Voting in Vivint Gives Back: Conejo Valley Friendship Circle Disqualified

This is the fifth entry in a series about vote compensation in Vivint Gives Back. Here are entries onetwothree, and four.

I found on rising this morning that half a dozen people had sent me the news that Conejo Valley Friendship Circle had been removed from the Pacific page of the charity rankings on Vivint Gives Back. There are now only 19 charities listed.

At 9:40 a.m., I was still able to get to Conejo’s voting page. A couple hours later, that was gone and the link now redirects to the Vivint Gives Back rankings (it seems to send me to a different region at random). The facebook event page reminding people to vote for CVFC appears to have been removed as well. And Vivint has commented on this picture Jane Clout posted on their facebook wall, saying, “[W]e have taken action against any such practice from charaties [sic] participating in Vivint Gives Back. Of course we want the votes to be fair. Thank you for your great concern in the matter.”

So I think that means they’re well and truly disqualified.

Vivint had assured us that they took allegations of vote compensation seriously, but despite those assurances, until I got the news, I can’t say I truly believed that Conejo would be removed from the contest. After all, we sent as much if not more evidence in during Chase Community Giving, Chase assured us they took the matter seriously, and they did absolutely nothing.

I’m happy to see Vivint handle this differently.

However, I’m sorry that the kids served by Conejo Valley Friendship Circle have now been shut out of receiving any financial or awareness benefit here because of the actions of adults involved with the organization. I think Friendship Circle does great work, and I believe they could have competed well based on that work by the same methods other charities are – reaching out to friends and family, building networks, explaining the importance of a cause. That’s the real benefit here – broadening awareness for something that’s personally important to each of us.

I also would have been satisfied to see Conejo docked votes, if it could be determined how many were obtained illegitimately. But I’m sure that would have been difficult, and we would have had to have trusted Vivint and Conejo to decide how many of their votes were compensated. This, on the other hand, is a sure remedy.

If the basis for this sort of competition is who can spend the most on votes but pay less than the actual prize money – that’s not a charity contest, it’s some combination of gambling, cheating, and a business proposition.

And I’m glad to see Vivint, pretty much alone among online charity contests, recognize that. Major kudos and my sincere thanks to them.

Those of us who have been looking at the data behind the scenes are going to continue to do so. If anything suspicious pops up, we’ll let you know.

This entry was posted in Contests and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

16 Responses to Voting in Vivint Gives Back: Conejo Valley Friendship Circle Disqualified

  1. shannah says:

    Great detective work! Fairness is an important concept – especially where so much unfairness already exists in the ME world. Thanks to Jocelyn for persisting with this and handling it in an admirable, professional manner. Thanks also to Helen and others who helped with this.

    • Jocelyn says:

      Thanks, shannah! I write all sorts of snark when I put posts like this together…then I sadly delete all of it before I hit the post button. 😀 At least it lets me get it out of my system.

  2. Helen says:

    Thankyou Vivint, for maintaining the integrity of the contest. I am so impressed

    • Jocelyn says:

      I sent Holly a personal thank-you note. She didn’t reply – I think she probably can’t for fear of running afoul of legal advice – but at least I was able to tell the team their efforts were appreciated.

  3. Thanks to Jocelyn and everybody else who worked hard to provide Vvint with the information they needed to make the right decision. This makes Chase look even worse. Vivint is showing them how it’s done fairly.

    • Jocelyn says:

      Agreed that it gives Chase a further black eye. I sent this post to the contact email from the Chase contest and said, “Now, you see? This is how it’s done.”

  4. kathy d. says:

    I’m sorry I just can’t figure this out with my CFIDS brain, or brain fog I should say.

  5. Jane Clout says:

    Ain’t it great that Vivint is running a fair contest! I am so happy about this – Chase left a nasty taste in my mouth, and cynical thoughts in my brain.

    I notice that another charity has disappeared from the Central Region, the Lindsay Foundation. So maybe it wasn’t just Conejo that were buying votes.

    Thanks for all your wonderful work, No Poster Girl xxx

    • Jocelyn says:

      And thanks for your help, Jane! Are you sure that the Lindsay Foundation is out? They’re in second place in the Central for me, and there are still 20 charities listed.

  6. Thanks, Jocelyn and Helen for shining a light on the “shenanigans”. Terrific work.

    Thanks Vivint for taking action.

  7. mari says:

    Hi J I’m as bad as you and I think we are closer then ever itS a fact after years of researcH its proof herpes or coxsackies viruses with genetics and a triger like vaccinatioins extreme physical stress (exercise heat etc_) or all combined triger ME or cfids

  8. mari says:

    J iwas wondering if u ever tried slow release 5mg cortisol and also if you have abdominal colon issue (not digesting well my case too) also any spine joints etc pain cortisol my help

  9. Pingback: Happy Blogiversary to Me | No Poster Girl

Leave a comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s