I don't know about anyone else, but this sounds totally wrong and unfair.

*Added 4-10-05* Active Members will be paid with priority. Those with low activity (those with a history of clicking just enough to stay active, or those clicking less than 25% of paid ads) will get suspended and their earnings will be paid to them minus 25% as funds allow. Unless they contact us, and wish to be unsuspended and become active members. Once earnings are paid, there accounts will be terminated.

Kinda sounds like terms in a hostage negotiation. This isn't something I would want any part of, as a member I would redeem for ads and get out of this site and every site owned or managed by the same owner. I know activity is something a lot of programs have a problem with but when it's nick picked to death and the members get the short end of the stick each and every TOS change the members need to speak out and speak out loudly by doing the 1 and only thing they can, leave it.

Ender

I find this unfair but not too horrible.



This is perfectly reasonable, in my opinion as a Program Owner and a Program Member. The whole point of Paid-To-Read is to read the ads and click through to the web site and consider it for whatever the advertiser wants. Not saying that every click has to result in a search or join or purchase, but as long as you've looked and made a decision to act or not, you've done your "job." Members who can't read the ad, use software, or just don't bother paying attention are not an asset to anyone. Not other members, not the program, and certainly not the advertiser. I have employed this method in the past and will continue to do so. I have a 3-strikes-you're-out rule, so of course if someone clicks all 4 links in my English Test their butts are gone.




This one is so totally wrong I don't even know where to begin!!! Members who are in a program that is historically behind on payouts are likely to be just active enough not to be deleted until they're paid. While I feel for the advertisers, this isn't a WRONG thing. I mean, if I was working for 2 weeks at my job and when payday hit they said, "We're having a little trouble, you'll each get paid as we can get to you," I sure as heck wouldn't be working nearly as hard!! I'd probably do just enough to not get fired until they paid me, then I'd be willing to put in the full effort I usually do. Not paying them their full earnings is WRONG, and it should be up to the member to hit "delete account," not the program owner.

How can you be clicking enough to be "active" and be eligable for "suspension" at the same time

This program is in serious trouble. Like others say, time to bail.

I agree with what's been said here, this program is definitely in trouble. Redeem for ads and get out while you can.

*Added 4-10-05* Active Members will be paid with priority. Those with low activity (those with a history of clicking just enough to stay active, or those clicking less than 25% of paid ads) will get suspended and their earnings will be paid to them minus 25% as funds allow. Unless they contact us, and wish to be unsuspended and become active members. Once earnings are paid, there accounts will be terminated.


This is absolutely unfair. Changing terms retroactively is bad enough, but holding members hostage in this manner for money that has been previously earned is beyond belief.

Wow....I was dangerously close to joining this program. I'm so glad I saw this thread first. It saved me from making a BIG mistake!

You know way back when I had a glimmer of a though to join here and or Hocus Pocus... then I saw thread after thread of bad stuff about this WM.. and I'm also glad I quit Tigers Ads months ago.. also run by her. No problems with the site just no time for it..

Sadly, this isn't the first time this PO has pulled this sort of thing:

Cashcrazyads she has gone too far

Cheers,

Wil

this is called a desperate po in debt looking for ways to not pay people

i mean you need to click 3 ads every 12 days to remain a member but if you donbt click 25% of the ads your earnigns are suspended

sounds about as scammy as they come

$5.00 is just not worth this.

Just wondering aloud - if you're a webmaster and there's a webmaster who is a member of your program, could you put something in your terms that basically says "you must abide by the terms of YOUR program at THIS program if you own a program"? I've "threatened" to do this over activity restrictions - say if a WM has a 75% requirement at their site, that they'd get a reduction in earnings at payout if they weren't 75% as active as their downline at MY program. It would be a pain to figure out, but might teach some webmasters a lesson - treat others how you want to be treated yourself!

I'll have to check and see how active Sarah is at my program.

- Alex

The main problem I see is I honestly don't know who of my members are webmasters.

Also, even if I did and this became a norm, I guarantee you the unscrupulous webmasters would go in hiding and create accounts we would never recognize at our site(s)

Is this the same program that did some fancy dancing so as not to get pulled from SAS?

If thats true then I hope wagdoll sees this and pulls em now. Ive already announced that they will be removed from YourPTR's approved list in 5 days.

Brian

We took CCM off SAS approved list when they reduced the payout to $5

This is not meant to be an attack, just an observation, but didn't Sas "reduce payout to $5" at one time ? What else did CCM do back then ? As for now they seem to be falling apart so you did the best thing

Thanks for the link, it shows that Sarah responds to her members requests

its good to show the full truth not just half the truth, here are some additional links for you to see also:

http://www.getpaidforum.com/forums/index.p...howtopic=331082
http://www.getpaidforum.com/forums/index.p...howtopic=328025
http://www.getpaidforum.com/forums/index.p...howtopic=321947
http://www.getpaidforum.com/forums/index.p...howtopic=320454
http://www.getpaidforum.com/forums/index.p...howtopic=318683
http://www.getpaidforum.com/forums/index.p...howtopic=318117
http://www.getpaidforum.com/forums/index.p...howtopic=318105
http://www.getpaidforum.com/forums/index.p...howtopic=317914
http://www.getpaidforum.com/forums/index.p...howtopic=316501
http://www.getpaidforum.com/forums/index.p...howtopic=315127
http://www.getpaidforum.com/forums/index.p...howtopic=312962

Those only who took the time to come and post a praise ( some are multiple praises in one thread) that they have been paid, and all of them after applying the new $5 payout.

what happened is not that the site decided suddenly to be ads only, or to close because the hosting bill is due and a miracle is needed to bring money in the sites paypal account, or been sold because the WM nutty mom stopped the credit card or or or or ... etc from all the things we have heard..

What happened is the site dropped the payout from $50 to $5, and put some temporary rules to control the big cashout requests that will result after applying this, the rules say:

Members with $50+ can cashout $15 max / 30 days
Members with $25-$50 can cashout out $10 / 30 days
Members with less than $25 can cashout $5 / 30 days

and it does NOT mean members can earn just $5 / 30 days and be paid only $5 / 30 days, it means they can cashout only $5 / 30 days, until the debt is elminated or reduced to its minimal (allowing all members to get paid not only those with $50+) then they can cashout all their account balance. As I know from the WM is that all who requested payouts since applying this rules on Feb 26 until now, have been paid, and currently there are only 4 pending cashout requests, and the funds are available for them and will be paid later today with any new cashout request that maybe added to the qeueue.

NOW can I ask, which is better for a member with $50?
to wait at least 4 month to get paid as the case was before? or to get $15 immediately, and another $15 next month, and so on..?

Which is better for a new member? to wait at least 6 months to reach the $50 min payout? and then another at least 4 month until getting paid? or to request cashout at $5 and get paid withing less than week after request?

what happened also is some members did not like these rules, either pay us all our money now, before you pay any new member the $5, or we will click one link every so many days, those who complained been paid, if any member of CCM requested payout after the new terms on Feb 26 and did not get paid then please post your complaint here and NOW!

Ads prices there is dynamic, meaning, ads prices are determined according to member base count, when the site have a big group that only click one link every 7 or 10 or 11 days, just to prevent been deleted, then advertisers are paying money for them and getting bad results, any ad that get less than 50% CTR is considered as a bad result for many, so how it is when this ad get 25% CTR, this is where the 25% come, and I may agree with some who say its hard to know if a member clicked 25% or less, true, and this will be discussed with the WM and members of the site.

CCM is trying hard to pay its old debt if not, there are much easier ways to do so, else than making 425+ payouts since Feb 26. Already many of members with old $50+ balances have got paid $30 and many others who did not reach the old $50 already got paid $20 and so many who has less than $25 been paid twice since Feb 26.

CCM is asking its member to show their support while the site is trying to recover and get back on track, not by forcing them to redeem, or to buy ads, or to upgrade! But by being active, the new changes was for those who are counted in member base, and advertiser pay to send them ads, and they click only 1 link every 11 days, the changes were for those, any normally active member won't be affected, and if it happened that a member been suspended for clicking only once every so many days, the terms say they will be suspended ( not deleted ) and their earnings will be paid to them minus 25% I think this is fair for the harm they caused by reducing the ad results quality.

Unless they sent the WM stating that their very low activity was for a reason else than showing anger that they do not get all the cash immediately, then they will get their accounts unsuspended, and get all their earnings without deducting anything.

good luck to you all

Edited: Oh forgot to add, CCM is not falling apart and its strong financially ( able to pay any payout request within a week now if not less )

Yes it was more than a simple reduction of payout. Like ibailoceva has said the payout was $50 and payouts were already over TOS for that. Those members who had been waiting 2 months already, even when the maximum payout was raised to $15 installments, still seems to be a 5/6 month wait to get the amount in their accounts that was supposed to be paid within 30 days. Knowing the site was already behind for some time and the action that was almost taken on CCA, the link Wil posted the decision was made to remove them. Another site that was behind TOS with payouts and lowered the payout - which isn't really lowering just a plan to pay off in installments and that's not really the same - was also removed from the approved list. Would it have been 'fair' to remove one site for this and not another?

Another problem with the site is that members who have a less than positive experience with the site are not allowed to post in forums so how are we to judge if there are problems in a site if the owner tells the members not to tell anyone or they could be deleted? Same goes for changes in the site such as the lowered payout, or the payout queue, these things as far as I can tell are supposed to be kept behind closed doors. The way the SAS approved list works, is in part by looking at a site's payout queue and how members are treated as part of decisions to keep sites on the list - how to do that when no one is allowed to post in public unless it's to say they got paid?

I do take the point that SAS lowered payout and when the no minimum was started there was a delay that got I think over 2 months, but I also feel there is a difference between a genuine lowering of payout and paying the full balances, or at least the former minimum balance in one go and not 'that' far over TOS and a site that is already behind and implements the lowered payout as an installment plan.

Edited to add: at the time it was only a temporary measure to remove the site from the list until they were caught up. Sarah herself has decided she does not want this site added back to the SAS approved list when the site is caught up. After seeing this addendum to the TOS I think both parties would be happy with that decision.

"CCM is asking its member to show their support while the site is trying to recover and get back on track, not by forcing them to redeem, or to buy ads, or to upgrade! But by being active"

You said it all in one sentence Not forcing upgrades, not forcing redemptions, not forcing ad purchases, but FORCING activity by making term changes, and holding part of the members earnings hostage otherwise.

Totally unacceptable behaviour from a PO, but thats just my opinion.

I do not think getting $15 within a week is 5/6 months wait..

$50 before wait 4 months at least.. the new rules.. assuming a member has $50 then:


before the $50 was waiting at least 4 months, at that time, I would agree with somebody clicking one link every 11 days, jsut not to be deleted, because I understand they are not sure whether they are going to be paid or not


Assuming we have 30 members each with $50+, and 50 members each with $20-$50, and 100 members with less than $25 but more than $5

according to the new temporary rules for cashing out:

$450 will be paid to members with $50+
$500 wil be paid to members with $25-$50
and $500 will be paid to membres with less than $25 but more than $5

total members paid are 180 members got $1450 in cash, meaning all who requested payout, got paid.

with the old terms and payout of $50, $1450 will pay 29 members only.

The next month, will be easier regarding the urgent cash to be paid to members, since those who were having $50+ have less than $50 now, so they get $10 not $15

and those who were getting $10 are getting $5.. its like a break period for the program..

the next month, it will bemore easier, so the program may say now all who have more than $25 will get $15 / 30 days..

the month after.. these rules may no longer be needed.. and all can cashout, whevenre they want, and get all their cash..

BUT.. some did not try to understand.. they jumped to conclusions that CCM is trying not to pay its members! from where they got this, I have no idea, how come if a program try not to pay its members, reduce its payout from $50 to $5.. Ithink we all know that those with hiugh payouts are the ones who are trying not to pay their members! hoping that they will get bored trying to reach $50 and clicking 1/4 and 1/2 cents links.. or maybe get bored and redeem for ads .. lol.. what happened.. like: OH NO CCM lowered payout! weeeeeeeee a hot topic for discussion, all are invited to discuss.. sure thing, but not to judge this with failure when you did not even wait for the first month to pass and see its results.. when you did not bother sending the WM asking whats going on, Sarah was responsive, she felt it won't be fair for those with $50+ to get just $5 / 30 days like the new members, so she raised it to $15/$10/$5.. no need to mention that those who are getting $10 and $5 / days now were not eligable to cashout, they had to wait till they reach $50 before..



I think, that was fair, to all, all got paid at the first month after applying this, more than 425 payouts been made... Then HOOOP!!.. a SAS wanna be PO with near 500 members come and say, i will remove CCM from MY approved list, lol, OK.. fine, but do not try to shine yourself on the account of a program that paid its members more than $3500 in cash since Feb 26 Do not try to get free advertising on the account of a program that are still here and have not been sold, or closed, or changed to ads only.. and its still paying its members, all of them

no earnings are hold as a hostage, all are being paid, and will paid according to the new rule for cashing out and now after the terms changes (in order to cut it on those who will say CCM is deleting memebrs to reduce debt) even those who will be suspended will get paid

suspending an account, will make it not count in memberbase, so advertisers are not paying for it

in a site sending at least 15 ads daily, thats 150 ads / 10 days.. one click / 10 days means less than 1% CTR, how would this benefit the site and make them all pay in time.. CCM showed its good intensions by paying them a part early.. without making them wait 4 month, this is more accurate than what you posted ITs expected to react in a positive way, not by clicking 1 link / 10 days when i see the program is paying..

All programs ask their members to be active, its about ads lol, isn't it? and po's have the right to do whatever to enhance their ads quality and protect both, its members and advertisers?

Isn't this the same site that somehow got someone to give or loan them the money to make payouts back when there was a thought of either going ads only or closing the site?

In other words, robbing peter to pay paul didn't help the old debt. It just temporarily acquised those members owed money.




Yes programs would like active members, but to say members MUST click however many ads to be considered active is not protecting advertisers.

People will be clicking only to click to ensure they get what is owed them........they will have no interest in what the advert is being sent only that it is a link that MUST be clicked.

How does this protect the advertiser? How does this give the advertiser quality views?

How is attempting to force peoples hands to click protecting members?

Sorry, but I don't see what you see.

I see a site that got in arrears, making decisions to alleviate the stress of owing members rather than protect members or advertisers.

Qauntity of clicks is not the same as Quality..............We can go out and click click click and rack up a million clicks from members..........thats quantity.................but without results there is no quality to those clicks.

Quality means that the advertiser profitted in some way from those clicks.

Just so no one gets confused, I'm A Sarah, but I'm NOT the one that owns CCM.

The % they MUST Click is SO LOW it's Rediclous If they can't find 3 things they are interested in 12 DAYS. Why did they OPT-IN to receive such ads? IF they don't see ANYTHING they are interested in Why did they Join? I mean 3 clicks per 12 Days Come on. you can click a ptp "Just a Click" ad the advertiser is satisfied. right now ptp is the "thing" so there are ALWAYS those to do.

Right... but people have already earned this money thats now being held hostage...

It would be like a factory telling its workers that they wont be paid for the work they did this week unless they worked the entire following week.

Brian

Have you once Talked to Sarah Herself before making such a decision? Instead of basing it on Gossip here?

Why Sarah is doing Everything she Can to bring her sites Back online. She is Getting more Caught up By the DAY.

What you want the site to just close will you be happy then? She could have taken that route you know!

I think 3 links in 12 days sounds reasonable, though personally I feel 12 days is too short but if members joined knowing that in advance that's up to them.

But that isn't the whole story is it? The terms also state members must be 25% active or they will be docked 25% of their prior earnings.



I think its this part that the problem is for some of us. Obviously not everyone will feel that is a problem, but some do.

People are NOT Losing this money Yes they earned it. They WILL be Paid. IF they are Active. the Requirements for being active is minimal. I know of Sites that REQUIRE you to Redeem a portion of your cash for ads. Or Sites that flat out do NOT pay. Cash Crazy Mails is neither.

Not sure who are Paul & Peter, or if they are just used as an example, but the site did not rob Paul or Peter lol, are you trying to discuss the site financial matters, and from where it gets it finance? The site is paying all its members under the new temporary cashing out rule with no delay, this is the point here, and what we are discussing, not the site financial issues



Good that we agree that programs would like active members how you define being active in a PTR program?

Its not a paid to receive email whether you read it or not.. when an advertiser send an email, he pays memebrs to read, and to know they actually read there is a link to be clicked and to visit the advertisers site.. then, if the offer does not interest the member, they just click the small "X" to close the window.. Sorry for this boring definition that is already known..

CCM does not say members must click each and every link been sent to them, it says members must be active clicking one link / 10 days out of at least 150 or 200 , is a very low activity, that programs do not like, nor do the advertisers.. PO's protect advertisers by, making sure members have seen the ad they been paid to see, and for which the advertiser paid, protecting members here, is by deleivring good result to advertisers so they come back, meaning more earnings to the members..

when I have in my program for example, a group that try to blackmail me, either pay me all my cash now or I will click one link / 10 days, and when I have a new rule that all with $5+ can cashout now not just those with $50+ then I have the right to ensure that the source of recvenue for the site whcih is advertisers, will stay.. I think the general benefit here, is more important than this group own benefit only, they are not happy, ok, it is hard to please all people, they can click one link every so many days, and they will get suspended + paid minus 25% for the ads they got paid to read and click them, but they trashed them

Where is forcing here, no "Must" and no "Forcing" but keeping the site at a certain level of activity.. if they got suspended, they can be unsuspended and have all their earnings back, without deducting..



Again protecting advertisers by making sure members have viewed their ad that they paid for showing it to members The site is not stressed, again? are you trying to discuss its financial matters? I will tell you again and again .. all payouts requests since Feb 26 have been made according to the temporary cashing out rule



Thats how ptr works, they are paid to read, not to purchase, or act, or signup or make a valid search.. they are paid to read basically, if the offer interest them, then they may want to respond, PTR's are to read, and the only way to make sure a member read the ad, is by clicking that "runner" link.

If brian based the decision on an admin mail - how can an admin mail sent by the owner of the site be 'gossip'?

Since the site is getting caught up and doing well how would brian's actions lead it to close?

I based it on the email that was posted here word for word... Are you saying those werent her words and thus was taken out of context?

Is this paragraph untrue?



My decision was based on that paragraph alone. If that paragraph was falsified or not word for word from Sarah herself please let me know. As my decision was based on that right there.

Brian

It says if they are suspended they Will get Paid minus a 25% fee ***IF they don't Contect the W/M about the Suspension!*** If they Do Contact the W/M they will be reinstated and then can be active again and Get Paid WITHOUT the 25% Fee

So if the members click 3 links in 12 days, they get suspended and docked 25% of their earnings unless they agree to be 25% active in future?

That's the way it's Posted But it's misleading.

*Added 4-10-05* Active Members will be paid with priority. Those with low activity (those with a history of clicking just enough to stay active, or those clicking less than 25% of paid ads) will get suspended and their earnings will be paid to them minus 25% as funds allow. Unless they contact us, and wish to be unsuspended and become active members. Once earnings are paid, there accounts will be terminated.


Makes you think that after you are asked to be reinstated you get paid then Deleted. NOT THE CASE

I asked Sarah about that myself

A Member Will be Suspended if their Clickthru is Less than 25%(probably NOT Strictly enforced IMO, maybe just for those who click a link here and there NOT to get deleted) Then at that time Will have a period of time to Contact the w/m about their account. If they DON'T within that time whatever is in their Account Will be paid to them -25%. If they DO Contact the w/m Their account Will be Reinstated and Will be Required to be active to Get paid as a normal member.


How many sites you know will pay a suspended member before deleting them?

But the suspension and deduction are based on current activity, while the money in which the deduction comes from was already earned.

This is like you getting suspended from your job this week and your employer demanding 25% of last weeks check back.

I can understand suspending someone for a certain level of inactivity... but not taking away money already earned based on that current activity. They abided by all rules to earn that money and thus are entitled to 100% of it... not 75%

brian

Again If they ask an get reinstated and remain active they'll get 100%

Most sites wouldn't suspend a member for clicking 3 links in 12 days, more than that with a 25% requirement if there are more than 12 links sent over 12 days.

If I got suspended for that reason I don't think I would beg to be allowed to be 25% active in future so that I wouldn't lose 25% of what I already legitimately earned.

I also agree with ptrhost about the quality v quantity if a member is simply trying to click the 25% so as not to lose what they already earned. How do you know that the person who clicked 3 links didn't do 3 searches or join 3 sites from those links while the one who clicked 200 links did nothing at all other than make up the numbers?

If the pricing is a problem, why not manually adjust the pricing rather than using the script which is flawed compared to the activity levels of the memberbase?

And they do not get suspended except if they been with a very low activity level for a while, during which they caused bad ads results, thats why they are deducted 25% for this period.. not all their earnings!.. plus, they can get unsuspended and get all their earnings back without any deduction if they sent the WM telling that their activity level will be back to normal.. so, they will get all their previous earning without deduction, and without charging them any fee for the period in which their acitvity level was very low..

So in your opinion it's perfectly OK for a PO to take money back that a member has earned? I sure hope your not a PO.

Ender

Edited to add I've read that e-mail over and over I must have missed where it said anything about returning deduced money. I did read they would be paid and then deleted but it, unless I missed it, didn't say the 25% would be added back to the members account.

Beg? Nobody mentioned begging at all!

TOS CLARIFACATION UPDATE

Posted with PERMISSION from Sarah

*Added 4-11-05 For clarification purposes* Once suspended, you have 7 days to contact us regarding suspension of the account to understand the reason regarding the suspension. If you agree to become a active member, you will be come unsuspended and not be docked the 25% fee as long as you remain active by clicking at least 3 links per 12 days once you become unsuspended.

So... you would perfer a member just clicking and not caring about the ad to make sure they get their money than people clicking because they are interested in the ad.

This is just leading to the blind clicking we are always complaining about...

Which do you think looks better to an advertiser:

100 clicks and 5 signups (or whatever response the advertiser is looking for)
1000 clicks with 5 signups because 900 people felt they need to click to make sure they get paid.

Brian

[quote=Ender,Apr 11 2005, 01:13 PM]
So in your opinion it's perfectly OK for a PO to take money back that a member has earned? I sure hope your not a PO.

Ender
[right][snapback]3452034[/snapback][/right]
[/quote

of course its not ok, and also, to take money from advertisers to deliever them bad results..

adjusting price level, with members count stay the same showed on the site for public, is not a good idea, then, we will have another thread her about CCM being unsustainable.

Thanks for the clarifacation. I've had stereos that came with cleared and easier to follow instructions.

Ender

of course 100 clicks and 5 signups not 1000 clicks and 5 signups

also which is better to an advertiser, to pay an ad for 100 and get 5 clicks or to pay an ad for 1000 and get 5 clicks?

That works both ways though

If an advertiser buys an add on a 1000 Member site and Get 600 Clicks on it

or they buy an ad on a 1000 member site and gets 100 clicks on it.


Which would they rather see?

Especially if the ad is a ptp ad

If activity is really such a problem why not sell the ads as paid to 100,500, 1000? I don't think as a member I could ever accept being blackmailed forced into being active by any PO. I agreed to recieve and if I want to read to e-mails I didn't agree to an activity level set by anyone other then myself.

I have a real problem with retroactive TOS changes I don't see them as fair to members, who signed up, earned money and deserve to be paid what they are already entitled to. Making them to jump though hoops can't be good for the program in the long run and can't help but cause hard feelings.

Ender

Sorry I didn't see the above post before I hit send.

one word... RESEND

Why not let the people interested in clicking that ad get the money instead of forcing those that wish not to click, click with no interest.

This reinforces my decision to remove them from the approved sites list. I would much rather see an ad for YourPTR PTP sent to members twice who are interested in clicking the ad than to a major percentage of people who are only clicking to be active because of these asinine new requirements.

Brian