I have an idea. - Page 2 - GoFuckYourself.com

mika · 09-08-2002, 04:03 PM

very interesting.

if you take part of this you might wanna use your gf's credit card or someone else's who is close to you and allows you to use his/her cc. I just thought you might get some big time enemies if you use your own info and cc.

ps. labret, I was just wondering, you might wanna consider your lawyer first. or maybe you already have

sponsors often use terms like
"Attempts to cheat, defraud or mislead us in any way"

It wouldn't be cheating imo, but misleading? perhaps
If your project gets serious, be prepared

good luck

Wilbo · 09-08-2002, 04:06 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by mika
very interesting.

if you take part of this you might wanna use your gf's credit card or someone else's who is close to you and allows you to use his/her cc. I just thought you might get some big time enemies if you use your own info and cc.

ps. labret, I was just wondering, you might wanna consider your lawyer first. or maybe you already have sponsors often use terms like
"Attempts to cheat, defraud or mislead us in any way"

It wouldn't be cheating imo, but misleading? perhaps
If your project gets serious, be prepared

good luck

Then you just post which sponsor is suing you, that oughta shut him up fast

Theo · 09-08-2002, 04:11 PM

1st time i see a sponsor with independent stats to be a volunteer for shaving test. hehe

I like the idea of the test.

Backov · 09-08-2002, 04:19 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Soul_Rebel
1st time i see a sponsor with independent stats to be a volunteer for shaving test. hehe

I like the idea of the test.

Yep, says good things about Rogers program...

Cheers,
Backov

RogerV · 09-08-2002, 04:32 PM

I have no problem with it but when it comes to paying out on it and that acount gets flagged for fraud it will not get paid.

Basically if 100% of the trials cancel before they go active most of the time its fraud.

It happens once in a while where a webmaster tries to fuck us but we get alot of webmasters testing us to see if the joins show up.

Our stats work like this Joins are real time and hits are updated every 20 min.

we have never shaved we make our money off the exits and cross sells. so I'm not worried

But I agree with testing the sponsers and seeing who makes you the most at the end of the day aside from conversions and high payouts.

And if a sponsor shaves that only makes it better for me.

And I hope if for some reason we don't catch this test you guys will be honest with me.

Exxxotica · 09-08-2002, 04:36 PM

Very cool idea.

Im too lazy to participate... but I would be really interested in seeing the end results.

I hope you guys go through with it!

Backov · 09-08-2002, 04:48 PM

Here's the thing, there's all sorts of ways a shaving routine could work.. At least one has been mentioned already.. Some more that come to mind

1 - If the trial cancels the first day, shave it. (Sales show up in a block later, cancelled first day trials don't) Some programs would consider this perfectly ethical. Solution - don't cancel the trial in the first day as a rule.

2 - First X amount of sales or days the shave is off, this it to get the "wow, what a great sponsor!" factor going.. I know at least 2 sponsors (big ones) that work this way. No proof of course, except that making a new account and changing your links "magically" brings your conversion ratio back up.

3 - Only shave high volume accounts.. If you're making 50 signups plus a day, what's 5 shaved? Most webmasters would never be able to notice with that volume of traffic.

I guess what I'm saying is, this trial will probably only catch the really dumb-ass shavers.. Which is better than nothing.

Cheers,
Backov

GoLiaT · 09-08-2002, 04:49 PM

nice idea
very nice...

RogerV · 09-08-2002, 05:02 PM

What i have noticed if a webmaster is sending me 50 joins a day normally they are a sponsor or a whale that is not frauding the system. So there is no need to shave unless that sponsor has worked a shave mechanism to profit in there system.

its the little guys who send 5-10 a day that normally try to fraud you with multipal acounts. and all the trials cancel in the first 3 days. and there conversions are always a set number like 1/400

It should be easy to test sponsors without them knowing.

I'm sure you guys will figure out away to catch the shavers.
Good luck!

easy01 · 09-08-2002, 05:06 PM

Great suggestion !

I think that it's best not to post here the date when the test starts and to run two or more sessions of this kind of test

for example : one in the beggining of October , then in the end etc., then wait one month and then again.

Fletch XXX · 09-08-2002, 05:18 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by [Labret]

Will you do the site design?

I'll be shooting you an icq once I get on.

Design?

Sure, if you need anything.

<i><font color="green">beyond belief.</i></font>

[Labret] · 09-08-2002, 05:26 PM

Excellent.

Ok, can I get some suggestions on which programs should definitely be considered for the first run?

Also, if I can get 5 to 10 more people in on this, there should be no reason why we cant have this thing running by the end of the week.

Again, I will personally cover the cost of every trial of everyone who participates.

[email protected]

Aussie Rebel · 09-08-2002, 05:29 PM

Great idea Labret, I cant wait to see the results.
make sure ya test maxcash & stiffycash

easy01 · 09-08-2002, 05:32 PM

Don't forget to include Ars

http · 09-08-2002, 05:33 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Backov

....

I know at least 2 sponsors (big ones) that work this way. No proof of course, except that making a new account and changing your links "magically" brings your conversion ratio back up.

....

Absolutely true...works amazingly with a certain sponsor

Off getting a new account...

phogirl69 · 09-08-2002, 05:39 PM

You should test

Maxcash
ARS
Sic
Nastydollars
CEN
FlyntDigital
Topbucks
Silvercash

Mostly all the ones that pay per sign up

Theo · 09-08-2002, 05:50 PM

FD has jettis stats

RogerV · 09-08-2002, 05:54 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by phogirl69
You should test

Maxcash
ARS
Sic
Nastydollars
CEN
FlyntDigital
Topbucks
Silvercash

Mostly all the ones that pay per sign up

what about freefreeprogram.com don't leave the pornkings out.

Sly_RJ · 09-08-2002, 05:55 PM

Definitely need to check Nasty on a larger scale. Although I already know what the results would (or should) be...

<IMX> · 09-08-2002, 06:00 PM

Very good idea [Labret]
However, I agree with what Backov said.

You are very unlikely to catch a large shaving sponsor. Unless you have the participation of someone with a massive amount of traffic, i.e. the exit traffic from another sponsor, an extended period of time, and the sponsor is fairly unsophisticated in their approach to shaving.

I would add to Backov?s statements that said sponsor would probably "smooth" the shaving over time. That way they could adjust ratios to keep people happy and making a certain amount of money per click or unique visitor sent. The sponsor knows what their magic ratio numbers are for their business model to be profitable. They also know the maximum amount that they can afford for each of those ratios so they can remain profitable.

I.E. [X trials | X conversions to joins | X rebills | X upsells | X from "rejoins"]
=> X amount per unique max per each ?class? of webmaster.

With the knowledge of the maximum payout rates, the sponsor could aggregate the data from individual affiliates and create a systematic approach of shaving each ?class? of webmaster. Whales convert a such and such for joins, conversion and rebills, upsells etc. Smaller webmasters at such and such etc..

By smoothing the shaving over time, the sponsor could average the joins over time to pay out a specific average click to certain accounts, or even whole "classes." The sponsor knows how much they will be able to pay for each unique from each "class," it is only a matter of when they will pay out the money.

The other important note is that each sponsor may have a certain ?honeypot? that they shave. The third exit pop-up chain has no affiliate links randomly during your traffic. How many of us actually go through and check the chained consoles? It is impossible to check every single unique visit.

Not to sound discouraging....
Frank W. brings up an important point involving Game Theory.

Essentially, you should start by constructing the best ways to shave different types webmasters. Then devise ways to defeat the those systems of shaving. Hopefully, that eliminates the most obvious systems of shaving. The higher the barrier to devise a system of shaving, the less likely sponsors are to shave.

Your group can probably discourage quite a few smaller and mid-tier sponsors from shaving, by modeling how sponsors _would_ shave, and then devising a methodology to test sponsors over an extended period of time say 6 months.

Definitely keep the data private for an extended period of time say 6 months, as that turns up the heat. Also, a few "trusted" people should hold the final assumptions that will be made in regards to testing the sponsors. That way 3 of you hold the keys, and the rest are sheep who are told to "buy here."

That keeps the sponsors from implanting people to illicit information =}

Hope my ramblings make sense. As this is a good topic.

</IMX>

TheFLY · 09-08-2002, 06:09 PM

Here are my thoughts...

1. Do you accept payment for a "review" ? Maybe to keep it clean we should do an independent poll (not on GFY).
2. If this is not an ongoing test -- I don't see the use. I'm going to assume that most shavers are not on all the time -- and not on for all affiliates -- especially in the first week or so of sending traffic. Lets get some professional input from real programers that have coded shavers...
3. Are you only testing trial programs?
4. Why do you care? If you do care about X program -- why not test it yourself... Or is your goal to make a suspected-dishonest program honest again?
5. I think using a bot is a bad idea -- I'm sure you can spare a 100 crap hits for a test...
6. What if the sponsor claims that somebody signed up with Browser X that did not track cookie Z correctly... You need to make sure that the testers have cookies turned on, etc. for the audit to be accurate...
7. Try to get testers with different ISP's and different countries... A good way to shave would be to shave by ISP or by country...

I think it's a good idea -- but like Exxxotica I'm pretty lazy -- maybe I'll help out in round #2 if it's for a program that I think is worth reviewing

I have some suggestions but I don't want to do anything out of taste in public LOL...

Maybe we should target affiliates' accounts that suspect shaving... Like if webmaster XYZ is converting like 1:3000 and he's going to drop the program anyway because it sucks -- this would be a "more perfect" opportunity to crank up our shave test... For example I tested some traffic on Big Players -- I made $50 off 1 trial right away (duh) -- but after about more hits I didn't make any more sales... great opportunity to do some testing at that point -- not like I'm going to keep using the program anyway.

Backov · 09-08-2002, 06:11 PM

Great post IMX..

Now, here's my assertion (based on nothing but personal impressions):

Most sponsors aren't that sophisticated. Sure, they know their financials, but even the biggest probably have pretty basic shave systems. It requires a VERY smart programmer/designer to come up with a good design for your idea of a shaving system, and no offense to any salaried progammers out there, most just aren't that good.

I on the other hand, could write a shave system so good, no one would ever catch it.. (Kidding, kidding, stop icqing me!)

So, I expect that a well organized test WILL catch some shavers. But we will miss the more sophisticated ones, and there's not much we can do about that. Again, as I said before, some is better than none. And if we come up with some good rules of thumb of things to avoid, we should be good.

Now if someone can just come up with a system to find our "moles". ;>

Cheers,
Backov

TheFLY · 09-08-2002, 06:27 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by <IMX>
[B]I.E. [X trials | X conversions to joins | X rebills | X upsells | X from "rejoins"]
=> X amount per unique max per each ?class? of webmaster.

Exactly -- if I was going to shave -- that is how I would do it... Keep everything smooth and nobody will complain about shaving... Even if a program is not shaving -- it's better to have the signups drip in smoothly... any 0 signup day will put a webmaster in a panic.

Or you could have indicators for traffic fluctuations (like sudden drop in traffic = no shave -- sudden increase in traffic = no shave... steady gain or steady loss = unattentive webmaster = shave.

Quote:

Essentially, you should start by constructing the best ways to shave different types webmasters. Then devise ways to defeat the those systems of shaving.

I feel you -- and maybe this is why we should target affiliate accounts of webmasters that already assume they are being shaved... Because the most obvious way to shave would be on some kind of rotation system. On the other hand -- if you assume in a game such as this there are an unlimited # of ways to shave a webmaster -- such a "construction" -- in your own words -- is most likely doomed by being misdirected.

---

In the end all the dribble that is coming out of our brains is a waste of bandwich... You're better off going with your gut instincts and trusting your homeys.

some_idiot · 09-08-2002, 06:28 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by [Labret]
Excellent.

Ok, can I get some suggestions on which programs should definitely be considered for the first run?

Also, if I can get 5 to 10 more people in on this, there should be no reason why we cant have this thing running by the end of the week.

Again, I will personally cover the cost of every trial of everyone who participates.

[email protected]

I've seen some probs with TB's system counting...
bad programming? Be nice to know. I'm not saying that
they do, but I've seen numbers change significantly in
less than an hour.

TheFLY · 09-08-2002, 06:29 PM

Why don't we save some time and hire some spies -- or pay for some double-agents...

Let's do some Cloak and Dagger shit...

[Labret] · 09-08-2002, 06:41 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by TheFLY

I feel you -- and maybe this is why we should target affiliate accounts of webmasters that already assume they are being shaved... Because the most obvious way to shave would be on some kind of rotation system.

I agree with everything you have said.

This was just an idea that came to me while sitting on the pot. I figured I would throw the idea out and see what happens.

The advanced shavers will never be caught. But the vast majority of shavers are not that bright.

I really like the idea of sacrificing someone elses already established account.

As for the hitbot, I figure I could just buy some chinese 404 traffic for dirt cheap and use that for a buffer. Not like it would convert and skew the results.

And no, I have no particular interest in any program. I dont work in straight so I am not out on any kind of witch hunt. I just thought it would be an interesting idea. And just imagine the drama. Oh lordy.

TheFLY · 09-08-2002, 06:48 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by [Labret]
I really like the idea of sacrificing someone elses already established account.

I don't think it will be difficult getting volunteers for this...

*snicker*

gornyhuy · 09-08-2002, 06:58 PM

Unfortunately Its probably not feasible to turn this concept into a long term 'watchdog' program... that would be the best possible outcome IMHO.

Kind of like The Statistician but covering shavers: Just look at the chart and see who's got a clean record.

I guess you could get a covert team to do spot checks once a quarter or something and publish the results....

Backov · 09-08-2002, 07:02 PM

The only way I can see for something like this to be sustainable is with those prepaid credit cards I have heard of.. Ya know, the ones you buy in the 7/11 or whatever that come with X amount of dollars on them.. If you could keep buying those, you could do the watchdog group.. If you couldn't, everyone in the group would be blackflagged and you'd never be able to do it again. ;>

Cheers,
Backov

<IMX> · 09-08-2002, 07:06 PM

Backov--
Thanks.
I trust your judgment.

We can then assume that the most sophisticated methods of shaving are either:
1.) Nearly impossible to catch with small sampling methods.
2.) Too expensive for sponsors to execute.

That leaves the rather unsophisticated methods.

TheFly--
I agree, you could get caught up in trying to determine an infinite number of unsophisticated shaving methods; however, I believe if a group brainstormed over a number of days some definite patterns would begin to emerge.

Once the patterns of shaving methodologies are charted, the group could actually determine a finite number of unsophisticated shaving methods. With assistance from some great programmers, like yourself, the group could determine the least expensive ways of executing the shaving via an automated or semi-automated system.

Then test the easiest ways of shaving up to the more complex.

In fact, things like the ?exit-console? shave could be tested without the use of ccs.

As you stated earlier, the test wouldn?t provide anything but more arguments.
(Our system has trouble tracking non-cookied Macintosh users on Wednesdays.)

But Who doesn?t like a good knock-down drag-out? LOL...

Yarr...I was just about to say, we are better off trying to socially engineering our way into to the innards of the shav-o-matic.

Us> Hey I?m the programmer who hooked-up your affiliate system
Sponsor> Huh?
Us> You know they guy who did the custom work for you.
Sponsor> Hmm...
Us> Yeah, I hooked-up the ?razor?
Sponsor> Oh yeah...

-Or-

We devise a simple test:

We throw the CEOs from programs we want to test into a pool in Vegas.
If the sponsor swims, their program shaves.
If the sponsor drowns, their program does not shave.

</IMX>

heymatty · 09-08-2002, 07:09 PM

If you do it pleaee reas the TOS very closely to make it fair.

eg Nasty dollars, you need to to cancel the trial after 12 hours or more

quiet · 09-08-2002, 07:12 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by <IMX>

We devise a simple test:

We throw the CEOs from programs we want to test into a pool in Vegas.
If the sponsor swims, their program shaves.
If the sponsor drowns, their program does not shave.

definitely the way to do it

kenny · 09-08-2002, 07:18 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by heymatty
If you do it pleaee reas the TOS very closely to make it fair.

eg Nasty dollars, you need to to cancel the trial after 12 hours or more

You got it all wrong, you tie their hands and feet and if they float they dont shave, if they sink well mach3 baby

SleazyDream · 09-08-2002, 07:26 PM

just a thought, but is it smart to get your credit card involved with someone like [Labret] who spends soo much time and effort into not having anyone know who he is????

fnet · 09-08-2002, 07:27 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Backov

Most sponsors aren't that sophisticated. Sure, they know their financials, but even the biggest probably have pretty basic shave systems. It requires a VERY smart programmer/designer to come up with a good design for your idea of a shaving system, and no offense to any salaried progammers out there, most just aren't that good.

The best argument for lack of sophistication is that none of the sponsors have been put to a well publicized, peer supported test, and therefore have not established a precedent for covering their asses as a business necessity.

Some are as blatant as shelf dropoffs at the start of a new month.

It would be nice to get some input from people who don't check this board regularly, to get a narrowed idea of who to test. I mean, there are a few people out there who use almost every single sponsor.

Nbritte · 09-08-2002, 08:06 PM

I am game if you need more people
4763784

Brian

[Labret] · 09-08-2002, 08:14 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by SleazyDream
just a thought, but is it smart to get your credit card involved with someone like [Labret] who spends soo much time and effort into not having anyone know who he is????

True. I run most of the major programs and would go on major shopping sprees.

Interest has peter'd off and I dont think I have enough people to pull it off successfuly. And combined with all the obvious stumbling blocks stated, its not looking like it is going to fly. Was an interesting idea, if anyone else thinks they can pull it off, I have 4 cards I can contribute.

And the next time we speak after this post Sleazy, you will be looking me in the eye. So keep digging your hole motherfucker. Come January, your ass is mine.

quiet · 09-08-2002, 08:16 PM

so you're coming to Internext this time around?

[Labret] · 09-08-2002, 08:21 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by quiet
so you're coming to Internext this time around?

Yes. For one reason and one reason only.

StupidNewbie · 09-08-2002, 08:23 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by easy01
Don't forget to include Ars

i second that

<IMX> · 09-08-2002, 08:25 PM

Quote:

Yes. For one reason and one reason only.

I hope you'll have time for drinks and merriment.

Frank W · 09-08-2002, 09:17 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by <IMX>

We devise a simple test:

We throw the CEOs from programs we want to test into a pool in Vegas.
If the sponsor swims, their program shaves.
If the sponsor drowns, their program does not shave.

</IMX>

Hey, if its good enough for medieval courts, it's good enough for modern webmasters. lol

High Quality · 09-10-2002, 06:25 PM

May I suggest you start with ARS, the biggest out there. Additionally, it would be great to find out either way, as Marc De on this very board has denounced all shaving allegations.

hahmike · 09-10-2002, 06:32 PM

nasty are shaving fucks... i'll eat the shit from ernesto's ass if anyone can prove me wrong.

switched to maxcash. awful, awful, ugly cookie cutter popup hell sites... but more joins avg. per week than i ever did with nasty.

nasty fags.

pipp · 09-10-2002, 06:37 PM

Labrat - So how is this going ? Any resoults jet ?

crack · 09-10-2002, 06:38 PM

>We're gonna need a hitbot as a control or something, cos as soon as a sponsor sees a 1:2 join ratio for an FPA

No problem with that.

harvey · 09-10-2002, 06:44 PM

It's a good idea, I know for sure 2 big guys with dirty tricks. Anyway, you'd use some trustable friends instead of an "open community" action, since you don't know who's into this, and believe me they'll be between the testers just to know which is the testing account. Simple as A-B-C. Now, if nobody knows about the account, that's a completely different thing.

And from the list of sponsors you gave, nobody showed up yet telling something (whatever). Pretty curious, huh?

Anyway, good luck, would love to see the results!

LiveDose · 09-10-2002, 06:47 PM

This is a great idea.

09-08-2002, 04:32 PM	#55
RogerV Banned! Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 12,591	I have no problem with it but when it comes to paying out on it and that acount gets flagged for fraud it will not get paid. Basically if 100% of the trials cancel before they go active most of the time its fraud. It happens once in a while where a webmaster tries to fuck us but we get alot of webmasters testing us to see if the joins show up. Our stats work like this Joins are real time and hits are updated every 20 min. we have never shaved we make our money off the exits and cross sells. so I'm not worried But I agree with testing the sponsers and seeing who makes you the most at the end of the day aside from conversions and high payouts. And if a sponsor shaves that only makes it better for me. And I hope if for some reason we don't catch this test you guys will be honest with me. Last edited by RogerV; 09-08-2002 at 04:34 PM..

09-08-2002, 04:36 PM	#56
Exxxotica Confirmed User Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Oregun Posts: 4,396	Very cool idea. Im too lazy to participate... but I would be really interested in seeing the end results. I hope you guys go through with it! __________________ Needs some really great hosting? Black Seven note: I do not work for Blackseven... Im just grateful for their kick ass hosting...so quit bothering them when I hurt your feelings... pussy

09-08-2002, 04:48 PM	#57
Backov Confirmed User Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Cat Detector Van Posts: 1,600	Here's the thing, there's all sorts of ways a shaving routine could work.. At least one has been mentioned already.. Some more that come to mind 1 - If the trial cancels the first day, shave it. (Sales show up in a block later, cancelled first day trials don't) Some programs would consider this perfectly ethical. Solution - don't cancel the trial in the first day as a rule. 2 - First X amount of sales or days the shave is off, this it to get the "wow, what a great sponsor!" factor going.. I know at least 2 sponsors (big ones) that work this way. No proof of course, except that making a new account and changing your links "magically" brings your conversion ratio back up. 3 - Only shave high volume accounts.. If you're making 50 signups plus a day, what's 5 shaved? Most webmasters would never be able to notice with that volume of traffic. I guess what I'm saying is, this trial will probably only catch the really dumb-ass shavers.. Which is better than nothing. Cheers, Backov __________________ <embed src="http://banners.spotbrokers.com/button.swf" FlashVars="clickURL=http://banners.spotbrokers.com" quality=high pluginspage="http://www.macromedia.com/shockwave/download/index.cgi?P1_Prod_Version=ShockwaveFlash" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="120" height="60"></embed>

09-08-2002, 05:26 PM	#62
[Labret] Registered User Industry Role: Join Date: May 2001 Location: Са́нкт-Петербу́рг Posts: 10,945	Excellent. Ok, can I get some suggestions on which programs should definitely be considered for the first run? Also, if I can get 5 to 10 more people in on this, there should be no reason why we cant have this thing running by the end of the week. Again, I will personally cover the cost of every trial of everyone who participates. [email protected] Last edited by [Labret]; 09-08-2002 at 05:32 PM..

09-08-2002, 06:00 PM	#70
<IMX> Confirmed User Join Date: Jun 2002 Posts: 2,728	Very good idea [Labret] However, I agree with what Backov said. You are very unlikely to catch a large shaving sponsor. Unless you have the participation of someone with a massive amount of traffic, i.e. the exit traffic from another sponsor, an extended period of time, and the sponsor is fairly unsophisticated in their approach to shaving. I would add to Backov?s statements that said sponsor would probably "smooth" the shaving over time. That way they could adjust ratios to keep people happy and making a certain amount of money per click or unique visitor sent. The sponsor knows what their magic ratio numbers are for their business model to be profitable. They also know the maximum amount that they can afford for each of those ratios so they can remain profitable. I.E. [X trials \| X conversions to joins \| X rebills \| X upsells \| X from "rejoins"] => X amount per unique max per each ?class? of webmaster. With the knowledge of the maximum payout rates, the sponsor could aggregate the data from individual affiliates and create a systematic approach of shaving each ?class? of webmaster. Whales convert a such and such for joins, conversion and rebills, upsells etc. Smaller webmasters at such and such etc.. By smoothing the shaving over time, the sponsor could average the joins over time to pay out a specific average click to certain accounts, or even whole "classes." The sponsor knows how much they will be able to pay for each unique from each "class," it is only a matter of when they will pay out the money. The other important note is that each sponsor may have a certain ?honeypot? that they shave. The third exit pop-up chain has no affiliate links randomly during your traffic. How many of us actually go through and check the chained consoles? It is impossible to check every single unique visit. Not to sound discouraging.... Frank W. brings up an important point involving Game Theory. Essentially, you should start by constructing the best ways to shave different types webmasters. Then devise ways to defeat the those systems of shaving. Hopefully, that eliminates the most obvious systems of shaving. The higher the barrier to devise a system of shaving, the less likely sponsors are to shave. Your group can probably discourage quite a few smaller and mid-tier sponsors from shaving, by modeling how sponsors _would_ shave, and then devising a methodology to test sponsors over an extended period of time say 6 months. Definitely keep the data private for an extended period of time say 6 months, as that turns up the heat. Also, a few "trusted" people should hold the final assumptions that will be made in regards to testing the sponsors. That way 3 of you hold the keys, and the rest are sheep who are told to "buy here." That keeps the sponsors from implanting people to illicit information =} Hope my ramblings make sense. As this is a good topic. </IMX> __________________ $$$ Check out NICHE PAY the leader of Micro Niche Sites! They offer $1 Trials! $$$ $$$ Check out 10 FREE TRIAL SALES equals 1 FREE LAP TOP ! $$$

09-08-2002, 04:03 PM	#51
mika Confirmed User Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Finland Posts: 1,561	very interesting. if you take part of this you might wanna use your gf's credit card or someone else's who is close to you and allows you to use his/her cc. I just thought you might get some big time enemies if you use your own info and cc. ps. labret, I was just wondering, you might wanna consider your lawyer first. or maybe you already have sponsors often use terms like "Attempts to cheat, defraud or mislead us in any way" It wouldn't be cheating imo, but misleading? perhaps If your project gets serious, be prepared good luck

09-08-2002, 04:11 PM	#53
Theo HAL 9000 Industry Role: Join Date: May 2001 Posts: 34,515	1st time i see a sponsor with independent stats to be a volunteer for shaving test. hehe I like the idea of the test.

09-08-2002, 04:49 PM	#58
GoLiaT Confirmed User Join Date: Mar 2002 Posts: 1,130	nice idea very nice...

09-08-2002, 05:02 PM	#59
RogerV Banned! Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 12,591	What i have noticed if a webmaster is sending me 50 joins a day normally they are a sponsor or a whale that is not frauding the system. So there is no need to shave unless that sponsor has worked a shave mechanism to profit in there system. its the little guys who send 5-10 a day that normally try to fraud you with multipal acounts. and all the trials cancel in the first 3 days. and there conversions are always a set number like 1/400 It should be easy to test sponsors without them knowing. I'm sure you guys will figure out away to catch the shavers. Good luck!

09-08-2002, 05:06 PM	#60
easy01 Confirmed User Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 321	Great suggestion ! I think that it's best not to post here the date when the test starts and to run two or more sessions of this kind of test for example : one in the beggining of October , then in the end etc., then wait one month and then again.

09-08-2002, 05:29 PM	#63
Aussie Rebel Blow Me U Geeks Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Maximum Security Posts: 5,108	Great idea Labret, I cant wait to see the results. make sure ya test maxcash & stiffycash

09-08-2002, 05:32 PM	#64
easy01 Confirmed User Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 321	Don't forget to include Ars

09-08-2002, 05:39 PM	#66
phogirl69 Confirmed User Join Date: Jul 2001 Posts: 3,330	You should test Maxcash ARS Sic Nastydollars CEN FlyntDigital Topbucks Silvercash Mostly all the ones that pay per sign up

09-08-2002, 05:50 PM	#67
Theo HAL 9000 Industry Role: Join Date: May 2001 Posts: 34,515	FD has jettis stats

09-08-2002, 05:55 PM	#69
Sly_RJ Live Hard - Die Hard Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Ready to leave... Posts: 17,042	Definitely need to check Nasty on a larger scale. Although I already know what the results would (or should) be...

09-08-2002, 06:09 PM	#71
TheFLY So Fucking Banned Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: http://www.thefly.net/ --- Quit your job and live off steady traffic. Posts: 11,856	Here are my thoughts... 1. Do you accept payment for a "review" ? Maybe to keep it clean we should do an independent poll (not on GFY). 2. If this is not an ongoing test -- I don't see the use. I'm going to assume that most shavers are not on all the time -- and not on for all affiliates -- especially in the first week or so of sending traffic. Lets get some professional input from real programers that have coded shavers... 3. Are you only testing trial programs? 4. Why do you care? If you do care about X program -- why not test it yourself... Or is your goal to make a suspected-dishonest program honest again? 5. I think using a bot is a bad idea -- I'm sure you can spare a 100 crap hits for a test... 6. What if the sponsor claims that somebody signed up with Browser X that did not track cookie Z correctly... You need to make sure that the testers have cookies turned on, etc. for the audit to be accurate... 7. Try to get testers with different ISP's and different countries... A good way to shave would be to shave by ISP or by country... I think it's a good idea -- but like Exxxotica I'm pretty lazy -- maybe I'll help out in round #2 if it's for a program that I think is worth reviewing I have some suggestions but I don't want to do anything out of taste in public LOL... Maybe we should target affiliates' accounts that suspect shaving... Like if webmaster XYZ is converting like 1:3000 and he's going to drop the program anyway because it sucks -- this would be a "more perfect" opportunity to crank up our shave test... For example I tested some traffic on Big Players -- I made $50 off 1 trial right away (duh) -- but after about more hits I didn't make any more sales... great opportunity to do some testing at that point -- not like I'm going to keep using the program anyway.

09-08-2002, 06:11 PM	#72
Backov Confirmed User Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Cat Detector Van Posts: 1,600	Great post IMX.. Now, here's my assertion (based on nothing but personal impressions): Most sponsors aren't that sophisticated. Sure, they know their financials, but even the biggest probably have pretty basic shave systems. It requires a VERY smart programmer/designer to come up with a good design for your idea of a shaving system, and no offense to any salaried progammers out there, most just aren't that good. I on the other hand, could write a shave system so good, no one would ever catch it.. (Kidding, kidding, stop icqing me!) So, I expect that a well organized test WILL catch some shavers. But we will miss the more sophisticated ones, and there's not much we can do about that. Again, as I said before, some is better than none. And if we come up with some good rules of thumb of things to avoid, we should be good. Now if someone can just come up with a system to find our "moles". ;> Cheers, Backov __________________ <embed src="http://banners.spotbrokers.com/button.swf" FlashVars="clickURL=http://banners.spotbrokers.com" quality=high pluginspage="http://www.macromedia.com/shockwave/download/index.cgi?P1_Prod_Version=ShockwaveFlash" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="120" height="60"></embed>

09-08-2002, 06:29 PM	#75
TheFLY So Fucking Banned Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: http://www.thefly.net/ --- Quit your job and live off steady traffic. Posts: 11,856	Why don't we save some time and hire some spies -- or pay for some double-agents... Let's do some Cloak and Dagger shit...

09-08-2002, 06:58 PM	#78
gornyhuy Chafed. Join Date: May 2002 Location: Face Down in Pussy Posts: 18,041	Unfortunately Its probably not feasible to turn this concept into a long term 'watchdog' program... that would be the best possible outcome IMHO. Kind of like The Statistician but covering shavers: Just look at the chart and see who's got a clean record. I guess you could get a covert team to do spot checks once a quarter or something and publish the results.... __________________ icq:159548293

09-08-2002, 07:02 PM	#79
Backov Confirmed User Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Cat Detector Van Posts: 1,600	The only way I can see for something like this to be sustainable is with those prepaid credit cards I have heard of.. Ya know, the ones you buy in the 7/11 or whatever that come with X amount of dollars on them.. If you could keep buying those, you could do the watchdog group.. If you couldn't, everyone in the group would be blackflagged and you'd never be able to do it again. ;> Cheers, Backov __________________ <embed src="http://banners.spotbrokers.com/button.swf" FlashVars="clickURL=http://banners.spotbrokers.com" quality=high pluginspage="http://www.macromedia.com/shockwave/download/index.cgi?P1_Prod_Version=ShockwaveFlash" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="120" height="60"></embed>

09-08-2002, 07:06 PM	#80
<IMX> Confirmed User Join Date: Jun 2002 Posts: 2,728	Backov-- Thanks. I trust your judgment. We can then assume that the most sophisticated methods of shaving are either: 1.) Nearly impossible to catch with small sampling methods. 2.) Too expensive for sponsors to execute. That leaves the rather unsophisticated methods. TheFly-- I agree, you could get caught up in trying to determine an infinite number of unsophisticated shaving methods; however, I believe if a group brainstormed over a number of days some definite patterns would begin to emerge. Once the patterns of shaving methodologies are charted, the group could actually determine a finite number of unsophisticated shaving methods. With assistance from some great programmers, like yourself, the group could determine the least expensive ways of executing the shaving via an automated or semi-automated system. Then test the easiest ways of shaving up to the more complex. In fact, things like the ?exit-console? shave could be tested without the use of ccs. As you stated earlier, the test wouldn?t provide anything but more arguments. (Our system has trouble tracking non-cookied Macintosh users on Wednesdays.) But Who doesn?t like a good knock-down drag-out? LOL... Yarr...I was just about to say, we are better off trying to socially engineering our way into to the innards of the shav-o-matic. Us> Hey I?m the programmer who hooked-up your affiliate system Sponsor> Huh? Us> You know they guy who did the custom work for you. Sponsor> Hmm... Us> Yeah, I hooked-up the ?razor? Sponsor> Oh yeah... -Or- We devise a simple test: We throw the CEOs from programs we want to test into a pool in Vegas. If the sponsor swims, their program shaves. If the sponsor drowns, their program does not shave. </IMX> __________________ $$$ Check out NICHE PAY the leader of Micro Niche Sites! They offer $1 Trials! $$$ $$$ Check out 10 FREE TRIAL SALES equals 1 FREE LAP TOP ! $$$

09-08-2002, 07:09 PM	#81
heymatty Confirmed User Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Scottsdale :) Posts: 2,188	If you do it pleaee reas the TOS very closely to make it fair. eg Nasty dollars, you need to to cancel the trial after 12 hours or more __________________ Cashlantis ~ Black Book Cash

09-08-2002, 07:26 PM	#84
SleazyDream I'm here for SPORT Industry Role: Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Phone # (401) 285-0696 Posts: 41,470	just a thought, but is it smart to get your credit card involved with someone like [Labret] who spends soo much time and effort into not having anyone know who he is???? __________________ This dog, is dog, a dog, good dog, way dog, to dog, keep dog, an dog, idiot dog, busy dog, for dog, 20 dog, seconds dog! Now read without the word dog.

09-08-2002, 08:06 PM	#86
Nbritte Confirmed User Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Kentucky USA Posts: 689	I am game if you need more people 4763784 Brian

09-08-2002, 08:16 PM	#88
quiet we'll miss you our friend. RIP Industry Role: Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Fernie, BC Posts: 25,115	so you're coming to Internext this time around?

09-10-2002, 06:25 PM	#93
High Quality Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Vegas Posts: 5,741	May I suggest you start with ARS, the biggest out there. Additionally, it would be great to find out either way, as Marc De on this very board has denounced all shaving allegations.

09-10-2002, 06:32 PM	#94
hahmike So Fucking Banned Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 2,488	nasty are shaving fucks... i'll eat the shit from ernesto's ass if anyone can prove me wrong. switched to maxcash. awful, awful, ugly cookie cutter popup hell sites... but more joins avg. per week than i ever did with nasty. nasty fags. Last edited by hahmike; 09-10-2002 at 06:33 PM..

09-10-2002, 06:37 PM	#95
pipp Confirmed User Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Where the sun don't shine Posts: 1,185	Labrat - So how is this going ? Any resoults jet ?

09-10-2002, 06:38 PM	#96
crack Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 100	>We're gonna need a hitbot as a control or something, cos as soon as a sponsor sees a 1:2 join ratio for an FPA No problem with that. __________________ There is a crack in everything. That's how the light gets in.

09-10-2002, 06:44 PM	#97
harvey Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: 127.0.0.1 Posts: 9,266	It's a good idea, I know for sure 2 big guys with dirty tricks. Anyway, you'd use some trustable friends instead of an "open community" action, since you don't know who's into this, and believe me they'll be between the testers just to know which is the testing account. Simple as A-B-C. Now, if nobody knows about the account, that's a completely different thing. And from the list of sponsors you gave, nobody showed up yet telling something (whatever). Pretty curious, huh? Anyway, good luck, would love to see the results! __________________ This post is endorsed by CIA, KGB, MI6, the Mafia, Illuminati, Kim Jong Il, Worldwide Ninjas Association, Klingon Empire and lolcats. Don't mess around with it, just accept it and embrace the truth

09-10-2002, 06:47 PM	#98
LiveDose Show Yer Tits! Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Somewhere Out there... Posts: 25,792	This is a great idea. __________________ Scammer Alert: acer19 acer [email protected] [email protected] Money stolen using PayPal