Hello team! As part of the tasks from sub-govermans analytics & support, we publish an analytical scoring report about the partner
Привет всем! В рамках задач из сабговерменса аналитика&саппорт публикуем аналитический скоринг отчёт о партнере
English ver:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1IFLK6pAOhDLwzsUMtIPo6neTajLe8gKj/view?usp=sharing
Русская версия:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1WfLV8sMDWJ4FC-6U4EXLeHdMCFJL8zUf/view?usp=sharing
First of all, I demand that my personal data be removed from these documents. I did not consent to their publication, these actions are absolutely illegal. I did not hide my name and identity, but the publication of info like personal phones, addresses, etc. - it’s too much.
Next, I will comment on the data contained in this report.
Unfortunately, this “report” is not professional. The author clearly set himself the goal of depicting the project in a negative light. The author tries to show that the site’s indicators are not real, and his audience is schoolchildren who are of no value.
Immediately I will publish a link to the independent statistics system Yandex.Metrica - https://metrika.yandex.ru/dashboard?id=55696873 (I think no one can doubt the authenticity of this data), where you can make sure that our audience is only 16% consisting of persons under 18 years of age. You can also make sure that traffic is real and that there is no manipulation (just use reports on traffic and sources).
Some of the author’s statements make one think about his professionalism. For instance, “Dynamics and structure of the visitor indicators tell us that the indicators are 100% artificially simulated due to the fact that 76% of visits come from the direct link access and only 5.4% - from search engine.”. The actual number of direct visits can be found here https://metrika.yandex.ru/stat/sources?period=quarter&accuracy=1&id=55696873&percentage=ym%3As%3Avisits. They are not 76%, but 21.6% (according to the data for the last quarter). Visits from Search Engines - 27.8% (not 5.6%). In addition, even if the figure of 76% were correct, how can one conclude that falsifications are based on this indicator? This number can be said only of the percentage of users who visit the site constantly (regular audience).
Why was data about my wife published in the report, when she has nothing to do with the project at all? Why did the report contain a list of websites for clients of my advertising agency, which existed more than 10 years ago (and for some reason, the author concluded that these sites were created only for selling of links. No, these are regular small business sites: beauty salon, medical center, etc.). For what purpose do some digits in the “report” differ from the real ones by several times?
It’s clear to me that the “report” is biased. For what purpose this was done remains unclear to me. This is not ethical and I don’t think that it will accord with the ideology of the FreeTON community.
What is going on here?
I removed personal data.
We will analyze the data provided
Thank you!
Персональные данные убрал.
Касательно предоставленных данных проведем анализ.
Спасибо!
We cannot analyze your data. No access
Try again, please. I turned on public access again.
Please update the information in the report to be correct or remove the link. In its current form, it is now misleading people.
I have no idea who is personally responsible for this report creation/publication, so I will refer to the author/the group of authors as “you”.
I just couldn’t keep silence being a witness of this.
First of all, I am in no way connected to UNU.
I am not an UNU “fan” as well as their business model. Generally, I have been I bit suspicious about this contest and more likely to say “no” than “yes”.
However I have to say that your report is totally ridiculous and non-professional. Why?
Many years ago I was a part of a team that launched a website. It is still visited by about 4k visitors daily, but it took several years for direct traffic to go under 80%. Now its only 16%, but this was achieved in 11 years! People just know the website name and it is the fastest way to open it - its pure logic.
So your argument that 76% of direct traffic definitely shows fraud with a website stats is wrong and misleading. Moreover, your information/estimation of direct traffic to UNU website turned out to be wrong.
I had several times been a part of team launching a website and direct traffic was the biggest part of the pie for a year or more. Some websites analyzers show that Yandex.ru has 84% direct traffic - is there traffic also not fair?)
But what is more ridiculous you didn’t even think of talking to UNU team directly prior to publishing this stuff here, get the real stats instead of invented/presupposed and based on that make your report professional.
Instead you took time and efforts to produce unprofessional report full of one’s own opinon pretending to be 100% true, as well it was a non-ethical report publishing sensitive personal data.
I hope your SG is going to consider this case and make necessary changes to your business processes. Your work should not harm people.
This is just my opinion, definitely, but I suppose the best way (for both parties and for the Forum reputation) to handle this issue is to remove the report from the Forum and deal everything in person with lkk.
This is our partnership analytical report prepared for the “Analytical reports about partners” contest.
Disclaimer:
Present analytic report is completely based on the data available in the open sources. Due to ethical reasons, personal contact details are partially hidden. The report structures all the publically available information and flags potential interdependancies and inconsistencies. Present report should not be regarded as a verdict or proof of any kind. It is an initial open source intelligence: not all the information gathered or conclusions made can be regarded as 100% legit.
ENG:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1zGg0TcBqV2qPasa8oYcgNHqv9KhfoSJQ/view?usp=sharing
RUS:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1znkV7kqlO2vpRKQlZnbfGIgAfBRCzapc/view?usp=sharing
#Partnersreport
#UNU
Interesting topic, i recommend adding information about reports.
Yes, this topic is very interesting to me now! I will continue to actively study it!
I think this is a very good idea and will be useful.
Of course, we will publish progress reports.
Hi! Payment method FreeTON is very good and conveniently!
You will need to understand all the operations. Draw conclusions for yourself, whether it is suitable or not. A good idea in general.
Good news!
Despite the fact that the discussion of our proposal with the community dragged on, we decided to take the first step and began the first level of integration. From today UNU accepts payment for services in FreeTON Crystals!
A few words about the success of UNU over the past few months. Since the beginning of 2021, the platform has grown by over 70% in almost all metrics. At the moment:
I still think that the collaboration between UNU and FreeTON is a WIN-WIN story. And with the growth of our platform, we will be able to tell even more users about FreeTON and get the way for mass adoption.
I think it’s time to start voting on our proposal, because we did not receive any critical objections in this discussion.
a very good step on your part !
Молодцы
Давайте голосовать, я против
Recently,i decided to prove this platform for freelance and i can say that it is really useful and suitable platform for income. I liked that there are cashback and you can grow. The higher your level,the more money you earn. You have a motivation. That’s great!
