Bridgetopics

[Free]

This is the entire content of the first email

 

"Can you please tell me where you got my email address from?

 

Thanks"

Wayne, are you really on a quest to find out where they got your email address from, while you're posting it in plain text on this website? You even have your phone number and mobile on there!!! :blink:

[Cascade]

Wayne, are you really on a quest to find out where they got your email address from, while you're posting it in plain text on this website? You even have your phone number and mobile on there!!! :blink:

 

I don't really care.

 

I am someone annoyed that they choose to spam as their marketing policy.

 

I don't think they do themselves any favours by not responding to reasonable emails.

[Free]

I don't really care.

 

I don't think they do themselves any favours by not responding to reasonable emails.

Why should they care to waste time to respond if you don't care about the answer anyway?

 

I am someone annoyed that they choose to spam as their marketing policy.

This is the only valid argument you've presented imo. Spam is definitely annoying.

 

Note however that in the time you've wasted to send 2 emails you could've prevented any more of their spam forever.

[blackshoe]

Note however that in the time you've wasted to send 2 emails you could've prevented any more of their spam forever.

 

Not so. He could perhaps have prevented his seeing any of their spam, but the spam would still exist (and would still be collected by his mail client).

[matmat]

Not so. He could perhaps have prevented his seeing any of their spam, but the spam would still exist (and would still be collected by his mail client).

 

 

this is that "falling tree in the forest" thing again, isn't it?

[bluecalm]

Btw, I find it sad that Eric Rodwell writes articles about support doubles at very basic level. I could do that just as well and probably many forum posters could too. As one of the best in the history of the game ER has certainly a lot to say about playing at the highest level, designing high level systems/treatments/conventions or even telling stories about what high level bridge is and what is important there. That would be unique and worth a lot of dollars to many bridge fans (like me, for example).

[Cascade]

Why should they care to waste time to respond if you don't care about the answer anyway?

 

 

This is the only valid argument you've presented imo. Spam is definitely annoying.

 

Note however that in the time you've wasted to send 2 emails you could've prevented any more of their spam forever.

 

Maybe I should have been more explicit.

 

I don't really care where they got my email address from. I do care that they are harvesting email addresses, mine and others, to send unsolicited commercial email. They continue to act like an irresponsible business by not responding to reasonable requests about their marketing strategies that cause inconvenience.

 

I had a much more responsible reaction from another business a few months ago. A business who like bridgetopics appear reputable but nevertheless sent me unsolicited email:

 

1. The responded to me promptly

 

2. Although initially they were insistent that I must have provided them with my email address and consent to send such emails they made an effort to check that fact

 

3. When they found that I had not consented to their commercial emails they immediately apologized

 

4. On their own initiative they sent me some petrol vouchers as a gesture of goodwill

 

Again I don't care about the petrol vouchers however at least I am sure that they took the matter seriously.

 

Not so BridgeTopics they have continued to act as if they don't give a damn that they spam email addresses an action which is quite possibly illegal (it certainly is where I live and I imagine is in many other places).

 

I repeat I have had one response from them it looked to me like a form letter rather than a personal response that addressed none of the questions that I had asked them. They invited me to ask them further questions and I did so but they haven't bothered to respond. If these are the actions of a reputable business then I will eat my proverbial hat.

[blackshoe]

this is that "falling tree in the forest" thing again, isn't it?

 

:lol: Probably.

[nige1]

Even if you regard spamming as harmless fun, IMO, you should respect the views of others who resent the time and money that it costs them.

Would-be users of Bridgetopics should be grateful to Cascade for his timely information: a vendor guilty of spamming that denies it and obstinately refuses to answer questions from a potential customer.

 

It is hard to understand is why no Bridgetopics representative has posted an apology here. It would be such a simple and efficient marketing exercise. Or would some label that spam too? :(

[matmat]

I wondered over to see the site. Meh.

 

It tells you who their emarketing coordinator is. so perhaps you could track down this particular individual and harass them personally frequently until you get taken off the mailing list? :D

[Free]

Btw, I find it sad that Eric Rodwell writes articles about support doubles at very basic level. I could do that just as well and probably many forum posters could too. As one of the best in the history of the game ER has certainly a lot to say about playing at the highest level, designing high level systems/treatments/conventions or even telling stories about what high level bridge is and what is important there. That would be unique and worth a lot of dollars to many bridge fans (like me, for example).

He won't do this until he's retired. :lol:

 

I guess it's because that might damage his own results. For example, he doesn't want to talk about his take on the best defense against strong ♣. Granted, it's a valid argument if you ask me, but it's a pitty for us mortals ofcourse.

[gnasher]

Not so BridgeTopics they have continued to act as if they don't give a damn that they spam email addresses an action which is quite possibly illegal (it certainly is where I live and I imagine is in many other places).

 

Is it illegal where you live? As I understand it your email address is publically available. I'm not an expert on New Zealand data-protection law, but a quick glance at The Privacy Act 1993 suggests that this would make it legal both to collect it and to use it.

[Cascade]

Is it illegal where you live? As I understand it your email address is publically available. I'm not an expert on New Zealand data-protection law, but a quick glance at The Privacy Act 1993 suggests that this would make it legal both to collect it and to use it.

 

I am pretty sure I am protected by Unsolicted Electronic Messages Act 2007 although I have to confess I have not read the details only summaries of the legislation.

[gnasher]

I am pretty sure I am protected by Unsolicted Electronic Messages Act 2007 although I have to confess I have not read the details only summaries of the legislation.

Sorry, I'd assumed this was the responsibility of the New Zealand Privacy Commissioner, whose website mentions only the Privacy Act. Anyway, now that I'm looking at the right piece of legislation, this may interest you:

 

(4)1(a)(iii)

consent ... is deemed to have been given when the following circumstances apply:

(A) an electronic address has been conspicuously published by a person in a business or official capacity; and

(B) the publication of the address is not accompanied by a statement to the effect that the relevant electronic address-holder does not want to receive unsolicited electronic messages at that electronic address; and

(C ) the message sent to that address is relevant to the business, role, functions, or duties of the person in a business or official capacity

[gnasher]

I too was disappointed by the free Rodwell article, but on reflection I shouldn't have been surprised.

 

I think that it's generally very hard to get top players to write articles or books that are aimed at a fairly high level, partly because the market is so much smaller, and partly because it requires a lot more effort. If we were all prepared to compensate for that by paying a lot more for the material, that might change, but we're not.

 

There are some people who do write for good players - Woolsey and Rubens for example - but I think they're going to go on being the exception.

[IMP_Jan]

Dear All,

 

Looking at the discussion which is developping here, as founding publisher of BridgeTopics.com I feel I should give a little explanation. We started mid September 2010 with BTC. The biz model is typical internetish. We give away lots of free info: i.e. daily bridge news from all over the world. We built a network of international correspondents and are happy to notice that this is widely appreciated. Without being too modest we already are considered as the CNN of the bridge world. We also facilitate The Grand Tour: a network of international bridge festivals and tournaments. Members are event organizers who have their own page with us for free. Our paid content is the Topics Collection of which Eric Rodwell (our anchor man) is the editor. We publish each month a Topic on modern bridge theory. This month f.i. we published Gazzilli à la Lauria. Based on a 12 month subscription of USD 79.0 and due to our partnership program the price of a single Topic is as low as USD. 3.33. We feel that that is a bargain for an in depth and extensive article of top quality. So far our mission and pricing. As to our marketing I admit that in the first month (september/october) we made some technical mistakes. That had merely to do with the fact that we erroneously mixed up a pressrelease and a news letter. From that moment on we were very keen sending our newsletter only to our registered members. Therefore I have the feeling that some critical remarks in this Forum - by the way always appreciated as we learn from it - might still be based on that very first month. And once more be assured we work very hard to communicate in a respectful way to the bridge world. Last words: if you still feel the need to exchange views with me on these things please mail me: jvcleeff@xs4all.nl or call me: +31 70 3605902 .

 

Thanks,

 

Jan van Cleeff

[the hog]

IMP_Jan, I wouldn't boast that "we already are considered as the CNN of the bridge world."

Personally I would regard that as an insult.

[bluecalm]

One more thing:

 

Allow people to buy separate topics. I am not willing to buy bunch of articles on topics which aren't aimed for me nor are about topics which interest me but still I could buy a few of chosen ones. It will be also good for you as you will have better picture of what kind of stuff is interesting for people as some topics will be bought more often than others.

[the hog]

We publish each month a Topic on modern bridge theory. This month f.i. we published Gazzilli à la Lauria. Based on a 12 month subscription of USD 79.0 and due to our partnership program the price of a single Topic is as low as USD. 3.33. We feel that that is a bargain for an in depth and extensive article of top quality. S

 

 

One more thing:

 

Allow people to buy separate topics. I am not willing to buy bunch of articles on topics which aren't aimed for me nor are about topics which interest me but still I could buy a few of chosen ones. It will be also good for you as you will have better picture of what kind of stuff is interesting for people as some topics will be bought more often than others.

 

Agree with Calm. How do I know this article is top quality? how many pages is it? 20, 30? If it is only a couple it is not worth it.

[kenberg]

He won't do this until he's retired. :lol:

 

I guess it's because that might damage his own results. For example, he doesn't want to talk about his take on the best defense against strong ♣. Granted, it's a valid argument if you ask me, but it's a pity for us mortals of course.

 

 

Is this really an accurate reflection of his views? If so, that does it for me. Of course he is under no obligation to provide us with his hard earned bridge knowledge but if I give money for the views of a great man I expect to get his views. Anything less is a deal for suckers.

[Cascade]

Sorry, I'd assumed this was the responsibility of the New Zealand Privacy Commissioner, whose website mentions only the Privacy Act. Anyway, now that I'm looking at the right piece of legislation, this may interest you:

 

Interesting. Maybe they would get away with being relevant. Although I think there is some argument.

 

Consider for example how Jan van Cleeff might welcome unsolicited emails from me offering him bridge lessons. This would be similarly relevant to his business but I can't imagine he would be too impressed.

 

I have bigger problems with their lack of prompt response and in many cases no response at all to emails that I have sent to them. Given Jan van Cleeff has now responded here I will follow it up directly with him.

[Free]

Is this really an accurate reflection of his views? If so, that does it for me. Of course he is under no obligation to provide us with his hard earned bridge knowledge but if I give money for the views of a great man I expect to get his views. Anything less is a deal for suckers.

I must admit that I'm not sure if it's Rodwell or Meckstroth who said that. But it sure was one of them in an interview.

[Vampyr]

We publish each month a Topic on modern bridge theory. This month f.i. we published Gazzilli à la Lauria. Based on a 12 month subscription of USD 79.0 and due to our partnership program the price of a single Topic is as low as USD. 3.33.

 

3.33x12 is 39. What am I missing here?

[lowerline]

3.33x12 is 39. What am I missing here?

 

For one subscription you get two accounts. So the math is 3.33x12x2.

 

To conclude: none of the posters here is a paying member of BridgeTopics. So nobody can really tell whether the topics are worth their money or not...

 

Steven

[nige1]

For one subscription you get two accounts. So the math is 3.33x12x2. To conclude: none of the posters here is a paying member of BridgeTopics. So nobody can really tell whether the topics are worth their money or not...Steven

Presumably the free samples are typical, although they seem to require you to sign up to a news-letter. IMO, Membership lists (and Non-membership lists) should be private.