrition and usage report, which we provided, and they began doing their own analysis. Despite what you'll hear from the trade, retail margins don't leave a lot of room for promotions for 20% off, traditionally. But the number of people exploiting the system was fairly small as a percentage. The problem was exacerbated by a land rush for codes by opportunistic members. The way the system was designed permitted any one member to download one coupon at a time, use it once and have to log back in to retrieve another. Though they had just begun working on a long-awaited multi-use code... one which could be assigned one per member and used multiple times. There was also some discussion about tying their membership account to their merchant one, for the same purpose.
That sounds like a logical solution. But that never developed?
No. During that same time, we began throttling the code distribution process...so that users could only download one per day, temporarily, solving the problem. Users quickly realized that if they quit the association, many calling our Accounting department directly, they could quit and re-join, using the free trial offer, and download an infinite number of codes. A related issue with that was that our emergency supply was then depleted much faster than we anticipated. Some of those users... again, very few, began uploading them to re-sell on eBay. That practice was a breach of their membership agreement, but the financial rewards of joining for free, downloading coupons for free and then selling them, was very appealing to them. Our Legal department worked with eBay to get those auctions removed, but the herculean work which resulted in very fast removals, was done by many of our new members - who appreciated the fact that if this wasn't stopped, it would likely result in an end to the promotion. They were really great.
How did you address closing the loophole?
Well, this is yet another one of the confluence of factors that occurred: we were doing a system-wide upgrade to the back-end software that runs the sites. Each time we build or customize modules it's a learning process. Again, there aren't any other non-profit entertainment consumer organizations to model after, so it's very often a matter of building what we think we'll need, having it be scalable, and then watching how well it addresses our needs. In doing the upgrade, the development company left a non-functioning button "live" that shouldn't have been. I believe it was for about three weeks that a feature that looked to disable auto-renewing of one's account could be selected - giving them the false impression that our software - and our architecture - was able to accommodate that request. So just to reiterate, it never worked.
I can see how that would present a problem.
Indeed. Since our staffers are all members, we wouldn't see the option to know that it was there. We, of course, had the developers remove the button as soon as we were made aware. Since it would be a year before those folks would have to renew - and the vast majority of them were the new free trial folks - we knew we had some time to sort through it, rectify the problem and explain the situation to those effected users - with our apologies and a token of our thanks for their understanding. But the code problems persisted while the partner sorted through things and worked on the new solution. Stacking three codes from three batches yielded a 30% discount and those using the exploit were getting more and more aggressive in the size of their orders - no longer buying a game or two. Joining, getting a code, calling and quitting, re-joining and getting another code and placing ever-larger orders was the breaking point. Plus, those contacting us weren't particularly pleasant to deal with when confronted about the practice.
So you've got a real problem brewing now and not a lot of options for solving it?
Exactly. We changed the method for quitting the association temporarily to mailing in the notice. The rationale was that the only people we'd ever... to the best of my knowledge... had leave the org before, were people who forgot to renew or update their credit cards and there were very few of those. By requesting that members mail in a termination notice, the only people affected were those taking advantage of the system and they were none-too-pleased with the move. If you thought they were difficult to deal with before, they were now incensed. Communications devolved into very very rude and abusive voicemail and email messages. Our staff wasn't prepared for that or for the vulgarity. I didn't want anyone having to deal with that, nor should they have to.
Did the codes come back?
No. As the partner was working on their single code solution, it all was coming to a head. We ran out of the balance of the emergency batch and were awaiting the newly enhanced codes - a process that had taken from one to two weeks before. We removed the ads which promoted that discount and dealt with the feedback from members who were getting increasingly impatient for the next batch. A few people even sent nasty emails to the merchant in an effort to make them aware of their displeasure with having to wait. Some other members started getting angry that an advertised promotion wasn't online, so they accused us of bait-and-switch and became more threatening. We updated the sponsor's listing on the partnership page to indicate that they were still supportive of the org and our efforts, but that the promotion was suspended, as we didn't know if or when another would be offered. But changing the language just made those who were upset even more angry, demanding that we somehow force the partner to provide another offer. But shortly after, we heard what we were dreading: that the exploits and comments were just getting to be too much. Had there been just a little more time or patience, the new multi-use codes would have come in and all would have been well.
Wow! OK. I didn't realize that tensions were so high?
No one did. We're talking about a very small group of people to be fair, but they were free trial members who wanted initially to get a refund and then later demanded that their membership not auto-renew until and unless more discounts came available. We responded back letting them know that more, in fact, had come online and several more were almost contracted and done, but that the button they thought they used wasn't functional. They demanded that we bring it back online and weren't happy to learn that it just wasn't that simple. When they heard that we wanted a mailed letter for termination, they went viral and began a coordinated campaign to attack the association.
But if the group was so small, how effective could they be?
Again, playing Monday morning quarterback, I can say that I had no idea. They continued escalating the situation and incensing other members, rallying them to their cause. We heard the feedback on wanting to have the option of not auto-renewing online, which made a lot of sense, but wasn't an option with the current design. They began reaching out to several media outlets, telling them that we were running a scam and taking their money without giving them the option to leave or not auto-renew. We were blindsided.
...which was when you released the reaction statement?
Right. I tried to explain the situation and address the concerns of members who were becoming aware of issues by reading the stories. They had no idea what was going on and out of context, panicked, and rightly-so. Out of context we sound like horrible greedy people and they sound like victims who've been taken advantage of. The release was intended to answer questions, allay concerns and explain what the actions of this group have done. Unfortunately, it wasn't received by everyone that way. I never meant to offend and I certainly apologize.
Were there a lot of people upset by the release?
No, not that we're aware of. I think the vast majority of members weren't even aware that there was a problem and those who were and read the statement largely took it the way it was intended. I think the folks that I upset probably read the statement via one of the blogs on-going coverage - which usually included negative commentary from the writer. Those folks, having read it that way and reading the ensuing comments below those articles, were really concerned - wondering what happened to the association and what was going on. In the mean time, a few people continued to escalate their attacks, from personal assaults on staff members in the form of slander and libel, to inciting others to contact the Better Business Bureau (BBB), then the Attorney General's (AG) office and then finally our partners, merchants and credit card providers. They demanded that we reinstitute the non-functioning button and permit them to cancel by phone and email - while, all the time, communicating that message in as hateful and vile a correspondence as you can imagine.
What was the reaction from all of the people they were trying to convince not work with ECA anymore?
Really great. Most reacted by saying that they understood the situation and they have similar problems from time to time. The BBB folks also were very understanding and we're continuing to work with them, providing them with whatever documentation and information they request. We had one partner temporarily suspend their current offer for members, wanting to wait to see how the situation was resolved. And we had another who was approached directly by the inciters, who who chose to side with them - but to be fair, he very likely knew nothing of the situation at the time. Everyone else reaffirmed their commitment to the association and, in a few examples, even provided us with valuable feedback.
Do you have any sense of who these folks are?
Absolutely. We know precisely who they are - we have all of their information, of course. Seriously?! Now again, I should be clear that when I refer to the core group, I'm referring to the same people we've been discussing all along; not everyone who is concerned, upset or anxious. I think that those folks were likely relieved to see a new FAQ that we posted in the forums, earlier this past weekend, which explains that we're working on an auto-renew process, that it'll be substantially-similar to other major online gaming services or membership orgs in its design, and that we don't alter their credit card information...
Was that a concern as well?
Only recently. I believe that came to the surface from one of the newer folks who was generally concerned after reading all of the different forums posts. They looked through our membership agreement and came across a section where we state that we could alter expiration dates to process their renewals. It was part of the boiler plate. And again, makes sense in context: I want to renew, but my card just expired. Having that clause would enable us to make the transaction go through, so it never occurred to anyone that it was a bad thing. We never used it and couldn’t imagine other circumstances under which we would. But it was spun or interpreted to mean that we're going to renew you whether you like it or not! I can appreciate that concern, especially framed with all of the other stuff; so, after discussing it, we removed that section entirely.. Legalese, while complex out of necessity sometimes, can also be made clear. I believe that's been our position with EULA standardizations, generally, as well.
There was also some question about how best to communicate to the membership?
Yes, some members asked if we could communicate any significant changes to the membership agreement – such as our removal/rewording of that sub-section we just discussed. As a result of that suggestion, we said that that’s fair and the best way to do so would be via our member’s only monthly newsletter, going forward.
Are you concerned with how this has been playing out?
Of course, very. It’s been grueling on our staff and especially on our forums moderators, who have been on the front lines. On the other hand, getting feedback from members – when it’s communicated civilly – can be really productive. A lot of the things we’ve discussed reflect that open channel of communications where they provide suggestions and comments and we can assess the need and determine how best to address it. But it’s when those lines of communication fall apart, and the discussions happen on other forums, that it’s less productive.
So why take the ECA forums off-line?
Fair enough. That was my decision. Having read all of the discussion and debate all of the issues, it seemed to me that it had all been asked and answered. All of the opinions had been stated and as many of the updates that were available were posted. We hadn’t done a major update to the system – with security patches, with new features and new registration criteria – in some time, so it seemed like a good place to give everyone a break. Like with the other things we’ve said we’re working on, so too will the forums be addressed.
Other major online gaming services have had similar problems with user complaints, why is it so much more emotional with this situation?
With online gaming services, they’re delivering much more of a product than a service in my estimation. So when they went through backlash from users who were upset with their termination policies, there was that difference. Then there’s the fact that many – although not most – of our concerned members were the free trial folks, who didn’t have to pay to join. As compared with the members who did, there may be a mind frame difference. Gaming services cost money; there’s a value proposition, users weigh the pros and cons and commit to join or not. With ECA, we go through that same process, albeit at a much lower price threshold, and the reasons for joining are less about value for the dollar – again, referring to the paid users – and more about what the org does holistically. My guess is that the paid folks are more likely to be involved actively in our advocacy efforts, reading our newsletters and publications and generally aware of the non-benefits areas in which we’re involved. Similarly, the free trial members are probably more likely to be aware of the latest partners and offers that we’ve added as member benefits. That said, our members have an emotional connection with ECA that they probably don’t have – at least in the same way – with an online gaming service.
So where are you now and what’s the plan for moving forward?
As was addressed in the FAQ, we’re working on adding a new module for online account termination as one of the lead priorities. Since they’ve been down this road and had the back and forth with their customers, we can be fairly sure that the systems that are being used now are ones that our folks will be comfortable with. Getting an option to remove auto-renewals will also be addressed in this same build-out, as will be the notification date.
And where does the ECA stand with those members who still want to cancel?
Well, I’d hope that they’d understand that we’re working to address the issues that we’ve discussed at length here, but that these things do take time. I know that asking patience at an emotionally-charged time isn’t the easiest, but I think they’ll feel assured that we haven’t mislead them as they begin to see each of these things come to fruition. If they still decide to part ways, I can’t say that I understand, but I can say that I respect their decision. Look, all of this is new – to them and to us. We need to just do the best that we can and work toward solutions that we’re all comfortable with. That’s really the best that we can do and I hope that they’re willing to be a part of that.
Is there anything else you’d like to add regarding the issue?
Yeah, again, just to restate my sincere apology for anyone who was offended by our statement last week, who felt unintentionally lumped-in with the group that I was referencing. That was never my intention, and feel badly for not being more clear. It really is in all our best interests to work together, learn from the issue and continue to focus on the important work that still needs to be done.


In my opinion, if the ECA follows through with what he's saying they will have done a lot to fix this. Also, a lot of his explanation and tone is much friendlier and clearer. They seemed to be listening to ours and others concerns and making right. For that, I applaud them.

12/9: The ECA has removed the section of the TOS referring to their ability to change your CC's expiration date, again a positive change that they should be commended for.


--------------
12/7 update:

Latest word from the ECA's Gypsyfly:
"Right now ECA is working on implementing an online option for members which will require creating a new business, accounting, and site module as the site never had this option. They will also notify members of policies changes via their members newsletters even though they are not required to, some items in the TOS will also be updated moving forward to better reflect the needs of members."

I'd recommend waiting a bit before spending the time and money on a certified letter, we'll hopefully be able to cancel a more convenient way soon.

...........

12/4 update: the eca has a new faq that includes info about canceling. They still require written notice. While they say it doesn't need to be traceable, I'd still recommend it given part 12 of their terms. They also now say they are working on another way to cancel and an option to disable auto renew.
http://forums.theeca.com/showthread.php?t=7158
What is the annual membership fee?
The annual dues for membership in the ECA are $19.99 per year for normal membership, and $14.99 for student and military members (with a valid dot edu or dot mil domain extension). To join the association, click here.

What benefits are there associated with ECA membership?
The organization is dedicated to providing a wealth of community and affinity benefits to our members.* With membership, you can connect with like-minded gamers, explore career and educational opportunities in the business, start or join one of our network of chapters across the US and Canada, and much more.*Take a few minutes to check out our website to explore the advocacy issues that we work on, the empowerment tools that we provide, the accomplishments we’ve made and the other benefits of membership. We also have a more general FAQ, which may be helpful, available here.

What do I get in terms of actual dollar value for my $19.99 dues?
The member benefits section of the website provides a detailed explanation, but our goal is to provide members with access to a whole host of goods and services, such as low cost insurance, to advocacy campaigns, to discounts with retail partners. As a member of the ECA, you should be spending considerably less each year on goods and services because you’ll have access to them through us at a much cheaper/more compelling rate(s). The list is fairly long and is constantly being updated with new offers, but members can access the full roster of offers on the site.

Since the ECA is a non-profit, are my dues payments tax-deductable?
No. The association is a 501(c)(4) non-profit membership organization. You may be thinking of 501(c)(3) charitable organizations. For more information about the differences between different classifications of non-profits, try here.

Once I join will my membership auto-renew?
Yes. At the time of your registration, you are asked to provide a major credit card so that on your anniversary date you can be automatically renewed for the following year as standard practice – not dissimilar to parallel membership organizations or major online gaming services. Nearing your anniversary date we remind you that your term is coming to an end so that you can take action to update your credit card information or cancel your membership.

Can I choose to have my membership NOT auto-renew online?
The system is presently not set up for this, but due to membership feedback we have been actively working on solutions that should make it so. We’re modeling some of the other leading online games services and membership associations, so the process should be familiar and use best practices.

Wasn’t there a button that I could check to deselect auto-renewing?
For a brief period of time, some users may have seen a non-functioning button that referred to cancelling auto-renewal. This was due to developer error during a system upgrade to the back-end. It was removed as soon as we were made aware to avoid confusion and because it never had that functionality. However, the new enhancements we’re working on will address this option.

What happens if my credit card expires?
The ECA requires all members in good standing to have updated credit cards on file. This is for several reasons, not the least of which is that the system was designed to reduce overhead and back-end expenses. The credit card disclaimer – which can be found right above the section where new members are prompted for their details – explains that the card will not be charged again until your anniversary date (not unlike other non-profit membership organizations, online gaming services, or health club memberships for that matter). If new members are unwilling or unable to fully complete their registration information, we do not process their application. If your credit card expires or is lost/stolen, your profile must be updated so that you have a valid credit card capable of paying your dues on file with the association. The ECA does not automatically update expired credit cards.

Can I cancel my membership at any time?
You may terminate your active membership in the association at any time. However, refund requests will not be processed. Like with any other membership org, many of the benefits are accessible immediately upon joining. If this policy were not in place, people could join the association, take advantage of the benefits and seek a refund immediately afterward. It is disclosed in your Membership Terms & Conditions, which you can find here.

How do I cancel my membership?
While we build out the new accounting module, discussed above, we cannot accept emailed or voicemail cancellation requests at this time. We understand that it may be frustrating, but we ask for your patience while we work to enhance the system. In the interim, if you wish to cancel your ECA membership, simply send us a letter to the address listed below. (A certified letter is not required.) Please include your full membership details (full contact info and in as much detail as possible). Your membership will be terminated once processed and you will receive correspondence back, confirming your cancellation.

Entertainment Consumers Association (ECA)
Attn: Accounting Department
64 Danbury Rd, Suite 700
Wilton, CT *06897

What if I prefer not to send a letter to cancel my membership?
Until the new system is implemented, we can only accept mailed cancellation requests. We thank you for your patience and understanding during this time and will share the details of the update shortly.

Where can I find the ECA’s Privacy Policy, Terms of Membership and Membership Agreement?
As a consumer advocacy organization, the rights of consumers are the ECA’s priority. We also have a fiduciary responsibility to the organization as a whole and to the members individually. For those reasons our policies and agreements are modeled after the leading non-profit membership organizations and are available at the bottom of every page of our website. But for quick reference, our Privacy Policy can be found here and our Membership Terms & Conditions, here.

I’ve joined the association, but am having trouble accessing my account or logging-in.

Welcome! The system will send an authentication email to the address you provided in the first step, as well as a registration message acknowledging your complimentary subscription to ECA Today, our week-nightly HTML-based newsletter. You must click on the link in the authentication email to proceed to step two and finalize your registration. If you received the newsletter email, you will likely also receive the authentication message. Check your spam folder. If you didn’t receive either message, or you didn’t receive the authentication email after a short period of time, it may be that your ISP is blocking the email, or our message triggered something in your router’s filter settings. Just email us for additional help.

Does the ECA offer working journalists complimentary memberships?
We do offer members of the media a limited number of complimentary memberships in the association. For all media inquiries, please email [email protected] to communicate directly with our public relations staff.

How can I find out more about what the ECA is doing or has accomplished?
If you want to know how to get involved in any of the issue areas in which we’re engaged, try our action center here. We also keep members abreast of our activities via our week-nightly HTML-based newsletter, ECA Today, as well as our Monthly Member Newsletter, which broadly keeps you informed. And if you still have a question, comment or concern, you could always try our Forums.

I’d like to get the word out and help recruit new members, is there an affiliate program in place?
Yes. ECA is both a Publisher and Advertiser with Commission Junction, which is how we work with affiliate partners, so we would refer you to their website to connect via their portal, here.
Last edited by ezacharyk; Today at 08:29 PM.

I am pleased progress is being made, I still strongly feel they need to send an email to all members stating that the disable auto renew feature was never functioning. Also, while they say the feature was only available for a short time, there are indications it was available as far back as March and as late as the end of October (thanks blisskr for finding these posts). I wouldn't consider that a short period time, certainly its long enough to necessitate personal notice to all of their members. Please also note a mod responds to the March post and makes no mention of its non-functionality. I would also think that means they should have known about the button as early March, yet it was not removed until several months later. Additionally, according to several CAGs, the nonfunctional button gave verification that the auto renewal feature was canceled. It's very difficult to trust someone with your credit card information if such a major mistake is left on their website for months.


................

I am well aware that this is not a deal and many will flame me and say this is the wrong forum or that this is a re-post. However, at one point it seems like the majority of CAGs gave these people their credit card information in order to sign up for a paid or "free" membership. It should be emphasized that everyone who became a member(including free ones) had to give their credit card info, in case you have forgotten. Many if not all who signed up immediately canceled the auto renew billing feature using the website. It appears that it is now ECA's stance that anyone who did this did not actually cancel because it was never a working part of their website. They claim that the auto renew feature was only available for a limited time and never actually did anything because of some glitch, but anecdotal evidence from CAGs suggest it was online for several weeks and possibly months. Up to this point, they have refused to adequately accept responsibility for this mistake and have failed to personally notify their members of this problem. The original thread where I got this info from is found here, full credit should be given to Cager arcane93 for pointing all this out in this thread.

The ONLY way you can cancel your membership is by a letter through some form of TRACEABLE mail.

send your cancellation here, which according to their terms must be sent 30 days prior to your renewal date:
[FONT=&quot]Attn: Accounting, ECA, 64 Danbury Road, Suite 700, Wilton, CT 06897-4406. [/FONT]

What info is needed to cancel?
Just say you want to cancel and include your full name and email.

THERE IS NO WAY TO TURN OFF AUTO RENEW- you can only cancel your membership, they say here that "You will be notified a month before hand of your account expiring. So you have time to cancel if you decided to do so." But according to section 4 of their terms you must cancel 30 days prior to your renewal date. Obviously, this is highly problematic.

---for those concerned about potential unwanted charges: the charge shows up as: "ENT. CONSUMER ASSOC" Phone number 203-761-6180 CT"

Here are some tidbits from the ECA mod's themselves, taken from their forum:

Was there a button for auto-renewing?
Yes, for some browsers, but it wasn’t intended to be there, wasn’t a working option and was removed as soon as we became aware

Why can’t we terminate via email?
Because the org has grown too large to handle the volume and requiring a mailed piece separates those who are serious from those who are lazy or finicky – joining and leaving repeatedly – and it gives us written documentation, a paper trail to reconcile against

Notable Parts of their terms of service:

[FONT=&quot]5.[/FONT][FONT=&quot]Right to update Credit Card Account Information[/FONT][FONT=&quot]. If the credit card provided by Member to ECA has expired during an attempt to bill fees per section 4, ECA will revise the expiration date and proceed with billing using the same credit card account.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Was the stacking even that rampant? I joined back at the end of July and paid for my membership. I followed the thread here pretty steadily to keep an eye out for the best deals to use the 10% on. I didn't even know you could force the coupons to stack until this thread. Maybe I was traveling and missed a week or two of the old thread or something, but it seems like if it was THAT widespread, I'd have seen someone mentioning it.
 
Hal's reply doesn't sound like the major problem was the stackers. I think the last straw for him was the eBay sellers. I know there were like one or two of "CAGs" (I think they were newbies) taking part in that, but I also know there was a lot of CAGs reporting it to the ECA. Doesn't really sound like CAG was the problem for that one. In fact, CAG was probably helping with that issue.

The real issues that still isn't getting addressed by the ECA that makes the ECA a scam is the auto-charging of the credit card despite an expiration date and almost the lack of responsibility by the ECA if you send your cancellation letter. I'm still surprised despite Hal's efforts to be open and frank, he still has not addressed these major issues.
 
This was my response on GAF to Hal's Comments, but I wanted to post them here just to rant and get it off my chest. Hal's response in the "interview", which appears to be a conversation with himself, has way too many holes.


Ok, Hal, get the story straight. We all know wiping your forums clean removed a lot of the evidence against you, but much of this has been discussed.

"many calling our Accounting department directly, they could quit and re-join"


Was it really that easy>?

"the development company left a non-functioning button "live" that shouldn't have been. I believe it was for about three weeks"

People posted on the forums, months ago, that the auto renew button was working as long ago as March

"We changed the method for quitting the association temporarily to mailing in the notice"


You never at any point stated that the mailing in method was temporary, never.

"By requesting that members mail in a termination notice, the only people affected were those taking advantage of the system and they were none-too-pleased with the move."


Again, all 650 plus of you on the cancellation list are only those taking advantage of the codes. He just does not get it. This is not an issue with ONLY those taking advantage of the system Hal.

"We removed the ads which promoted that discount"

You left them on your site up until a few days ago saying they were "temporarily unavailable" making it seem as if they were coming back.

"Had there been just a little more time or patience, the new multi-use codes would have come in and all would have been well."

They never came in, and still haven't come in.

"We're talking about a very small group of people to be fair, but they were free trial members who wanted initially to get a refund and then later demanded that their membership not auto-renew until and unless more discounts came available."

I have yet to see one person in this forums or the other upset that they didn't get a refund, nobody wanted a refund. Nobody wanted more discounts and threatened to quit because of that. Hal, it is all the other reasons pointed out in this thread and all hte others. And a small group? He just cannot drop it.

"I never meant to offend and I certainly apologize."

Did Hal just apologize? But all of this is just a reaction of a small group of scam artists, why is he apologizing to them. This is ALL THEIR Fault, remember?

"a few people continued to escalate their attacks"

Yep, 6-8 people, or 650 people, who is counting?

"but to be fair, he very likely knew nothing of the situation at the time."

So you are saying your partners, business men, would make a business move without knowing the situation? Again, this is THEIR fault, and not the ECA's.

"and that we don't alter their credit card information..."


Your terms of service, which people agree to, still stated that you do and will. YOu dont agree to a FAQ, you agree to a TOS. When people wanted to quit, your mods and his/her buddies all pointed to that TOS. Stating, "they signed the TOS, the knew you had to send in a letter." Yeah, everyone agreed to the TOS that also stated you will change credit card expiration dates.

"I want to renew, but my card just expired. Having that clause would enable us to make the transaction go through, so it never occurred to anyone that it was a bad thing."


That never occurred to anyone that it was a bad thing? Think about what you are saying. You cannot do that just to get your money. If the card is expired, it is expired. Contact the user, they can update it themselves. It was so easy to enter the credit card to join, it should be easy to update your card as well.

"But it was spun or interpreted to mean that we're going to renew you whether you like it or not!"

Just like you are going to press fraud charges if a card is canceled. A card is canceled when it expires as well. That card is no longer good. Just like a card that a user requests to cancel, it is no longer any good. How can you say you are not going to do it whether we like it or not, when you threaten fraud charges if we simply cancel the card? You are trying to get your money either way.

"As a result of that suggestion (changes to the TOS), we said that that’s fair and the best way to do so would be via our member’s only monthly newsletter, going forward."

Yeah, and it would have been nice to see you let everyone know in the past as well when you change the TOS. And what if your users never subscribed to the newsletter? Or as some have stated, never got a newsletter? And just because you inform them about the TOS, doesn't mean they want to re-accept it. Its not like once you accept it one time, you can change it all you want and just tell people in a newsletter. What if they dont like the changes and don't want to accept the changes?

"With online gaming services, they’re delivering much more of a product than a service in my estimation." ........"and the reasons for joining are less about value for the dollar – again, referring to the paid users – and more about what the org does holistically"....


It is still very unclear what type of service the ECA provides. Asking gamers to go green in a newsletter or website update? How much did that cost? Sending emails out to Developers and Publishers. How much did that cost? What is the service you are providing with membership fees? Where is the money going? We know your cause, we know your mission statement, but it is still very unclear how you are going about achieving those goals and how you are using membership fees to reach them.

"Well, I’d hope that they’d understand that we’re working to address the issues that we’ve discussed at length here, but that these things do take time. I know that asking patience at an emotionally-charged time isn’t the easiest, but I think they’ll feel assured that we haven’t mislead them as they begin to see each of these things come to fruition. If they still decide to part ways, I can’t say that I understand, but I can say that I respect their decision. Look, all of this is new – to them and to us. We need to just do the best that we can and work toward solutions that we’re all comfortable with. That’s really the best that we can do and I hope that they’re willing to be a part of that.".........."Yeah, again, just to restate my sincere apology for anyone who was offended by our statement last week, who felt unintentionally lumped-in with the group that I was referencing. That was never my intention, and feel badly for not being more clear. It really is in all our best interests to work together, learn from the issue and continue to focus on the important work that still needs to be done."



This, I agree with, and I like to hear. This should have been the first paragraph of the "interview" not the last ones. Hal should have started with these statements. This should have been stated a week ago, not now. But he still is lumping everyone together in this group of "6-8 people". When will he understand that this is much bigger than that?





[/rant] I just had to get this off my chest. As much as it seems they are trying to do the RIGHT thing, it still is their USERS fault. They still think it is only those scammers or finniky customers that are upset. He also never touched on how they trap you in by notifying you that you are set for auto renewal, but their reminder comes too late for you to cancel with snail mail. Also, they stated in the past that because of high numbers and stuff that they were unable to handle phone or email cancellations. They didn't say it was to make it harder for scammers to cancel. Now he has changed his tune on that.
 
[quote name='Lan_Zer0']I don't want to get into arguments of analogies, but applying a coupon code requires no manipulation. And this is probably the last thing I say on the matter.

You buy a box of cereal. You have two different $1 coupons. Both say "cannot be combined with another offer". You hand over both coupons and inform the cashier that you are not sure if they will work. Cashier scans them, and they both go through and you walk out of the store with the cereal. Did you just scam the store? Are you a thief?[/QUOTE]

You make a good point in this analogy, but I view this in a bigger picture.

If the result of this incident (two coupons on the box of cereal) was that this store, the one you do all your food shopping for due to value, no longer accepted coupons at all because of this, then yes, the analogy is correct to me. It wasn't the act, but also the effect it had in the big picture.

I just find it "wrong" not just for the fact that the codes were stacked, but because it most likely (but without proof, only what I consider logical evidence) led to the demise of the entire thing. It goes to the "few bad apples" proverb.

I also am a little angry at Amazon for allowing it, and then pulling the plug instead of fixing it, thereby making people honestly using the codes upset. It's like back in grade school (I'm assuming this analogy is universal) when ONE bad kid acted up, the teacher would make EVERYONE put their heads down on their desks for 20 minutes. Of course you're going to be angry. You'll be angry at that kid, and you'll be angry at the teacher for her version of "discipline" ...

I hope you get what I'm saying. I think it's a combination of factors, and I'm mad at the whole issue, and when I dissect it, the blame disperses to several sources....

It's the whole "it's just not fair" BS, and I'm sure it sounds whiny, but tough, some of us got screwed over on what's been one of the best deals I've ever seen.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='odin08']Nice to see those who aren't trying to justify themselves by taking advantage of a simple error made by Amazon, who was kind enough to even offer the 10% discount in the first place.[/QUOTE]
Certainly! but only a minority of CAGers did stack, I think most of us did not, including myself (I used a single code, once). I also heard that slickdeals were the once exploiting and stacking codes (but don't quote me on this).
 
[quote name='Lan_Zer0']I don't want to get into arguments of analogies, but applying a coupon code requires no manipulation. And this is probably the last thing I say on the matter.

You buy a box of cereal. You have two different $1 coupons. Both say "cannot be combined with another offer". You hand over both coupons and inform the cashier that you are not sure if they will work. Cashier scans them, and they both go through and you walk out of the store with the cereal. Did you just scam the store? Are you a thief?[/QUOTE]

Ok so maybe I chose a poor analogy, but nowhere did I call anyone a thief or scammer.

Im sure that some people did this on accident and this is how it was discovered. Im also sure that this was a small percentage of the people who actually stacked codes. I'm willing to bet that at least 90% of the stacking was done intentionally.

It's hard to argue that point when I see people still bragging about adding onto their already triple stacked pre-orders.
 
[quote name='sickle']Certainly! but only a minority of CAGers did stack, I think most of us did not, including myself (I used a single code, once). I also heard that slickdeals were the once exploiting and stacking codes (but don't quote me on this).[/QUOTE]

I know, but it doesn't really make it any less irritating that the actions of a few screwed everyone.
 
[quote name='odin08']Nice to see those who aren't trying to justify themselves by taking advantage of a simple error made by Amazon, who was kind enough to even offer the 10% discount in the first place.[/QUOTE]

Exactly. Now this thread is about how ECA over-reacted and lost a lot of good will, because there is a bunch of us that didn't stack, and in fact never got to use a code at all, before this went away. I just wanted my NY tax taken off :cry:

But so it goes, I saw the writing on the wall when the exploiters took over the ECA thread - yes *exploiters*, clearly using the codes in a manner they weren't intended, suggesting otherwise is kidding yourselves. Frankly I would have rather Amazon and ECA just crashed down on these abuses/accounts.

It is a bit mind-boggling that the ECA code was so poorly implemented, it's not like internet shopping is in its infancy and Amazon is a small startup company. Flip-side you can see where they don't want to spend time and money to fix/track down exploits on a provided benefit to a non-profit.

I still think the ECA has done some permanent damage, but I might now see where this comes to before I send in my letter. My final disappoint lies not with the CAGers though - cheap asses WILL be cheap asses accompanied by twisting logic and ethics to try and justify - but with what the ECA has done to their fledgling community. It didn't need a blow like this - they first had my sympathies. Now I just want out.

When a community-supported advocacy group acts as bad as those who tweaked them in the nose - to all of their members - they'll lose members.

[quote name='odin08']I know, but it doesn't really make it any less irritating that the actions of a few screwed everyone.[/QUOTE]

Well I agree but I did get over it, posted in the ECA forums, tried Gamefly for a couple extra weeks, and liked the fact I'd be able to decide to stick around at the ECA at my own terms - I had already gotten rid of the auto-renew. The Amazon got in me in, never getting to use it got me off auto-renew, but I was still giving it a chance. The problem with ECA's response was that they let the actions of a few change their relationship with everyone. You can understand the knee-jerk reaction, if it's an individual. But if you're at the helm of a non-profit advocacy company which relies on its members, you have to do a bit better than that.
 
Hey Hal:

When you update the site to allow users to terminate their membership, or opt-out of auto-renewing, please remember to have the system send an email receipt of the changes made to the user. We don't want to be charged later, and have you claiming later that there was a problem with that feature on the day we were using it.

We want documentation that our account has been canceled, and that we have opted out out of the auto-renew option.

Thanks.
 
So yeah. That letter should have been his reply in the first place. His PR guy must have been on vacation for the first one -_- (granted, the moderators of their forums were no better)

In any case, too little, too late at this point. The letter is still condescending (though at least he actually apologizes). I love how he says the sponsors that pulled out "just didn't understand the issue" -_-

And yeah, I find it really hard to believe anyone was quitting and rejoining to get more Amazon codes. I still don't think he understands what happened there.

Anyways, I eagerly await online cancellation. I'd be curious to see what their member numbers look like once it goes active ;)
 
[quote name='Dahk']I respectfully disagree. The glitch needed to be manipulated by a person in order to work. This is more like the equivalent of changing stickers on items.[/QUOTE]

Not really. The closest example I can think of is going into a Gamestop with two coupons that don't stack. If you as the cashier to manually enter the discount for the other coupon anyway, 9 times out of 10 they'll tell you know NO but sometimes they'll do it. Or I've found games on the discount rack at Walmart that aren't at the discount, but tell the cashier this and them giving me the discount price anyway.
 
[quote name='Dahk']I respectfully disagree. The glitch needed to be manipulated by a person in order to work. This is more like the equivalent of changing stickers on items.[/QUOTE]

Whether you disagree or not, you are still completely wrong. After the first batch of Amazon codes went quickly, when the second batch came up, I decided to go all out and pre-order everything I wanted for the rest of the 2009 and 2010 season. I have Prime, so in order for Release Date Delivery to work, they all need to be separate orders (otherwise I would have bundled them all).

So, I ended up pre-ordering maybe close to 20 games. Eventually, close to half of these came out, and got shipped to me. So, let's knock it down a little above half, and say I still had 12 games left. Now, I ran into a problem of not having enough money (anticipating that I was going to have to buy Windows 7 that month; October; and also a few games Amazon still had listed as being released) so I ended up canceling a few (like Alpha Protocol).

Needless to say, I didn't even notice anything. I went to order something else a few days later, got a code, entered it, and suddenly; it turns out the code stacked with an older one. Completely unintentional. There is no remove option for these codes, so it's not like I was able to remove it; and I still needed the product I was ordering, so I'm not going to not order it just because there was some kind of glitch that rules in my favor. That would be asinine.

Therefore, although I used the "stacking", it was never intentional.. as I'm sure it wasn't by quite a few people (and sure it was by quite a lot of other people). It's just the by-product of a lazy programmer over at Amazon. They can easily limit coupons working with other coupons, and they knew about the stacking issue, so they really only had to tell the ECA to take down the codes, purge all current ECA codes (un-used ones that were the by-product of situations like mine; which they did do later-on), and then simply come out with the one-time codes, or come out with a batch that was incompatible with the others.

Why they didn't, is beyond me; but don't go playing the blame and self-righteous game on everyone here. Not all of us meant to do it, and it quite literally just happened; and it left all of us in a situation to where we either have to not order our product, or order it with the unintentional stacking. As I said, if you expect me to not order something that I need, just because I accidentally made it stack, you sir are out of your mind. I was ordering it for a reason, and an extra discount (although enticing) doesn't negate the fact of how much I needed the product to begin with.
 
Hal's response is borderline delusional, and tries (unsuccessfully) to gloss over the core issue, which is _not_ cancellation, but auto-renewel.

If the ECA had issues with people quitting and rejoining, then making it hard to cancel mid-year (by requiring snail mail), but leaving the option to opt-out of auto-renewel would have served exactly the same purpose, but without pissing off the legitimate members. Even now, they could negate this entire issue just by changing the renewal to opt-in rather than opt-out. Rather than send me email to notify me of the auto-renewal, send me email to remind me that my membership is expiring, and let me decide whether I'd like to continue the association.

By _not_ doing this, it's perfectly clear that the ECA is more interested in raising revenue from technicalities than serving their membership.
 
[quote name='Reira']I just closed the letter for editing. It can still be viewed however. I sent simmias 3 versions of the list, and asked him to specify which he is using:

Version 1: No edits
Version 2: People who are missing BOTH e-mail & username deleted (approx. 5)
Version 3: People who are missing EITHER e-mail or username deleted (approx. 35)

EDIT: Got a response back from simmias that he says he will hopefully get them mailed out today. Make sure you thank him! I'm sure he'll post later with more info.[/QUOTE]

Thanks a lot for your time and effort Reira and simmias, you guys are awesome. Thx again OP you rock also :)
 
[quote name='ja30278']Hal's response is borderline delusional, and tries (unsuccessfully) to gloss over the core issue, which is _not_ cancellation, but auto-renewel.[/QUOTE]

Exactly. I wasn't looking to cancel my membership -- I was more than willing to give the ECA the remainder of my current membership year to prove their value to me. But I did not want them renewing my membership without my direct approval. That's all. All of this could have easily been avoided if they'd provided this one simple option. I don't know why Hal and the other ECA people are finding this so hard to understand.

As has been noted previously, it's disingenuous for him to claim that the option to turn off auto-renewal wasn't working at all. There was a check box there, and when I unchecked it, it stayed unchecked. Therefore, it had to be, at the very least, storing that information somewhere. Maybe it would have taken some form of manual intervention on their part to make it actually not auto-renew, but they cannot reasonably claim that there was no working functionality there at all.

What gets to me more than anything is that after they stated that the box wasn't supposed to be there, they then just ignored all queries as to whether they intended to honor it for those who had used it or not. They didn't even state that it was "non-functional" until literally weeks later. This entire issue has come out of their complete and total inability to communicate effectively. If they can't even communicate on internal issues with me as a member, how am I supposed to trust them to communicate for me to the outside world as an advocacy group?
 
I never got too involved in all this; I actually paid back in March or April, whenever that article hit ArsTechnica about the ECA and Amazon codes and ended up getting my money's worth prior to the free codes.

His statement is definite damage control now, as there were a ton of screw ups, but I suppose it's good to hear that they're at least making convenience for auto-renew. I was actually one person that changed to not auto-renew via that button, only to find out via CAG over a month later that I hadn't.

Really though, I can't believe how anyone could defend some of the mods. Gypsyfly has already received her fair share, and it's been said to death, so I'll leave that be. I just can't see how, in any reality, GamesLaw could be considered to have handled the situation with anything less than the skill of a ham-fisted blind man trying to catch a 50-yard pass. I never posted on the ECA forums, but I saw when people had legitimate questions. He never answered anyone's questions. Instead, he directed them to FAQs that either didn't exist or didn't answer anyone's questions. He continually locked threads for hours, pointing to places without links, which people obviously didn't notice or they wouldn't have had to post countless threads. He never pointed anyone to an answer, or that answer provided nothing about the question asked; his arrogance and obvious opinion of these complainers as the 'lesser' ECA members got in his way of being a decent moderator.

A simple statement admitting ignorance to what they wanted or simply asking them to wait for an official word would have calmed the situation, but his arrogance and pride directly helped to escalate the situation. I know it's bad for a lawyer to admit fault, but when you're in Public Relations (I mean, a mod is just an unpaid PR rep) you don't have to tell the people ALL of the truth, just enough of it in a vague enough manner that they mildly understand what to wait for.
 
[quote name='arcane93']Exactly. I wasn't looking to cancel my membership -- I was more than willing to give the ECA the remainder of my current membership year to prove their value to me. But I did not want them renewing my membership without my direct approval. That's all. All of this could have easily been avoided if they'd provided this one simple option. I don't know why Hal and the other ECA people are finding this so hard to understand.

As has been noted previously, it's disingenuous for him to claim that the option to turn off auto-renewal wasn't working at all. There was a check box there, and when I unchecked it, it stayed unchecked. Therefore, it had to be, at the very least, storing that information somewhere. Maybe it would have taken some form of manual intervention on their part to make it actually not auto-renew, but they cannot reasonably claim that there was no working functionality there at all.

What gets to me more than anything is that after they stated that the box wasn't supposed to be there, they then just ignored all queries as to whether they intended to honor it for those who had used it or not. They didn't even state that it was "non-functional" until literally weeks later. This entire issue has come out of their complete and total inability to communicate effectively. If they can't even communicate on internal issues with me as a member, how am I supposed to trust them to communicate for me to the outside world as an advocacy group?[/QUOTE]

^ this exactly

The communication issues especially have really been the crux for me. They will go completely silent, locking threads with legitament questions even, then when they *do* talk, it's one big insult. Like they are saying "stop wasting our time with your petty concerns" and "maybe if you weren't all criminals, none of this would happen."
 
The ECA mods' behavior in all of this was definitely one of the most offensive things about the whole situation. Not only did they do everything possible to confuse and anger the members more than they already were, but they were snotty and rude about it from the word go. You can almost understand someone like Halpin, who has a financial and reputational stake in all this, going into defensive/spin mode when things turned sour, but with the volunteer mods, who knows what was going on in their heads.
 
My first stacks were on accident just by applying a few codes to my account based on knowing the expiration dates of the others codes that were posted so I'd have a few to order some games that were valid. Problem was the older codes didn't actually expire on the date that was posted and stacked with the newer codes. And for all your moral high rollers I felt a little guilty and called amazon and they told me there was no way to remove said applied promo from my account. That being the case there was many of us that stacked on accident and had no way of not stacking no matter what we did. So sorry to offend you but amazon didn't really care based off what they told me and I ordered the games I was going to anyway without any moral dilemma after that point.
 
*sigh*

Where do I sign up to play on ECA's self-pitch softball team, because GameCulture is up for the Cy Young Award


The positives from that article:
- He admitted he screwed up with the GIMAG code

- He apologized for the way his first press release sounded - which I'll barely give him a pass for, despite him not apologizing for what it actually said.

-
But it was spun or interpreted to mean that we're going to renew you whether you like it or not! I can appreciate that concern, especially framed with all of the other stuff; so, after discussing it, we removed that section entirely.. Legalese, while complex out of necessity sometimes, can also be made clear. I believe that's been our position with EULA standardizations, generally, as well.
Removal of the forced update on expired credit cards in the TOS is a huge plus. I belong to other places that just send me an email notification that my credit card is due to expire and I must update the information with them. They don't force an update whether I want it or not. Hopefully the ECA implements such a system here.

- No ill will toward the 700+ people canceling their accounts


The negatives from that article:
- It's not a real interview. There is no journalist named conducting this interview, and every "question" is just a softball one to lead Hal into his next answer. This is basically the equivalent of one of those advertisements in a magazine that looks like an article, or one of those infomercials they set up to look like a news report

-
Users quickly realized that if they quit the association, many calling our Accounting department directly, they could quit and re-join, using the free trial offer, and download an infinite number of codes.
So now it's many people calling to cancel? I thought it was just a few people calling before. Seriously. Make up your mind on the number of people who were calling and canceling every day, and either way admit you changed your entire procedure on the basis of how a small number of people acted. Never mind the fact that you didn't change your procedure until the Amazon codes were dead.

-
I believe it was for about three weeks that a feature that looked to disable auto-renewing of one's account could be selected - giving them the false impression that our software - and our architecture - was able to accommodate that request. So just to reiterate, it never worked.
It was there for longer than three weeks. I saw it when I joined BEFORE the GIMAG code stuff, and it was successfully used pre-March 2009. You're wrong on your "belief" there Hal. It did work at some point. I don't doubt that perhaps an upgrade screwed up the coding and disabled it, but it's a blatant lie to say it never worked.

-
Since it would be a year before those folks would have to renew - and the vast majority of them were the new free trial folks - we knew we had some time to sort through it, rectify the problem and explain the situation to those effected users - with our apologies and a token of our thanks for their understanding.
So how long were you going to wait before telling users that the button didn't work? 30 days before their membership expired? The whole year? It's been at least two months already, yet we've gotten no email that it didn't work.

-
By requesting that members mail in a termination notice, the only people affected were those taking advantage of the system and they were none-too-pleased with the move.
Wrong. #1 - According to you, the people that "gamed" the system were the ones who called, canceled, and resigned up. So literally, they only have one account to cancel, just like the rest of us. So are you calling all 700+ people on the list you're about to get scammers? Every one of them? #2 - The only people who would be pissed off about having to mail a letter would be the ones who "gamed" the system the right way, and are sitting there with 10 ECA accounts and no Amazon codes to exploit.

-
Had there been just a little more time or patience, the new multi-use codes would have come in and all would have been well.
It's all of our faults that there's no more Amazon codes then. You see, all those people who wrote in THANKING Amazon for participating with the ECA - you were outnumbered by a bunch of trolls. Nevermind the fact Amazon could have just voided all the codes like they eventually did anyway, then implemented the multi-use codes. B.S. answer, Hal.

-
We're talking about a very small group of people to be fair, but they were free trial members who wanted initially to get a refund and then later demanded that their membership not auto-renew until and unless more discounts came available.
The people legitimately upset about this, trolls aside, is pretty large. We're not a small number Hal. You're a small man for the way you hide behind your smokescreens with your spin.

-
Do you have any sense of who these folks are?
Absolutely. We know precisely who they are - we have all of their information, of course. Seriously?! Now again, I should be clear that when I refer to the core group, I'm referring to the same people we've been discussing all along; not everyone who is concerned, upset or anxious.
- So who are you exactly referring to here Hal? I've never threatened anyone of your staff. But I've been a vocal participant when you cut off registrations for the ECA, and again posting here on CAG. But I think most people would agree that, despite some parody images I've uploaded, I've been very mature and at least written mostly well thought out posts. So are you threatening me Hal? You have my home address and credit card number? Are you going to report me to the FBI or to your bank, or file a lawsuit against me? Or were you merely referring to the trolls who spammed your forums?

-
On the other hand, getting feedback from members – when it’s communicated civilly – can be really productive. A lot of the things we’ve discussed reflect that open channel of communications where they provide suggestions and comments and we can assess the need and determine how best to address it.
So what's the open channel of communication for us? Will you actually respond to my concerns if I use that feedback form since you closed the forums?

-
Yeah, again, just to restate my sincere apology for anyone who was offended by our statement last week, who felt unintentionally lumped-in with the group that I was referencing.
Well, now I feel lumped in with a group of people I don't belong with. Throughout this article you lumped together the trolls that were threatening Gypsyfly and posting porn on your forums and somehow still scamming your organization with the people who were just fed up with the ECA and its nonsense and wrote civilized posts to that extent. We're not the same, Hal.
 
[quote name='Ryuukishi']The ECA mods' behavior in all of this was definitely one of the most offensive things about the whole situation. Not only did they do everything possible to confuse and anger the members more than they already were, but they were snotty and rude about it from the word go. You can almost understand someone like Halpin, who has a financial and reputational stake in all this, going into defensive/spin mode when things turned sour, but with the volunteer mods, who knows what was going on in their heads.[/QUOTE]

Here's the thing, though -- other than perhaps Gyspyfly (and even she was obviously in way over her head), those mods are unpaid people who do not directly represent the ECA. They should never have been put in the situation where they were our only line of communication to the ECA in the first place. Where was Hal through all of this? For that matter, where has Jason Anderson (the ECA's "director of public relations") been? Or Brett Schenker (their "online advocacy manager")? Or any of the other people on the "Team ECA" page (http://theeca.com/team_eca)? Why did they just leave their mods clearly flailing and trying to deal with issues which went way beyond moderating a forum? The mods may not have behaved as well they should have, but ultimately it's on the ECA staff for not noticing that there was a problem and bailing them out. They are the ones who need to be held accountable. If they had been on top of it, things might have never turned sour.
 
[quote name='arcane93']Here's the thing, though -- other than perhaps Gyspyfly (and even she was obviously in way over her head), those mods are unpaid people who do not directly represent the ECA. They should never have been put in the situation where they were our only line of communication to the ECA in the first place.[/QUOTE]
That's a great point. You'd think someone higher up would have taken the mods aside at some point and said, "You're not helping."

Unless they were fine with the mods taking the heat in their place. I'm actually kind of surprised that Hal hasn't mentioned anything about "Forum mods, not sanctioned by or officially connected to the ECA, making mistakes to further inflame the situation" or somesuch. Seems like the kind of blame deflection that's right up his alley.
 
[quote name='Ryuukishi']That's a great point. You'd think someone higher up would have taken the mods aside at some point and said, "You're not helping."

Unless they were fine with the mods taking the heat in their place. I'm actually kind of surprised that Hal hasn't mentioned anything about "Forum mods, not sanctioned by or officially connected to the ECA, making mistakes to further inflame the situation" or somesuch. Seems like the kind of blame deflection that's right up his alley.[/QUOTE]He will if it suits him later. Though Gypsyfly has not handled the situation well, I felt bad for her at the beginning since it was very clear she could do nothing but toe the company line and wait for someone in the organization to answer her own questions.

GamesLaw on the other hand... has been a dick since the day the Amazon codes went up in April.
 
[quote name='LegendK7ll3r']Therefore, although I used the "stacking", it was never intentional.. as I'm sure it wasn't by quite a few people (and sure it was by quite a lot of other people). It's just the by-product of a lazy programmer over at Amazon. They can easily limit coupons working with other coupons, and they knew about the stacking issue, so they really only had to tell the ECA to take down the codes, purge all current ECA codes (un-used ones that were the by-product of situations like mine; which they did do later-on), and then simply come out with the one-time codes, or come out with a batch that was incompatible with the others.
[/QUOTE]

Same thing happened to me. I had pre-ordered 4 games (Beatles, Batman, Uncharted, and Brutal Legend) seperately when they were made available using the pre-order codes. My wife made me cancel them after a trip to the emergency room jumbled our finances. When everything straightened out, I re-ordered everything in 1 big lump using the FSSS. The discount was there, and I didn't know where it came from- Amazon didn't indicate what the cause was- just the discount. I cancelled the order and placed it again, and sure enough- big discount again. I even cancelled it a 3rd time and went into my "Promotions and Credits" section, and couldn't figure out what it was from. There was no way to deactivate the coupons, and I didn't even know what was causing it until I came here.

Eventually, I placed the order (and of course I added a few things to it). I felt guilty- so i contacted Amazon about some other parts of the order thinking they'd say something about it, but they didn't mention it.

While i'm sure some people intentionally used the glitch- there were a lot of people who stumbled into it.
 
[quote name='arcane93']Here's the thing, though -- other than perhaps Gyspyfly (and even she was obviously in way over her head), those mods are unpaid people who do not directly represent the ECA. They should never have been put in the situation where they were our only line of communication to the ECA in the first place. Where was Hal through all of this? For that matter, where has Jason Anderson (the ECA's "director of public relations") been? Or Brett Schenker (their "online advocacy manager")? Or any of the other people on the "Team ECA" page (http://theeca.com/team_eca)? Why did they just leave their mods clearly flailing and trying to deal with issues which went way beyond moderating a forum? The mods may not have behaved as well they should have, but ultimately it's on the ECA staff for not noticing that there was a problem and bailing them out. They are the ones who need to be held accountable. If they had been on top of it, things might have never turned sour.[/QUOTE]

This is true. But I don't think the mods get off that easy - being a moderator and not an actual "Team ECA" member doesn't give them an excuse to act like pricks to everyone. They could have certainly tried to direct those ECA people to the relevant threads if they didn't know the answers themselves.
 
[quote name='Ryuukishi']You'd think someone higher up would have taken the mods aside at some point and said, "You're not helping."[/QUOTE]

I'm not even so much saying that. The big problem came out of people demanding answers which the mods didn't have. The mods stalled, or didn't answer at all, presumably waiting for someone higher up to provide them. It didn't happen, and people got impatient and nastier about asking -- say what you want about the mods actions, but I did catch a few of the posts that they deleted before they deleted them, and there were some people posting some pretty nasty things (I'm not saying that everyone, or even everyone who was deleted did, but there were definitely some bad ones). As the mods began to feel more and more embattled, they got more hostile. Really, though I do fault them for escalating things in the way that they did, I can very nearly understand how they got there.

The point is that if someone from the ECA who actually had the authority to answer the questions that were asked had been on the forum answering them, things would have never gotten to where they did. They didn't need to be pulling mods aside after the fact, they needed to be dealing with the issues before it ever got to that point.

You know, looking at their staff page, I notice that they don't have a single person listed as being in charge of "membership" . . . Maybe that's part of the issue -- they don't actually have anyone whose duty it is to deal with membership issues.
 
[quote name='Warlock82']They could have certainly tried to direct those ECA people to the relevant threads if they didn't know the answers themselves.[/QUOTE]

I'm operating under the assumption that they did try, given that the information that we did get has to have come from somewhere. Really, though, are none of the ECA staff looking at their own forums, that they only know about issues and member questions if a mod reports them?

Anyway, yeah, I'm not saying that the mods are without blame, or that they didn't behave like pricks. They certainly did. But I still think that it only got to that point because they were put into a situation that they shouldn't have been in.
 
[quote name='arcane93']I'm not even so much saying that. The big problem came out of people demanding answers which the mods didn't have. The mods stalled, or didn't answer at all, presumably waiting for someone higher up to provide them. It didn't happen, and people got impatient and nastier about asking -- say what you want about the mods actions, but I did catch a few of the posts that they deleted before they deleted them, and there were some people posting some pretty nasty things (I'm not saying that everyone, or even everyone who was deleted did, but there were definitely some bad ones). As the mods began to feel more and more embattled, they got more hostile. Really, though I do fault them for escalating things in the way that they did, I can very nearly understand how they got there.[/QUOTE]
I don't know-- Maybe I wasn't following as closely, and in any case it's hard to recreate the sequence of events with so many posts delected after the fact, but it seemed to me that the mods were acting arrogant and hostile from the jump. They were characterizing any and all questions and complaints as "trolling" and "spamming" from the beginning, so when those things actually started happening, their credibility was already shot.
 
[quote name='arcane93']
You know, looking at their staff page, I notice that they don't have a single person listed as being in charge of "membership" . . . Maybe that's part of the issue -- they don't actually have anyone whose duty it is to deal with membership issues.[/QUOTE]
If I liked my wife less, I would recommend she send in an application.

[quote name='Ryuukishi']I don't know-- Maybe I wasn't following as closely, and in any case it's hard to recreate the sequence of events with so many posts delected after the fact, but it seemed to me that the mods were acting arrogant and hostile from the jump. They were characterizing any and all questions and complaints as "trolling" and "spamming" from the beginning, so when those things actually started happening, their credibility was already shot.[/QUOTE]
It depends on what you're referring to as the starting point. They were dealing with crap from people every time the codes disappeared for a few days since the Amazon promo began, and it only got worse once they were discontinued entirely.
 
So, out of curiosity, has no one at all tried to post a comment on Hal's latest post, or are they blocking/deleting them? I'm shocked that there's still not a single comment on that page.
 
[quote name='arcane93']I'm operating under the assumption that they did try, given that the information that we did get has to have come from somewhere. Really, though, are none of the ECA staff looking at their own forums, that they only know about issues and member questions if a mod reports them?

Anyway, yeah, I'm not saying that the mods are without blame, or that they didn't behave like pricks. They certainly did. But I still think that it only got to that point because they were put into a situation that they shouldn't have been in.[/QUOTE]

True. Which gets back to the whole issue with communication :)
 
[quote name='arcane93']So, out of curiosity, has no one at all tried to post a comment on Hal's latest post, or are they blocking/deleting them? I'm shocked that there's still not a single comment on that page.[/QUOTE]
I'm not going to test it, but from what I understood, comments were disabled. Considering they share the same downed forums as ECA and GamePolitics, I would be surprised if it were otherwise.
 
[quote name='botticus']I'm not going to test it, but from what I understood, comments were disabled. Considering they share the same downed forums as ECA and GamePolitics, I would be surprised if it were otherwise.[/QUOTE]

I was referring to the comment form at the bottom of the page, which certainly looks like a working comment form. Then again, maybe it was never intended to be there and isn't functional.
 
[quote name='kulsechsky']Yeah, I believe you that stacking occurred accidentally for some, but I would also believe that stacking was a purposeful act committed by MANY. Especially with the way things work around here.

Totally agree with you, what Hal did as retaliation is completely unacceptable. I'd be really surprised if it were illegal as well.

But you are passing off blame. Maybe it wasn't you personally, but as a group this thing got out of hand and people were definitely taking advantage of the situation. You admit it, but you totally down play it. That's all I'm saying.[/QUOTE]

Dude, no offense, but you're a fucking douche. You come in here knowing nothing about the situation, read a couple posts, and then think you have the ability to scold "everyone" for their actions and advise us how we should be feeling? How arrogant are you?

First of all, you make the same mistake as many others who try to defend the ECA and use the Amazon stacking as justification for this entire issue. First of all, there are MANY members who never stacked the coupon. And even for those who did, changing the terms of service, "undoing" memberships that were already canceled, and notifying NO ONE of these actions was not retaliation for the Amazon issue. That issue was dead and buried 2 months ago. But you wouldn't know that would you?

[quote name='kulsechsky']I'm not trying to argue, I'm just trying to point it out from an outside perspective so that maybe you will take a step back from the situation and think about what happened. The ECA doesn't seem like a bad idea, it would be a shame for this situation to ruin it.[/QUOTE]

And this...really? You're just trying to offer "an outside perspective so that maybe you will take a step back..." blah blah blah. GET OVER YOURSELF. Most people here know more about this entire ordeal than you, but you're trying to enlighten us? We know what SOME members did to abuse their ECA membership. But we also know the steps the ECA took to make their organization look undesirable to ALL members.

Just the fact that you're viewing it as "retaliation" on their part makes them sound like the victim. Nobody made them do these things. The fact that everyone wants to cancel now is a result of the ECA's poor decision making. Not because "oh no, I can't get Amazon codes!" Here's an idea for you. The next time you feel compelled to throw yourself into a discussion you have no personal investment in, or no real knowledge of, just shut the fuck up and walk away.
 
Stackers ruined the Amazon discount and then complained, threatened, etc enough to ruin it from coming back when it was just about to. Wow.
 
[quote name='arcane93']I was referring to the comment form at the bottom of the page, which certainly looks like a working comment form. Then again, maybe it was never intended to be there and isn't functional.[/QUOTE]

Bringing the lolz
 
[quote name='J7.']Stackers ruined the Amazon discount and then complained, threatened, etc enough to ruin it from coming back when it was just about to. Wow.[/QUOTE]Post history suggests... you're serious?
 
[quote name='J7.']Stackers ruined the Amazon discount and then complained, threatened, etc enough to ruin it from coming back when it was just about to. Wow.[/QUOTE]
I'd be mad too if all I had to look forward to in life was 10% off gaming purchases.

You guys need to get over it and stop circling the drain about stackers.
 
[quote name='Reira']Well, it doesn't look like I'm getting a call to work today, so I'll let the letter run for a bit longer this morning (until about 9 EST). Up to 745 entries!

http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0AfBFe-z6aDCCZGp0NndmNF8xZ2Njbnc5Y2Q&hl=en

As for the letter, I changed the "if nothing else" and rewrote the other one like so:
"This includes closing our current accounts and removing our billing information (including name, e-mail, and credit card number) from your database for any future auto-renewal purpose. " As for the "own volition" part, my thought was to try to prevent the thought of "well, they just grabbed ECA members' info," but I know they can still say that...I think I will leave it in there, though, unless I hear more thoughts.

And one question that I probably should have thought of earlier...What about those with incomplete information? A couple of did not include either their e-mail or their username, so I will probably delete them, but what do you guys think about those that only listed e-mail or username?[/QUOTE]

Just wanted to verify that the offline doc has the corrections?

Thanks for doing this.
 
[quote name='arcane93']I was referring to the comment form at the bottom of the page, which certainly looks like a working comment form. Then again, maybe it was never intended to be there and isn't functional.[/QUOTE]

are you a comedian? :D:applause:
 
[quote name='Jodou']I'd be mad too if all I had to look forward to in life was 10% off gaming purchases.

You guys need to get over it and stop circling the drain about stackers.[/QUOTE]
You need to stop blaming others for your own actions. No, you would be mad if you didn't get in on the dozens upon dozens of games that you got by stacking. New info about what the stackers did came up thanks to Hal that is why people post about it again...

[quote name='Lawyers Guns N Money']Relevance?[/QUOTE]
Hal's post... :roll:
 
[quote name='J7.']You need to stop blaming others for your own actions.[/QUOTE]
sense.jpg

 
[quote name='J7.']You need to stop blaming others for your own actions. No, you would be mad if you didn't get in on the dozens upon dozens of games that you got by stacking. New info about what the stackers did came up thanks to Hal that is why people post about it again...


Hal's post... :roll:[/QUOTE]
Hal also claims the increase in membership due to Game Informer, CAG, GAF, Slickdeals, FatWallet, and the rest of the internet at large was only a "modest" bump. But fight the good fight, sir.
 
[quote name='Jodou']


[/QUOTE]
Let's not play dumb... you passed the blame on everything else you could for the Amazon discount leaving instead of accepting the blame yourself as a person who stacked a shitload.

[quote name='botticus']Hal also claims the increase in membership due to Game Informer, CAG, GAF, Slickdeals, FatWallet, and the rest of the internet at large was only a "modest" bump. But fight the good fight, sir.[/QUOTE]
Ya it's obvious you don't believe anything Hal has or will ever have to say.
 
[quote name='J7.']
Ya it's obvious you don't believe anything Hal has or will ever have to say.[/QUOTE]
I think we have far more reason to disbelieve him than otherwise thus far. [note: weekly ECA forum registration increased 2-4 times from April through December]

Code:
Member ID    Date Joined    Avg Members/Week
341         6/29/07        -
1615        5/29/08        27
2460        4/11/09        18 (Amazon promo publicized shortly after this)
3311        10/5/09        37 (3 weeks following GIMAG)
4040        12/1/09        91
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
bread's done
Back
Top