“We understand there is a correlation between the click ID timestamps and support ticket submissions you shared, however, provided that we ourselves saw a substantial increase in volume of these types of landing pages to _other_ networks from September 29th and days or even months prior (also cited by the Reddit articles you forwarded), and the fact that the nature of user retargeting lends itself to the same audience being repeatedly shown similar ads, it is extremely likely that these same users have been exposed to numerous instances of these uncompliant landing pages and claims before or after opting in via a funnel tied to our network. It is very reasonable that a TikTok user could have seen numerous uncompliant ad angles, eventually opted in through our compliant LPs, and created those support tickets due to a preconception of the app caused by those uncompliant angles; fully unrelated to our claims.
There is no guarantee that the language used in these support tickets are directly caused or even influenced by our traffic. With this in mind, we feel that it is very aggressive to apply a chargeback of this size solely based on this. *Can you confirm whether or not there is any definitive evidence that links the uncompliant activity in question to us?*
We have been very open and transparent with you on our compliance practices and have instituted many safeguards to ensure that our affiliates are not running noncompliant traffic for the health of your offer and the industry as a whole. Since the beginning of our relationship with you, we have promised to deliver clean, quality traffic and have enforced this policy rigorously within our network. As Carson mentioned, this has been the reason for our low volume as of recently: our affiliates are made very clear on compliance rules and regularly updated on any changes. Given how strict our procedures are, they choose to run this type of noncompliant traffic elsewhere that will accept it. We want to be abundantly clear on our position here that we take compliance extremely seriously.
To reclarify our previous point, Mike's message was to confirm the compliance of the screentime angle we observed being scaled to other networks following a spike in volume from our own affiliates, out of concern that our sources may have been utilizing the same exploit. This was the reason for the pause in traffic, and after confirming at length that our affiliates were _not_ utilizing this landing page or any noncompliant ad angles, we allowed them to resume scale. This was the same procedure that we followed with July's sudden increase in volume, as we do not want to be in a situation where affiliates are scaling noncompliant or low quality traffic without ongoing knowledge about their campaigns. Our standard protocol is to completely pause affiliates scaling if there are any concerns about compliance.
Aff 22
<https://nexvumi.com/|nexvumi.com>
Aff 41
<https://change.loom-peak.com/qztbfhgiv?loc=__PLACEMENT__&subid=sub1example&utm_campaign=sub1example&utm_content=sub3example&mc_campaign_id=__CAMPAIGN_ID__&mc_adset_name=__AID_NAME__&mc_adset_id=__AID__&mc_ad_id=__CID__&mc_pub=__PLACEMENT__&ttclid=example|change.loom-peak.com/qztbfhgiv?loc=__PLACEMENT__&subid=sub1example&…> (needs to be viewed on mobile)
<https://www.landpage-view.com/fc/english/1?mc_attr=c%3D341c2884-4d04-49e5-871e-f7c2659f5dc4..m%3Dmuyhezfeu2iddn7kzqszbd9xpr..d%3D0-0-0-0-3..l%3D17914001827..e%3Dexample..t1%3Dsub1example..t2%3Dsub3example..t3%3D__CAMPAIGN_ID__..t4%3D__AID_NAME__..t5%3D__AID__..t6%3D__CID__..t7%3D__PLACEMENT__..t8%3Dsub1example|landpage-view.com/fc/english/…/1?mc_attr=…>”