Literally, given the nature of some of the projects that received the most votes in its scam “Members Project” contest.  Why have certain top-voted projects inexplicably “disappeared” from the final 25, as discussed here?  Was there some reason, any reason, that could provide arguable justification?

Since my last post, I’ve received a response from AmEx, as have a number of readers, particularly some very unhappy parents of children with Fragile X Syndrome, who went to great lengths to have their friends, relatives and supporters register for the AmEx promotion and vote. 

The response is corporate rhetorical nonsense at its finest, the sort of nonresponsive response that makes a lawyer’s blood pressure rise:

Thank you for contacting us regarding the Cure Fragile X project.

While we are unable to comment directly on the judging of specific projects,
please know that our selection was based on a variety of factors, including the
number of nominations received and other metrics of popularity and interest on
the Members Project website, a review of achievability, innovation, and broad,
positive impact by our Advisory Panel, and the confirmation of an appropriate
fulfilling organization for the project.  You can find more detail on the
criteria in the terms and conditions at http://www.membersproject.com/about/terms.html and additional information about this years Members Project Advisory Panel at http://www.membersproject.com/about/panel.html.

We appreciate your effort and participation in Members Project as great
attention has been drawn to this project.   We hope you will continue to be
involved by voting for the project that is meaningful to you.

Ah, the joys of hiding behind the fine print and meaningless rhetoric.  For the most part, the parents were unhappy and disappointed, but felt powerless.  After all, the corporation said so (which is a variation on the cop said so, but without a good beating).  While I doubt they felt satisfied, they are so inured to receiving nonsensical corporate responses that they accepted it at face value.  I’m not so inclined.

In an email response to another inquiry, found here, from the same AmEx employee, an additional sentence was included:

We regret you are unhappy with our selection, as we believe these are all compelling projects that are achievable, innovative, and have a broad, positive impact. (Emphasis added)

So, it’s the position of AmEx that the Cure Fragile X project met all theoretical criteria (as in, they had no objective or even articulable basis to exclude it), and yet the number 5 vote getter was dropped from the top 25 for no reason whatsoever?  Well, that sure makes the contest seem more legitimate.  To the extent that there might have been some hidden, secret legitimate reason that outsiders like me were unaware of, this ends the discussion.  There was none.  This was a scam.

No doubt there were plenty of caveats in the fine print of the sort that would make any contract action subject to dispute.  However, this fails entirely to addresses the fact that American Express engaged in an intentional fraud, gained a tangible benefit, and screwed disabled children, amongst others, in the process. 

The terms and conditions notwithstanding, AmEx induced people to vote for their favorite projects by deliberately crafting this promotion to suggest that funding would be the product of popular vote.  There was no wiggle in their promotional materials, only in their fine print.  In order to vote, people had to register with AmEx, meaning that they had to provide personal information and email addresses.  People were willing to do so to support important causes.  They assumed that this was legitimate. 

Now, the AmEx claim is that the voting was, well, utterly meaningless because it had a proviso in the T&Cs that allowed it to ignore the very thing it told us would be relied upon.  If you read the T&Cs, it suggests that the voting, the only quantifiable and objective criterion, would be primary, and the “advisory panel” would be involved only to vet the projects for the purpose of making sure that the projects were achievable, innovative and have a broad positive impact.  As the email quoted, and emphasized above, shows, the criteria were met.  If this wasn’t a scam, that would have been the end of the story.

Nowhere did it suggest that the voting was purely a subterfuge from the outset.  Nowhere did it suggest that AmEx collection of all the data from voters, which it would then have available for its own marketing schemes as well as resale, was solely for AmEx’s financial benefit.   When AmEx solicited votes, and urged participants to gather as many votes as possible, it never suggested that the votes were meaningless and worthless as far as the projects were concerned, and only good for AmEx to suck up as much marketable information as possible. 

But it gets worse.  Much worse.

While removing 5th top vote-getters from the top 25, another project, “New Affordable Treatments,” which ranked 52 after the voting, somehow managed to find its way into the top 25 (since there were some obvious vacancies after the top vote-getters “disappeared”).   As I was informed by the president of another well-established charitable organization that was unceremoniously dumped by AmEx, dedicated to eradicating disease in children,

Interestingly, this project is being fulfilled by www.global-cures.org.   A new startup organization that only recently received their IRS letter.  No 990’s, no organization documents – not even a phone number on the website.  The only email address is [email protected],   I emailed them Tuesday but have not heard back from them.

So well-established, exceptionally well-run organizations dealing with diseases affecting children that are deeply involved in very promising research are inexplicably tossed from the program, replaced by an organization that suddenly appeared out of nowhere, and has no telephone number, miraculously jumps from number 52 after the voting to the top 25?  This isn’t the say that Global-Cures isn’t real, but to the extent that there’s anything behind AmEx’s claims of vetting the top projects for legitimacy, this choice blows it out of the water.

Back to the response by American Express.  “While we are unable to comment directly on the judging of specific projects. . . .”  Why not?  Because you say so?  Because the employee responding to angry voters is in the PR department, and has no clue what she’s talking about?  Because this is the typical corporate response, assuming that people are so used to organizational arrogance that they will just lie back and accept it?

Or Does AmEx respond this way because it has engaged in an overt deception, obtaining hundreds of thousand of emails and other personal identifying data from this scam, and is now left without an answer because it got caught?  American Express intentionally deceived people who support these exceptional charitable organizations to help save the lives of children.  And the best it can do is say that it’s “unable to respond?” 

To the contrary, your response is painfully clear:  AmEx to Disabled Children:  Drop Dead.

Oh yeah, and thanks for the free data.