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:
[quote name='Lawyers Guns N Money']It was a B+ rating at the time of that post. They started with a D+, it suspiciously was raised to a B+, then (yesterday, I believe) they unrated them, due to the complaints.[/QUOTE]

It's really not that suspicious. If you had really looked at the BBB rating at the time when it was a D+, that rating was based on one complaint and the fact that the BBB didn't have enough information about the ECA to make a judgment. The ECA sent them the information that they wanted -- granted, probably because of the growing issue and people saying that they would report them -- and the BBB decided that, on the basis of their response to that one complaint, a B+ was appropriate. They didn't start processing all of the other complaints until after that, and then it changed to unrated. I really don't think there's any great conspiracy here.

Edit: Huh, other people saw two complaints listed? I'm certain that when I looked there was only one. Maybe one of them had already been processed by the time I looked, or maybe one was added after. Regardless, I agree with Warlock82 -- those were probably old complaints about the Amazon codes which the BBB decided were irrelevant since, due to the ECA's terms (and these were succinctly stated), they were subject to change or removal. The BBB would have written those complaints off.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
For those worried about being investigated, if you are a VISA customer, you have nothing to worry about. As I posted earlier, I emailed VISA with my concerns in this matter, including in the email a copy of the eca's TOS. VISA said to call the phone number I put in earlier and tell them you were recommended to file a formal complaint, and that your card issuer knows the merchant regulations VISA has, and wont have any issues with your charge backs, or blocking them from your card. My bank verified this for me as well.

Also in regards to the 9th circuit and the CT laws being separate, this may be true, however being that the 9th circuit is a federal court, it sets a precedent, which any court in CT would look strongly at.
 
I've quietly been reading over a lot of these posts and am just wondering, they're going to renew your subscription every year for as long as this corporation exists right? I keep seeing posts like "this isn't a big deal...just pay the $20" or whatever, so is it just a one-time thing? I'm a really lazy guy so I'm not exactly sure if I'm gonna go through with writing a letter if it's a one-time fee of $20, but I'd be much more inclined to do so if I know I'll be getting charged $20 annually at a continuous rate. I hope someone can clear this up for me...I know this topic gets like 45 new posts per minute, so I hope mine doesn't get lost along the way.
 
[quote name='arcane93']It's really not that suspicious. If you had really looked at the BBB rating at the time when it was a D+, that rating was based on one complaint and the fact that the BBB didn't have enough information about the ECA to make a judgment. The ECA sent them the information that they wanted -- granted, probably because of the growing issue and people saying that they would report them -- and the BBB decided that, on the basis of their response to that one complaint, a B+ was appropriate. They didn't start processing all of the other complaints until after that, and then it changed to unrated. I really don't think there's any great conspiracy here.[/QUOTE]

sounds about right, except how do they UNRATE an already rated company?

this, however, shouldn't be the main argument in this thread.
we should continue spreading the word about this, and ones who just found out about this - should continue signing the list.
 
[quote name='arcane93']It's really not that suspicious. If you had really looked at the BBB rating at the time when it was a D+, that rating was based on one complaint and the fact that the BBB didn't have enough information about the ECA to make a judgment. The ECA sent them the information that they wanted -- granted, probably because of the growing issue and people saying that they would report them -- and the BBB decided that, on the basis of their response to that one complaint, a B+ was appropriate. They didn't start processing all of the other complaints until after that, and then it changed to unrated. I really don't think there's any great conspiracy here.

Edit: Huh, other people saw two complaints listed? I'm certain that when I looked there was only one. Maybe one of them had already been processed by the time I looked, or maybe one was added after. Regardless, I agree with Warlock82 -- those were probably old complaints about the Amazon codes, which the BBB decided were irrelevant since, due to the ECA's terms (and these were succinctly stated), they were subject to change or removal. The BBB would have written those complaints off.[/QUOTE]

when I looked it said 3, 2 were supposedly resolved, and another was unfounded or something.
 
[quote name='MasterAwesome']I've quietly been reading over a lot of these posts and am just wondering, they're going to renew your subscription every year for as long as this corporation exists right? I keep seeing posts like "this isn't a big deal...just pay the $20" or whatever, so is it just a one-time thing? I'm a really lazy guy so I'm not exactly sure if I'm gonna go through with writing a letter if it's a one-time fee of $20, but I'd be much more inclined to do so if I know I'll be getting charged $20 annually at a continuous rate. I hope someone can clear this up for me...I know this topic gets like 45 new posts per minute, so I hope mine doesn't get lost along the way.[/QUOTE]


Not only is it a auto-renewing yearly charge, but due to how their TOS is worded they can change their membership dues at any time and you can do nothing about it. Might be $20 one year $30 the next and so on. And they do not notify members of TOS changes, so this would also be a surprise unless you constantly monitored their TOS yourself.

This not for profit BS is just that..BS...Someone is getting rich off this shit.
 
[quote name='Llamas Notsheep']Actually, I am a lawyer (well... I'm about 8 hours away from being sworn in). And that code section isn't being taken out of context. I agree that the notification provision is in violation of CT law. But as far as I can tell, aside from being contrary to CT law, no one cares all that much about it. It's a side issue. Look back to the two or three fantastic posts that got choruses of "amens" in the past half dozen pages. The big issue here is the ECA making it hard for people to unsubscribe after luring us in with coupons and good discounts.



We already covered this back in the 70s-ish pages. Sec. 42-126b(c)(1) is not being taken out of context. It applies to the contract between the ECA and each of us. You're right that "electronic notice is acceptable in lieu of a letter." As in, electronic notice is legally adequate notice of cancellation. Meaning that whether the ECA likes it or not, it's legally obligated to accept and honor electronic cancellation because it is acceptable, under CT law, in lieu of a letter.

In practice, the likely remedy for late communication on the renewal would be either (a) reformation of the contract, requiring earlier notice and extending the period during which you can cancel for anyone who didn't receive notice in time, or (b) rescission of the contract, ending obligations of no parties. The latter might be nice for a lot of us, but I don't think that's what's bugging people. It's certainly not what bothers me. What bothers me is that whether I have an extra month to cancel or not, the ECA is trying to tell me that I have to jump through a bunch of hoops to cover my ass, or else they reserve the right to fraudulently deny receipt of my cancellation notice.

That's where 42-126b(c)(1) comes in. No matter when I notify the ECA of my cancellation, it's legally adequate whether I do so by letter or by appropriate electronic means.

If you submit a cancellation via their electronic feedback, properly labeled, it's going to be legally binding. Period. What's more, the auto-reply e-mail you get (which says they don't honor electronic cancellations) is confirmation that they have actual notice, which means they can't even make up some crap about never receiving it, as they did with the button on the website.[/QUOTE]

Could you please tell me how you draw the conclusion the notice requirement refers to the notice a consumer gives to terminate the service. My reading is that the statute only refers to the notice required on behalf of the provider, not the receiver of services.

"...with a clear and conspicuous written notice that the recipient may cancel such contract. Such notice shall include the procedure for such cancellation. Such notice shall be given at least fifteen days but not more than sixty days prior to...:

This is the only notice requirement I see in this statute and, again, it refers to the service provider. I believe the later reference people keep on using is indeed being taken out of context.

I have to say again that I have no idea if this code applies to the ECA and that this should not be taken as legal advice.
 
[quote name='sickle']sounds about right, except how do they UNRATE an already rated company?[/QUOTE]

They're unrated temporarily, while the BBB processes everything. Due to the volume of complaints that they've gotten, it's clear that a B+ may not be appropriate, but until they've gone through them all they don't know what to set it at. Really, it's the best thing to do -- they don't want to leave a B+ on the site until they figure it out if the ECA is not a B+ company, and they can't just make up another rating.

[quote name='sickle']this, however, shouldn't be the main argument in this thread.
we should continue spreading the word about this, and ones who just found out about this - should continue signing the list.
[/QUOTE]

Agreed. That's why I was trying to say that the BBB rating isn't really an issue.
 
[quote name='MasterAwesome']I've quietly been reading over a lot of these posts and am just wondering, they're going to renew your subscription every year for as long as this corporation exists right? I keep seeing posts like "this isn't a big deal...just pay the $20" or whatever, so is it just a one-time thing? I'm a really lazy guy so I'm not exactly sure if I'm gonna go through with writing a letter if it's a one-time fee of $20, but I'd be much more inclined to do so if I know I'll be getting charged $20 annually at a continuous rate. I hope someone can clear this up for me...I know this topic gets like 45 new posts per minute, so I hope mine doesn't get lost along the way.[/QUOTE]

It's annually -- as long as the ECA exists and you're listed as a member, you'll get charged each year.

And really -- just writing a letter isn't worth $20 to you?
 
I think it would be a good idea for someone to start an online petition. Have it state that all the signee's will boycot any company that continues to associate itself with the ECA. Have it list the companies that we are boycotting (walmart, gamefly, game informer, etc). We could then email a link to all the prospective boycottee's to see if we can get them to distance themselves from the ECA. If I had the technical nohow I would, but alas I am not blessed with the capabilities.
 
[quote name='Nightraven']I think it would be a good idea for someone to start an online petition. Have it state that all the signee's will boycot any company that continues to associate itself with the ECA. Have it list the companies that we are boycotting (walmart, gamefly, game informer, etc). We could then email a link to all the prospective boycottee's to see if we can get them to distance themselves from the ECA. If I had the technical nohow I would, but alas I am not blessed with the capabilities.[/QUOTE]


No online petitions. They are largely viewed as a joke. Do you really think WalMart is going to give a shit about a list of 300 names that say they wont buy from them anymore?
 
For those of you who are unshaken over this whole thing, I'd like to thank the members who have pointed out that the way things stand, your membership in ECA is a recurring fee and that fee is subject to change at any time. So, aside from just $20, if we don't do something now, this can definitely get out of hand and bite you in the ass later. Even if you dispute it, a collections charge accumulated with interest could really hurt your credit score and then actually effect important things in your life.

But remember, at it's core, even if you see it as just $20, we're all cheap ass gamers. If you've been here a while, you know that getting $20 saved is a big deal. That's why I don't understand why some seem so willing to just throw $20 aside and forget about this whole mess. That's $20 for your next video game, movie, system, etc. And now we have a game advocacy group trying to take money out of our pockets that will effect our buying power to purchase such things?!

So speak out and stand up for yourselves. Don't let this piece of crap organization bend you over now that you have been informed.

Anyway, if anyone from ECA stumbles upon this, know that you and your rat-faced son-of-a-bitch president are up to no good and the community as a whole is not going to stand for your bullsh*t. You screw with us and once Hal is dealt with, you'll be looking for a new job and wish you didn't go along with this scheme. That's my $20 and I'll be damned if your conniving ways are going to get them from my cheap-ass hands! :bomb:
 
[quote name='Outinthedark']lol boycott Walmart...yea...right... :D[/QUOTE]

boycotting walmart (depending on where you live) would not be a difficult task at all. Many places sell items for the same or even lower price. And on the video game side walmart is usually the last place i go for them. Now if walmart is the only place in town to go then yeah you can't boycott then, but you can boycott the other companies on associated with the ECA.

I guess i am already boycotting half of them considering the fact i have never even used them..... Hell i didn't even know some of them existed until i became a member with the ECA.
 
[quote name='TLPRIME']No online petitions. They are largely viewed as a joke. Do you really think WalMart is going to give a shit about a list of 300 names that say they wont buy from them anymore?[/QUOTE]

That isn't the point. The point is to show the ECA that we really do want them to change something. Obviously Walmart won't care and we arn't trying to ruin walmart so they really shouldn't care.

EDIT: Also yes Online petitions are usually see as a joke, but so do gamers standing for their rights most of the time. The fact that we are outraged by what the ECA has done probably looks like a joke to many people. The fact that starting an online petition shows we won't stop fighting against it will not hurt our image. And yeah the other d-bags that add their name and comment "Penis' are fun!!!" will look like a joke, but those kind of things happen to all types of stuff anyway.
 
Kaltic, it's noble, but it's a lost cause. No petition is going to make any of the companies consider their position with the ECA. Possibly the smaller companies but certainly not Walmart.

It seems to me contacting the people they use as spoke persons like Adam Sessler, Trixie, Larry Hryb etc etc. would result in an actual response rather than petitioning a huge company like Walmart.

I sent my letter off already. I have no intention of associating myself with the ECA any longer.
 
[quote name='Kaltic']That isn't the point. The point is to show the ECA that we really do want them to change something. Obviously Walmart won't care and we arn't trying to ruin walmart so they really shouldn't care.

EDIT: Also yes Online petitions are usually see as a joke, but so do gamers standing for their rights most of the time. The fact that we are outraged by what the ECA has done probably looks like a joke to many people. The fact that starting an online petition shows we won't stop fighting against it will not hurt our image. And yeah the other d-bags that add their name and comment "Penis' are fun!!!" will look like a joke, but those kind of things happen to all types of stuff anyway.[/QUOTE]

I suspect the majority of the petition would be filled with joke names and "Hal sucks!" type things, which pretty much invalidates it. That's the main reason online petitions never work - they get filled with garbage and thus get ignored.

In any case, the forum mods are deleting posts and banning members for legitament, non-"zomg ECA sux!111 lolzz" type complaints, you think they'd actually even bother looking at an online petition? It'd be another "Oh, the exploiters are complaining again" Hal response.
 
[quote name='Outinthedark']Kaltic, it's noble, but it's a lost cause. No petition is going to make any of the companies consider their position with the ECA. Possibly the smaller companies but certainly not Walmart.

It seems to me contacting the people they use as spoke persons like Adam Sessler, Trixie, Larry Hryb etc etc. would result in an actual response rather than petitioning a huge company like Walmart.

I sent my letter off already. I have no intention of associating myself with the ECA any longer.[/QUOTE]

I never said an online petition would help us. It just wouldn't make us look any worse like some were implying. Plus i already stated it would have no affect on Walmart and what not. You may have started posting prior to me editing.
 
Hmm, yeah, you know what? I didn't read over the whole section carefully enough :) You're right, that notice is specifically notice of renewal. My bad, I concede the point.
 
[quote name='Outinthedark']Kaltic, it's noble, but it's a lost cause. No petition is going to make any of the companies consider their position with the ECA. Possibly the smaller companies but certainly not Walmart.

It seems to me contacting the people they use as spoke persons like Adam Sessler, Trixie, Larry Hryb etc etc. would result in an actual response rather than petitioning a huge company like Walmart.

I sent my letter off already. I have no intention of associating myself with the ECA any longer.[/QUOTE]


This sounds much more feasible and productive (contacting the spokespersons) than an online petition.
 
[quote name='caltab']Could you please tell me how you draw the conclusion the notice requirement refers to the notice a consumer gives to terminate the service. My reading is that the statute only refers to the notice required on behalf of the provider, not the receiver of services.

"...with a clear and conspicuous written notice that the recipient may cancel such contract. Such notice shall include the procedure for such cancellation. Such notice shall be given at least fifteen days but not more than sixty days prior to...:

This is the only notice requirement I see in this statute and, again, it refers to the service provider. I believe the later reference people keep on using is indeed being taken out of context.

I have to say again that I have no idea if this code applies to the ECA and that this should not be taken as legal advice.[/QUOTE]

I agree that Sec. 42-126b(c)(1) only deals with the procedure an organization must follow when notifying a consumer of their right to cancel.

I think the point is, if the other statute that I don't have the citation to says that e-mail is a valid form of cancellation under CT law, then regardless of what the ECA says their cancellation procedure is, we would still have a right under CT law to cancel via email, whether the ECA wants to recognize that right or not.

But I'm too lazy to go back and search for that statute to confirm that is indeed what the statute says.
 
I'm looking for a good deal on a 2005 Volkswagon Beetle...wait, what thread is this? :lol:

Anyone know if the GOG coupon works on discounted games or full price only?
 
I'm no lawyer which is why I think non-lawyers should stay away from that CT legal business.

No matter how YOU interpret, I'm not sure it's 100% clear, especially to a layman.

So please don't send the ECA emails claiming they are violating that section of CT law. Unless you're a lawyer and you know what you're doing, you could end up looking very foolish. They do have a general counsel on staff.
 
[quote name='confoosious']I'm no lawyer which is why I think non-lawyers should stay away from that CT legal business.

No matter how YOU interpret, I'm not sure it's 100% clear, especially to a layman.

So please don't send the ECA emails claiming they are violating that section of CT law. Unless you're a lawyer and you know what you're doing, you could end up looking very foolish. They do have a general counsel on staff.[/QUOTE]

Well in theory it doesn't matter how anyone interprets it, lawyer or non-lawyer, because actual lawyers shouldn't be giving legal advice over the internet. But I don't see the harm in those who have training in interpreting the law taking a stab at what the statutes mean for the sake of discussion. If there's any real question about violation of statute it should be referred to the CT Attorney General's office, not to Hal Halpin's personal email address or whatever some people are doing. The AG will decide if CT law has been violated and whether its worth prosecuting or trying to remedy.

EDIT: Someone above quoted a different link to Sec. 42-126b(c)(1) than I read previously, and the provision definitely has no application to the consumer's method of cancellation. It's just saying all the ECA has to do is email us notification about the impending renewal since we signed up online and agreed to receive notice electronically. So far ECA's snail mail method doesn't appear to violate any CT law.
 
[quote name='kodave']Well in theory it doesn't matter how anyone interprets it, lawyer or non-lawyer, because actual lawyers shouldn't be giving legal advice over the internet. But I don't see the harm in those who have training in interpreting the law taking a stab at what the statutes mean for the sake of discussion. If there's any real question about violation of statute it should be referred to the CT Attorney General's office, not to Hal Halpin's personal email address or whatever some people are doing. The AG will decide if CT law has been violated and whether its worth prosecuting or trying to remedy.[/QUOTE]

No there's no harm.

Unless you fire off an email to the ECA stating they are violating CT law. Because they might or might not be. And then you'd look pretty dumb and the rest of your argument/outrage will be swept aside.
 
[quote name='confoosious']No there's no harm.

Unless you fire off an email to the ECA stating they are violating CT law. Because they might or might not be. And then you'd look pretty dumb and the rest of your argument/outrage will be swept aside.[/QUOTE]

Agreed. And I edited my post while you were responding, so I'll just requote that portion here.

[quote name='kodave']EDIT: Someone above quoted a different link to Sec. 42-126b(c)(1) than I read previously, and the provision definitely has no application to the consumer's method of cancellation. It's just saying all the ECA has to do is email us notification about the impending renewal since we signed up online and agreed to receive notice electronically. So far ECA's snail mail method doesn't appear to violate any CT law.[/QUOTE]

So until someone finds law to the contrary, they can email us notification of impending renewal, and we have to snail mail out cancellation letter.
 
[quote name='ChernobylCow']Here's a link to the story over at The Escapist: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/96504-ECA-Responds-to-Accusations-of-Wrongdoing[/QUOTE]

Eh, another for the slightly misleading and taking Hal's word too closely pile, though they at least seem to agree the snail mail thing is a douchebag move.

Read the comments though, ECA chapter guy out in full force to defend them. Very amusing.

Edit: I enjoy the comment comparing Hal's statement about exploiters to video game publishers who say "Anyone who complains about DRM is probably a pirate anyway, so don't listen to them."
 
I sent my letter off today and used certified mail. Lets hope it actually works. I'll update everyone with status later on.


Has anyone successfully canceled their membership yet??
 
While I highly doubt we'll ever know, I wonder which side of this line Amazon falls on. On the one hand, their name is kinda getting dragged through the mud by association along with the ECA and Hal. On the other, I'm sure they were pretty irritated that their kind gesture to help support the ECA ended up getting abused to an extent by some (which honestly wouldn't have happened on nearly the same scale if the two companies had been better prepared for it - both in the method for giving codes and the method of applying them (oh, the dreams of account associated 10% off codes...)).

I suppose there's no such thing as bad publicity though.
 
[quote name='arcane93']And really -- just writing a letter isn't worth $20 to you?[/QUOTE]
To be fair, they're asking us to physically mail a letter with some type of delivery confirmation. It would cost me about $3.00 to do this -- that's 15% of the total cost of my membership, just to be certain that they won't charge me for a renewal that I already declined, but which (oops!) they lost. The fact that they're even trying to justify this as an infrastructural issue has completely destroyed any remaining faith I had that this organization could accomplish anything productive. When you add up the cost of the postage and lost time required for each canceling member to mail in their letter, that's an enormous amount of net time and money being wasted. And we're supposed to believe that manual entry of all of this information is somehow more reliable and efficient than an electronic notification which could be tied directly into their member database? I'm not buying it.

So fuck it, I'm not sending them any cancellation letter. If they send me a renewal notice, I'll be happy to notify them electronically that I already canceled renewal of my membership via their website and that I believe this closed the matter. After all, I've never received any direct communication from the ECA stating anything to the contrary. The credit card number I used to buy my membership is now completely inactive, so they will not be able to bill me even if they'd like to. What are they going to do, send a collection agency after me for $20? The negative press that they would get from this -- seriously, a consumers' rights advocacy group shaking down one of its own members? -- would be far more costly than any payment they might recoup.
 
Instead of BOYCOTTING, I recommend everyone writes similar emails to their sponsors, such as this. Do not threaten sponsors, do not tell them what to do. Ask nicely for them to investigate the matter and correct the situation. Heres a template I came up with if anyone would like to use it.

I'm a long time follower of your business. I recently noticed that your company sponsors the Entertainment Consumers Association, which has been involved in questionable activity in recent weeks. I would like to request that your business investigates the ongoing sponsorship and possibly reconsiders supporting a company with operating standards, such as The ECA's.

Being a gamer myself, I recognize the importance of an organization to represent gamers in Washington. The general consensus of the active posters on CheapAssGamer.com forums, a community of over 237,815 gamers, seems to clearly have recognized the need for a large part of the gaming community to disassociate themselves from this the ECA. Therefore, I ask you, in light of recent events to, at the very least, investigate the actions of the ECA and determine whether your business wishes to be associated to the organization described below:

The ECA has not only been guilty of modifying Membership Terms to paying supporters of the organization (Note that this is a protected right they had as listed in their membership terms), which now prevents all members from cancelling their auto-renewing, $20 per year membership, without incurring a cost for postage. No member was contacted about this change or given a chance to cancel before this change came into effect. Previously, members were allowed to cancel their renewal by phone or by the click of a button. The ECA claimed this feature never "worked" and further removed it from the site, but failed to notify the community about their mistake. Therefore, members who were told their memberships were canceled with the use of this button will be greeted next year with a non-refundable $20 charge. In addition, forum moderators deleted many civil posts regarding this issue. The real concern was also never discussed by the operator of the organization, Hal Halpin, and instead accused many people concerned with the questionable operating practices of being "exploiters." I myself, and many others, were not "exploiters" of the services provided by the ECA.

Therefore, I encourage you to carefully examine the situation, and based on your own independent decision, determine whether or not TheECA is an organization which should be receiving your business supports. As the ECA states themselves, "The ECA is an advocacy organization for consumers of interactive entertainment." Well, I'm a consumer of interactive entertainment, and they're definitely not an organization for me.

Thank you for your time
 
This whole mess would have been avoided if they hadn't done the free subscription code. At this point, their tactics make it look like the free code was a scam to collect credit card numbers.
 
[quote name='watcher0']This whole mess would have been avoided if they hadn't done the free subscription code. At this point, their tactics make it look like the free code was a scam to collect credit card numbers.[/QUOTE]

It appears to be more of a Hey congress we are 100K member society and you have to listen to us, then a money scheme. Enron padded the books, I suspect this is what they are doing for the member lists.

I got mine free from PAX.
 
[quote name='aeri']Instead of BOYCOTTING, I recommend everyone writes similar emails to their sponsors, such as this. Do not threaten sponsors, do not tell them what to do. Ask nicely for them to investigate the matter and correct the situation. Heres a template I came up with if anyone would like to use it.[/QUOTE]

Should have proof read your letter....Just sayin
 
[quote name='Bootstrap']To be fair, they're asking us to physically mail a letter with some type of delivery confirmation. It would cost me about $3.00 to do this -- that's 15% of the total cost of my membership, just to be certain that they won't charge me for a renewal that I already declined, but which (oops!) they lost.[/QUOTE]

I absolutely agree with you. It is ridiculous. At the same time, though, I'd rather just spend the $3.00 to send a certified letter now and not risk having to deal with a collection agency later if the ECA were to go that far. Because even if you are completely in the right and it comes out in your favor in the end, dealing with a collection agency is still going to be a major pain in the ass and end up costing a lot more than that $3.00 in time and possibly money, not to mention the potential credit rating damage (which can happen even if you're in the right). At the very least, I know it's not the ECA that's getting my $3.00.
 
Don't know if this has been mentioned. But so far, they have not sent out any notification correspondence regarding their cancellation policy changes and that the auto-renewal cancellation didn't work. While it may be legal for them to change their terms without advance notice, last I checked, most states require companies/organizations taking your money to inform you of policy changes once they have been made through proper direct correspondence (mail, email, telephone). Blog/news/forum posts don't count.
 
If anyone hates writing letters as much as I do, you can use my default letter and just change a few things and print it out. I haven't read this whole thread so if anyone else already did this, sorry. Anyway, here is the letter I sent out today...


CANCELLATION
LETTER

DATE

Attn: Accounting
ECA
64 Danbury Road
Suite 700
Wilton, CT 06897-4406

Dear ECA,

This letter serves to request my immediate membership cancellation and any auto renewal of The ECA (Entertainment Consumers Association). All obligations have been fulfilled with regard to this membership. I expect that no additional charges will be applied to my credit card and all credit card information will be removed from your system. Please confirm receipt of this request by return mail.

NAME
ADDRESS
EMAIL ADDRESS
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
 
Here's an imperfect analogy I thought of this morning (just for laughs, and no offence meant to Walmart or anyone):

One day, Walmart decides that due to a small number of people shop-lifting from their stores, they are going to implement a strip-search when you leave the store to make sure you don't steal anything. Problem is, they enforced this while I was in Walmart shopping, so after I'm done paying for my stuff and leave, I find out about this policy at the exit door. Now, the problem is do I subject myself to the strip-search so I can leave the store (even though I didn't shop-lift so didn't do anything wrong) or do I complain to the media and their management about the unfair practice and wait in the store while this issue gets resolved and hopefully, I can leave unmolested... Either way, if this does happen, I sure will not go back to Walmart to shop again.
 
Well, I sent out a few emails this morning, had a few ask for more information, and just recently received this one from Chris, who is the CTO of Maingear.
... thanks...to be honest I didn't even know we were a sponsor, I'll ask around here. But it sounds like we don't want to be associated. I'll research this and get back to you. Thanks for bringing this to our attention.
 
Has any videogame personality like Sessler commented on this yet? I don't really know why, but I would like to see what he has to say about the whole situation.
 
I sent in a gmail card, signed the list (which hopefully they'll use), and if none of these get my ECA membership cancelled by January - will send a letter by Certified Mail (keeping a copy of coarse).

Regarding watcher0 post - I think you're right, but unless someone finds a lawyer to do this, we can't really tell 100%.
 
[quote name='Lawyers Guns N Money']Well, I sent out a few emails this morning, had a few ask for more information, and just recently received this one from Chris, who is the CTO of Maingear.[/QUOTE]

That was absolutely fantastic. I'm glad to see some of these emails to sponsors getting through.
 
[quote name='bluehat9']Has any videogame personality like Sessler commented on this yet? I don't really know why, but I would like to see what he has to say about the whole situation.[/QUOTE]

CheapyD commented on this
 
[quote name='Lawyers Guns N Money']Well, I sent out a few emails this morning, had a few ask for more information, and just recently received this one from Chris, who is the CTO of Maingear.[/QUOTE]

This is what im currently working on sending out

I'm a long time follower of your business. I recently noticed that your company sponsors the Entertainment Consumers Association, which has been involved in questionable activity in recent weeks. I would like to request that your business investigates the ongoing sponsorship and possibly reconsiders supporting a company with operating standards, such as The ECA's.

Being a gamer myself, I recognize the importance of an organization to represent gamers in Washington. The general consensus of the active posters on CheapAssGamer.com forums, a community of over 237,815 gamers, seems to clearly have recognized the need for a large part of the gaming community to disassociate themselves from this the ECA. Therefore, I ask you, in light of recent events to, at the very least, investigate the actions of the ECA and determine whether your business wishes to be associated to the organization described below:

The ECA has not only been guilty of modifying Membership Terms to paying supporters of the organization (Note that this is a protected right they had as listed in their membership terms), which now prevents all members from cancelling their auto-renewing, $20 per year membership, without incurring a cost for postage. No member was contacted about this change or given a chance to cancel before this change came into effect. Previously, members were allowed to cancel their renewal by phone or by the click of a button. The ECA claimed this feature never "worked" and further removed it from the site, but failed to notify the community about their mistake. Therefore, members who were told their memberships were canceled with the use of this button will be greeted next year with a non-refundable $20 charge. In addition, forum moderators deleted many civil posts regarding this issue. The real concern was also never discussed by the operator of the organization, Hal Halpin, and instead accused many people concerned with the questionable operating practices of being "exploiters." I myself, and many others, were not "exploiters" of the services provided by the ECA.

Therefore, I encourage you to carefully examine the situation, and based on your own independent decision, determine whether or not TheECA is an organization which should be receiving your business supports. As the ECA states themselves, "The ECA is an advocacy organization for consumers of interactive entertainment." Well, I'm a consumer of interactive entertainment, and they're definitely not an organization for me.

Thank you for your time
 
OK, I'm back. I see that the list has some issues with deleted names and stuff, so I'm going to temporarily close the link until I fix it as best as I can. I'll post when I have fixed it up, and will respond to all my PMs then.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
bread's done
Back
Top