Brian Cullingworth accuses GPWA members of having “payment agendas”

Brian Cullingworth accuses GPWA members of having “payment agendas”

Brian Cullingworth, owner of online gambling news and trivia service Infopowa, is a long-standing advocate of eCOGRA. eCOGRA is currently embroiled in the Grand Prive fiasco, as a result of an attempted audit of the Grand Privè affiliate programme, which left all affected members with derisory compensation offered a year after the programme's closure.


Cullingworth is touchy on the subject of eCOGRA, as the organisation receives heavy criticism from many industry observers on the basis of being nothing but a front for the software providers on whose behalf they claim to offer assurances of quality.


Touchiness notwithstanding, Cullingworth's latest attack is something of a surprise. After a couple of flare ups in the Casinomeister Grand Prive discussion, he came out with the following remarkable allegation of financial impropriety:

3rd March 2010

...the hallmarks of a number of GPWA posters with personal as well as payment agendas.

Cullingworth is no novice to the "agenda" broadside, the allegation that argument is made from a biased or compromised position - I have received many such myself when arguing with him about eCOGRA and the general failings to the player of the online gambling industry.


However, to accuse multiple members of a given forum of webmasters as having "payment agendas" is step into new territory, even for this old campaigner. What is the implied financial impropriety of which Cullingworth is accusing people? Does he have any evidence to back up the allegation?


Almost certainly he does not, as noone who has criticised either eCOGRA or the supportive stance that a handful of industry representatives have given to their mishandling of the Grand Prive "audit" has any interest beyond fairness to all injured parties.


Cullingworth should be a little less cavalier with his public allegations of financial compromise, particularly when they are plainly unfounded and without a shred of evidence to support them.

Post a Comment

May 2005 | June 2005 | July 2005 | September 2005 | October 2005 | November 2005 | December 2005 | January 2006 | February 2006 | March 2006 | April 2006 | May 2006 | August 2006 | October 2006 | January 2007 | February 2007 | March 2007 | May 2007 | June 2007 | July 2007 | January 2008 | February 2008 | March 2008 | April 2008 | June 2008 | July 2008 | September 2008 | October 2008 | December 2008 | January 2009 | February 2009 | March 2009 | May 2009 | June 2009 | July 2009 | August 2009 | September 2009 | October 2009 | November 2009 | December 2009 | January 2010 | February 2010 | March 2010 | April 2010 | May 2010 | June 2010 | July 2010 | August 2010 | October 2010 | November 2010 | December 2010 | January 2011 | February 2011 | March 2011 | April 2011 | May 2011 | June 2011 | July 2011 | August 2011 | September 2011 | December 2011 | February 2012 | May 2012 | July 2012 | August 2012 | March 2016 | April 2016 | June 2016 | November 2016 | December 2016 | March 2017 | May 2017 | June 2017 | August 2017 | August 2021 | October 2021 | Atom feed