[CSGibson]

Ok, I had someone recommend joining bridgetopics.com, a website with several articles written by Eric Rodwell. Basically, it's his take on 12 topics for $80, or 6 topics for $50. I perused his discussion of support doubles, and found a couple of things that clarified my understanding of the topic.

What I'm getting around to is this: Is anyone a member of this website? How useful have the topic discussions been for you? What level are the topics geared toward?

This post has been edited by CSGibson: 2011-January-19, 22:42

[FrancesHinden]

Well, they sent me one unsolicited email saying "this is the only unsolicited email we are going to send you, look at our site"
Then they sent me another 3 unsolicited emails. Then I added them to my spam senders list.

I don't know where they got my email address from, but I wish they hadn't.

I have no idea what the content is like, but you can see why I haven't given them any money!

[gnasher]

I'd read all the free stuff on bridgewinners.com first.

[Cascade]

I would like to echo Frances' comments.

These people sent me unsolicited email. I have no idea where they obtained my email. I know of others who have also received unsolicited email from them.

I have emailed them twice regarding this but have not received the courtesy of a response.

I do not know what the laws are where these emails originated but in New Zealand there is provision for half million dollar penalties for this antisocial behaviour.

Given their immoral and antisocial business practices I would recommend steering well clear of anything to do with that site.

[rogerclee]

Cascade, on 2011-January-19, 17:19, said:

I would like to echo Frances' comments.

These people sent me unsolicited email. I have no idea where they obtained my email. I know of others who have also received unsolicited email from them.

I have emailed them twice regarding this but have not received the courtesy of a response.

I do not know what the laws are where these emails originated but in New Zealand there is provision for half million dollar penalties for this antisocial behaviour.

Given their immoral and antisocial business practices I would recommend steering well clear of anything to do with that site.

Very sad, I hope you feel better soon.

[Cascade]

rogerclee, on 2011-January-19, 17:54, said:

Very sad, I hope you feel better soon.

Perhaps you find their behaviour acceptable.

If so I think that is very sad.

I think Rodwell and his cohorts behaviour in promoting this site is dispicable. Not only do they seem to spam every email address they can get their hands on but they don't bother to respond when replies are made to those emails.

[mtvesuvius]

I'll ask him & Jeff about it when I see them at the regional next month...

I looked at the "About us" page, and... Eric & Jeff are not the ones really behind the website, and are merely "guest writers", Eric doing the majority of the writing. It would seem Jan Van Cleeff is the person behind the site, and probably has additional publicity agents:

Bridgetopics.com -> About Us said:

Jan Swaan
Jan is responsible for the E-marketing. By profession he is an educational psychologist with survey experience having done academic observation studies in different fields. So he is familiar with communication and statistics. He speaks six foreign languages and works as Press Room manager during the major World and European Bridge Championships. Jan began playing bridge at home when he was 15 years old and still loves the game as a happy social event. He has a passion for the good life in Italy, France & Sweden, where he enjoys spending his holidays.

Regardless, unsolicited emails are really bad.

[Cascade]

rogerclee, on 2011-January-19, 17:54, said:

Very sad, I hope you feel better soon.

It is equally sad for whoever thought your post was so good that it was voted up.

Your post and the fact that it was voted up shows how flawed the voting up of posts is.

Someone suggested to me that your post is exactly why we need to be able to vote down posts.

[gnasher]

"Jan is responsible for the E-marketing. By profession he is an educational psychologist with survey experience having done academic observation studies in different fields. So he is familiar with communication and statistics."

But not, apparently, with psychology.


Maybe they can be cut a little slack? It's not uncommon for a new business with a new product to think that it's the best thing in the world and that everyone will want to hear about it. And writing to bridge players about a product aimed specifically at bridge players isn't really in the same category as mass-mailing Viagra offers.

[mtvesuvius]

gnasher, on 2011-January-19, 18:38, said:

Maybe they can be cut a little slack? It's not uncommon for a new business with a new product to think that it's the best thing in the world and that everyone will want to hear about it. And writing to bridge players about a product aimed specifically at bridge players isn't really in the same category as mass-mailing Viagra offers.

I agree they could be cut a little slack, however, unsolicited mass-mailing is still unsolicited mass-mailing whether about Viagra or Bridge Articles.

[Cascade]

gnasher, on 2011-January-19, 18:38, said:

Maybe they can be cut a little slack? It's not uncommon for a new business with a new product to think that it's the best thing in the world and that everyone will want to hear about it. And writing to bridge players about a product aimed specifically at bridge players isn't really in the same category as mass-mailing Viagra offers.

Maybe.

However I took the trouble to write to them twice regarding their unsolicited email. They did not bother to respond. This suggests to me that they are not at all concerned about their strategy of using unsolicited email.

It would cost them nothing to apologize but their lack of response just indicates to me that they don't give a damn about those that they mailed they are just interested in try to get some money out of them.

[JLOGIC]

Cascade, on 2011-January-19, 18:19, said:

It is equally sad for whoever thought your post was so good that it was voted up.

Your post and the fact that it was voted up shows how flawed the voting up of posts is.

Someone suggested to me that your post is exactly why we need to be able to vote down posts.

Very sad, I hope you feel better soon.

[CSGibson]

gnasher, on 2011-January-19, 17:17, said:

I'd read all the free stuff on bridgewinners.com first.

I do - it's now part of my daily routine. I really like that site both for its quality and its accessibility. It seems to be a site for the purpose of promoting bridge, and I would love to see it succeed longterm.

[Cascade]

JLOGIC, on 2011-January-19, 19:25, said:

Very sad, I hope you feel better soon.

Not mad just telling it like it is.

bridgetopics appear to have a policy of sending unsolicited bulk commercial email. I and many others find that practice distasteful.

[Cascade]

Since they have not bothered responding to my earlier emails I sent them another message today from the contact us option on their website.

I will let you know if and when I receive a response. Given it is over three months since my first email I am not holding my breath.

[JLOGIC]

Cascade, on 2011-January-19, 20:55, said:

Not mad just telling it like it is.

bridgetopics appear to have a policy of sending unsolicited bulk commercial email. I and many others find that practice distasteful.

[Cascade]

JLOGIC, on 2011-January-19, 23:49, said:

Oh really!

Are you mad at them?

I mean someone should be.

[fred]

Although I am not a paying member of bridgetopics.com, I visit the site every day and I enjoy reading the news there.

The driving force behind that site, Jan van Cleeff, has been a friend of mine as well as someone I have done business with for about 15 years. I have always found Jan to be a person of good character so I was mildy surprised to read some of the comments in this thread. I included "mildly" because I have learned the hard way that technology companies often have technical problems getting started and that one of these is that their problems with spam tend to be much more serious than those of most individuals (the result being that legitimate e-mails sometimes fall through the cracks).

Anyway, yesterday I contacted Jan to bring these matters to his attention and to ask for an explanation. Here are some of the points he made (these are direct quotes):

• As owner and founding editor of BTC I am responsible for all commercial activities. Eric is editor of the Topic Collection, but has not been involved in marketing so far.
  
• Yes we do send an email News Letter, but it concerns closed circulation and NO spam. The recipients are voluntarily registered at BTC as Free Members or as Premium Members. In both cases they receive a.o. our News Letter (as announced at registration).
  
• So far we sent one press release by email to the bridge press announcing the founding of BTC, the ‘CNN’ of bridge.
  
• We are aware that at start up (September/October 2010) we had to overcome some technical problems, which also had a minor effect on our email traffic. Those issues have been taken care of.
  
• Our support desk is very keen to answer whatever question comes up. With our knowledge today we might judged some questions/reactions differently. We are working hard not to repeat earlier mistakes or misjudgments.

Bottom line is that it sounds like Jan acknowledges that they had had some technical problems and that some mistakes have been made. Hopefully these issues have been resolved.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[cherdano]

Uhuh, the "technical problems" excuse for spam.

[gnasher]

cherdano, on 2011-January-20, 11:01, said:

Uhuh, the "technical problems" excuse for spam.

I don't know about Wayne, but I believe that Frances is, or was, the editor of her county bridge association's magazine. That might explain why she got onto a "bridge press" list.

As for the repeated messages, that's the sort of thing that happens when people without any direct-marketing experience try to do their own direct marketing. But it's usually a cock-up rather than an evil conspiracy to fill up people's inboxes.