Guest amo Posted November 19, 2002 Posted November 19, 2002 Hi i have submitted over 4 weeks ago and dont seem to be getting any response. http://dmoz.org/Regional/Europe/United_Kingdom/Recreation_and_Sports/Gambling/Contests_and_Sweepstakes/ I have contacted the editor twice asking for feedback. It is not an affilaite site and is not breaking any ODP guidlines. can anyone give me any help. thankyou
dfy Posted November 19, 2002 Posted November 19, 2002 Your site is a thinly disguised method of collecting people's details for the purpose of providing car insurance quotations. Since the site is wholly owned by Carsource Ltd (at http://www.carsource.co.uk/) I would class your site as afilliated. Your submission has been deleted.
Guest amo Posted November 20, 2002 Posted November 20, 2002 Hi thanks for the response,i think there has been a slight confusion. Win4now offers the chance to win prizes in exchange for permission to send marketing emails. We do not collect data for the purpose of insurance quotes (it would be illegal and in fact impossible based on the limited amount of info that we recieve) It complies with ALL data protection legislation and is a licensed credit broker (no. 437820). The parent company carsource LTD, just as Elephant insurance is part of the admiral group, they are owned by the same company but are seperate entities. But the most important issue is that if offerring prizes in exchange for permission to send marketing emails is not acceptable for the cat Gambling/Contests_and_Sweepstakes/ then the following sites with exactly the same business model should also not be allowed Bananalotto.co.uk Cheekymonkey.com MyOffers etc etc Indeed all competitions on the internet swap personal details in exchange for prizes, i dont think this is unique to win4now. I hope this resolves the issue, i must say that im very impressed with your vigilance. regards amo
dfy Posted November 20, 2002 Posted November 20, 2002 Re: http://www.win4now.co.uk/ >> We do not collect data for the purpose of insurance quotes ... it would be illegal << Then please explain why your 'privacy' page says "We currently only keep 'sensitive data', as defined by the Data Protection Act 1998 for the explicit purpose of providing initial and renewal car insurance quotations". If you are operating illegally, this would be another reason to deny you a listing. The problem with your site is not so much that you collect personal details in order to provide insurance quotes, but that the site appears to just be a front for carsource.co.uk. Carsource.co.uk has an insurance quotation form on it which prompted my attention. The two sites are owned by the same company, and appear to have been written by the same person. This makes win4now.co.uk appear to be nothing more than a lead generating site.
Guest amo Posted November 20, 2002 Posted November 20, 2002 Re: http://www.win4now.co.uk/ Hi the confusion is that the privacy statment and compliance with the data protection act must cover the company that owes the site(s). Thus on the privacy policy it covers ALL carsource owned domains. So the part which covers insurance applies to carsource.co.uk and the statement that covers competuitions applies to win4now.co.uk in short carsource.co.uk = cars & insurance win4now.co.uk = competitions carsource ltd privacy policy = covers all sites owned by the company. (this is standard practise, for privacy statements 1 privacy policy covers ALL data collection on ALL company domains) EXAMPLE if you look at http://www.cheekymonkey.com/terms/privacy.asp (which is the first site i looked at the cat) you will see they also own and run a affilaite network (on a seperate domain) BUT the privacy policy covers BOTH sites. this doesnt mean they are trying to get people to sign up to there affilaite network through competitions! they are just operating 2 seperate business under 1 parent company which uses the SAME privacy policy. Believe it or not its actually good practice with privacy policies to be totally open about who you are. Also its clear from the site that we DO NOT collect data for the purpose of insurance. It would be impossible to send an insurance quote OR a renewal quote on the data we collect anyway as there is about 5% of the information needed for insurance. Win4now.co.uk is a seperate entity from carsource.co.uk the only things they have in common is: 1 they are owned by the same company 2 they share a privacy policy which covers activity on both This is 100% in accordance with data protection legislation and UK law. The comment that we are collecting data for the purposes of insurance is totally inaccurate and as i have outlined impossible. Win4now.co.uk business model is incentivising users to sign up to permission marketing by promoting competitions. this is 100% legal and also the business model of most of the sites in the cat. I hope this answers any queries you may have. best wishes amo <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" alt="" />
dfy Posted November 20, 2002 Posted November 20, 2002 Re: http://www.win4now.co.uk/ >> incentivising users to sign up << [shudder] IF I had my way I'd ban anyone that used words like 'incentivising' just on principle. <img src="/images/icons/laugh.gif" alt="" /> I'm not an expert on determining the difference between web competitions and spam generators, so at this point I'll leave it up to the local editors to decide whether or not your site merits inclusion. At the moment your site is sitting on its own in the unreviewed queue. I should imagine it won't be too long before someone gets round to reviewing it.
Guest amo Posted November 20, 2002 Posted November 20, 2002 Re: http://www.win4now.co.uk/ Hi is there any need for me to email this message board discussion to the editor so that he doesnt make the same assumptions. Or will he already be aware of this discussion? Thankyou for taking the time to discuss my submission. I hope this has cleared up any confusion. <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" alt="" /> regards amo <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" alt="" />
dfy Posted November 20, 2002 Posted November 20, 2002 Re: http://www.win4now.co.uk/ The other editor will be aware of this discussion.
Meta hutcheson Posted November 20, 2002 Meta Posted November 20, 2002 Re: http://www.win4now.co.uk/ "incentivising users to sign up" I _like_ the term. "We don't ban spammers anymore. Now we simply apply technological disincentivisations."
dfy Posted November 21, 2002 Posted November 21, 2002 Re: http://www.win4now.co.uk/ Arrrrggggghhhhhhhh! <img src="/images/icons/mad.gif" alt="" /> Blasted language manglers.
Guest amo Posted November 21, 2002 Posted November 21, 2002 Re: http://www.win4now.co.uk/ yes very funny <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" alt="" /> Although i carnt help but feel that i am being held responsible for peoples personal dislike of permission marketing. I would imagine that 90% of all commecrcial websites collect data from their users and most offer an incentive to do so. (Offline reward/loyalty cards are the same principle) Indeed if you look at the about us section of myoffers.co.uk MyOffers practices 'permission marketing'. This means that when you submit your questionnaire answers you do so on the understanding that you will receive offers (only from MyOffers, its sponsors or its clients) based on the information you have provided. Myoffers, its clients and sponsors may also use the address details on the Login page to send you offers or information in the post. If you prefer not to receive such offers please logon and amend your details. You can amend your Login details or de-register at any time via 'MyAccount', at the top of the page. They are not doing anything wrong. If win4now.co.uk, myoffers.co.uk or any of the sites in the cat were operating outside of the data protection regulations (we are a licensed credit broker ) we would be closed down, simple as that. I really dont think its fair to call my company (or any that is in accordance with UK law) spam merchants. We have the backing of major brands such as scottish power and are not doing anything illegal. So come on guys give me a break, we've worked hard to bring this project together and i think your being a bit hard on me. cheers amo <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" alt="" />
Meta hutcheson Posted November 21, 2002 Meta Posted November 21, 2002 Re: http://www.win4now.co.uk/ First of all, spam isn't "illegal." It's "unwanted". It's "obtrusive." It gets in people's way when they're looking for information. So what you said is logically equivalent to "It's not fair to call me a murderer, because I've never raped anyone." You really need to understand and address the real issue if you hope to persuade people to change their minds. So what's the real issue? Yes, no doubt, you are seeing the results of people's dislike of "permission marketing." This is fair (so far as it goes) because people really do dislike it, and you are really doing it. But why do people dislike it? I won't go into the business model (have we mentioned we are supposed to Not Care about that) or the legality bit (IANAL, and not a British subject, and wise people do not listen to my opinions of what OUGHT to be legal). But it conflicts with the ODP's INFORMATION model. The ODP is about finding, indexing, and categorizing information SOURCES that are available on the web. Sites that aren't information sources -- aren't indexable. "Data collection" is not just not an information source, it's an information SINK. We can't even review it. (How can we know what you do with that information? All we can see is what you claim to do with that information, which one might describe as your business model. And (for confidentiality reasons, no doubt) there isn't much detail to that.) So where would we put sites with "vague descriptions of business collecting consumer information for e-mail marketers"?
dfy Posted November 21, 2002 Posted November 21, 2002 Re: http://www.win4now.co.uk/ >> i carnt help but feel that i am being held responsible for peoples personal dislike of permission marketing << Well, what with you being a permission marketer, yes that's quite likely. >> [permission marketers] are not doing anything wrong << Well I could argue with that one. For instance your own site contains the following text on the sign up screen: "We need the information so that we can understand better what prizes might be appropriate for you, to communicate with you about the results of competitions and to ensure that winning prizes are sent to the correct place. We will also use the information to construct attractive offers for you, both by ourselves and with other parties" That text is placed above the name and address entry form, thus guaranteeing that the majority of people will not bother to read it. That's the only warning anyone ever gets that they are about to be deluged with junk mail. I don't think most people will realise that "We will also use the information to construct attractive offers for you" actually means "you are giving us the right to send you advertising which will irritate and annoy you so much that you eventually have to change your e-mail address". I believe that you know full well that most people won't have any idea what they are signing up to. In summary, you may not be doing anything illegal, but it's certainly wrong. However all this is beside the point. My personal distaste for e-mail marketing means that I will not be listing your site, or any like it. However, I will also not be putting any barriers in the way of other editors that may wish to list your site. There are hundreds of editors with permissions in that area, and I have no doubt that some of them will come across your submission one day. That's one of the major good points of the ODP system. No one has to do anything they don't want to, and there's always someone else to take over when someone refuses.
Guest amo Posted December 16, 2002 Posted December 16, 2002 Hi any news on the submission status, it been a month since i have recieved any feedback, and ive checked the cat and the submission hasnt been accepted yet. regards Lloyd
Guest Posted December 16, 2002 Posted December 16, 2002 No editor has accepted or rejected your site since you enquired, still waiting.
Guest amo Posted March 4, 2003 Posted March 4, 2003 http://www.win4now.co.uk Site Submission Status Hi its been about 5 months, has there been any progress? does it always take this long? <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" alt="" />
lachenm Posted March 4, 2003 Posted March 4, 2003 Re: http://www.win4now.co.uk Site Submission Statu There is no change. It is awaiting review in a short (less than 20 sites) queue. Times to review vary greatly among categories, and are not easily predictable.
Guest amo Posted March 28, 2003 Posted March 28, 2003 Re: http://www.win4now.co.uk Site Submission Statu Its now been over 6 months, any response? has anyone checked that the DMOZ editor is still alive as i am really concerned that he may be ill or retired. And for all those editors who has such a negative attitude towards the site here is a list of winners with testimonials: we may not be popular amoungst DMOZ editors, but the public seem to love the site <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" alt="" /> [165 names and addresses, and snippets from 7 glowing testimonials omitted to save space -- hutcheson]
Guest momathome Posted March 28, 2003 Posted March 28, 2003 Re: http://www.win4now.co.uk Site Submission Statu >>we may not be popular amoungst DMOZ editors, but the public seem to love the site<< Actually, ODP editors do not take these issues into consideration at all. As for your site not being "popular" among editors, that is also untrue. All of the editors at dmoz.org are volunteers, and they work very hard when each has time to review countless submissions to the directory every day. I wouldn't worry so much if I were you, when someone has time the submissions to the category in question will in fact be reviewed. <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" alt="" />
Guest amo Posted March 28, 2003 Posted March 28, 2003 Re: http://www.win4now.co.uk Site Submission Statu Hi thanks for responding, ill give you a few snippets of comments from several High level editors. (see below) Ive been accused of doing things illegal, immoral, just plain wrong they even used analagies with murders aand rapists!! I would suggest that counts as being unpopular. Which is a shame as the site has done nothing wrong and deserves a listing and to be honest both myself and the rest of the team feel like we desrve better than the accusations that have been so throw at us. volunteers or not i dont think we deserve the treatment we have recieved. Thankyou for your helpful and polite response. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- -If you are operating illegally, this would be another reason to deny you a listing. -IF I had my way I'd ban anyone that used words like 'incentivising' just on principle -First of all, spam isn't "illegal." It's "unwanted". It's "obtrusive." It gets in people's way when they're looking for information. -So what you said is logically equivalent to "It's not fair to call me a murderer, because I've never raped anyone." You really need to understand and address the real issue if you hope to persuade people to change their minds. -I believe that you know full well that most people won't have any idea what they are signing up to. In summary, you may not be doing anything illegal, but it's certainly wrong. -However all this is beside the point. My personal distaste for e-mail marketing means that I will not be listing your site, or any like it. However, I will also not be putting any barriers in the way of other editors that may wish to list your site. There are hundreds of editors with permissions in that area, and I have no doubt that some of them will come across your submission one day. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Meta hutcheson Posted March 29, 2003 Meta Posted March 29, 2003 Someone said (emphasis added) >Yes, no doubt, you are seeing the results of people's dislike of "permission marketing." This is fair (so far as it goes) because people really do dislike it, and you are really doing it. But did ANYONE say that would keep it from being listed? NO! Instead, someone said: >"So what's the real issue? ... It conflicts with the ODP's INFORMATION model." So it's extremely pointless for you to keep addressing an issue that you've already been told is irrelevant. It is also extremely counterproductive to keep pounding on a point that you already knew would tend to destroy whatever sympathy you might have had. You're not only not addressing the point, you're working HARD to arouse animosity. It's like saying "I'm not a murderer, but I think the world would be a better place if that ugly-looking dude in the jury box were killed tomorrow. I'm not a murderer, you all are just prejudiced against me because I like to beat up people. I'm not a murderer, because where I've lived, human sacrifice isn't considered murder -- when you're just trying to talk your way out of a parking ticket...and the police know your car is still locked in the no-parking zone. You need to read the responses more carefully, and note that we try not to CARE whether you call into the class of 'murderer,' or the even more dispicable class of 'spammer.' (And when we do care, we simply recuse ourselves from the jury.) But you need to stop making it so difficult for us to not care.
Guest amo Posted June 30, 2003 Posted June 30, 2003 Hi Could you tell me the status of my submission, currently its been sitting in unreviwed for nearly 1 year. Is it just going to stay in there or will someone actaully review it?
Alucard Posted June 30, 2003 Posted June 30, 2003 No change on the status. and yes, someone will review it. Thanks for your enquiry.
Guest amo Posted January 12, 2004 Posted January 12, 2004 Hi Its been 16 months since i first submitted. I have asked many many times why this isnt being reviewed. Do you think someone could review it as so much time has been spent posting here and other editors have been checking its status. why doesnt someone just review the site.
Recommended Posts