#and i cant find any sort of official profile from the company

[linogram]

so either rinjis age on the fancafe was wrong or the age on wherever the ppl whove decided she was born in 2006 is wrong

[ghostofnibelheim]

cultivatxr​:

For someone that has supposedly been keeping a low profile for the last decade, there’s something to be said for the way her name seems to defy the odds and spread like wildfire. It’s oddly charming in a slightly dangerous way, but perhaps it’s not so much a name as it is a reputation. She’s hard to miss these days, a ray on sunshine forever shining amidst the gloom of Midgar’s slums. How many florists are there down here really? Much less ones that are so counterintuitively inclined to give away their wares rather than actually selling them. It’s her skills as a florist she thinks might have lured in the much revered General, but perhaps it’s simpler than that. Maybe Zack’s been talking again - singing her praises and drumming up business like the kind of loveable and diligent friend she can always unashamedly depend upon.

Half propped up against the wall in a leisurely lean, Aerith straightened as she was addressed, her basket slung neatly over one arm as she painted on a smile that screamed nothing but honest and sincere appreciation.  ❝ That’s remarkably ominous! Mostly good, I hope! ❞ It’s not as if she had many skeletons in her closet that were publicly acknowledged to be anything else, but there’s always that rueful little possibility that one of her more colourful anecdotes might have reach such prestigious ears. Bright eyed and beaming, the ancient canted her head, her posture relaxed and her mannerisms warm as she tried to decipher the nature of this visit before invariably daring to ask.  

    ❝To what do I owe the pleasure?❞

“… I wonder.”

It was hard for the SOLDIER himself to tell what exactly had driven him to come and meet the lady in the flesh for himself. Typically, it was the other way around for him, with others lining up to come and find him, have a moment of his time, and attempting to climb the high pedestal upon which ShinRa had so meticulously placed him for as far as his memory went.

When Sephiroth himself was on someone’s tracks, it was typically on the battlefield. And almost always bad news for his target.

But this time his sword was at rest in its leather harness that held it strapped behind his back at an angle, his hands free down his sides, and not ready to bring destruction as the company’s most precious tools of war.

Hopefully him coming all this way from the far heights of Midgar and into the slums just to see a girl wouldn’t spring forth any sort of gossip on his end. Even though he’d taken care not to be followed, he had the firm suspicion someone was watching still. Even without seeing them, he could somewhat sense the vigilant eye of the Turks permeating the area surrounding the flower girl. Just one of the several curiosities he had about her now. Just what exactly was so special about her to deserve this kind of attention from the secret agents?

Looking at her in the flesh now, he couldn’t notice anything remarkable about the girl, if one didn’t stay his gaze on her fairness and overwhelming air of purity that surrounded her. A true flower in the slums much like those in her basket. So out of place, yet standing tall and confident like she belonged nowhere else but here.

Cat-like pupils lingered on her own just a moment longer, amused at the unusually brave response with which they were met. This one didn’t appear to quiver or shy away from his stare like most would. Naivete, or courage? Too soon to tell. Maybe it was simply that she could tell he was not here on official duty.

With the faintest intrigued curl to the corner of his lips, his chin tilted slightly up to nod in her direction, and the products she carried. “How many people do actually wish for a flower to keep, in this place?”

[topicprinter]

I'm launching an app that pays users to play sports anywhere. Such as basketball football and soccer. I've been networking on Co-Founder and i was reached out to by app developer who has several large apps on his portfolio that are BIG on the app store. He wants to explore my app and what I already have then possibly come on as a co founder. I asked him about equity and how much is he looking for...He explained that cofounders are looking generally from 10-15%Now I assumed "Co" in Co-Founder meant closer to 50-50% 40-60% at worst, Am I mistaken in this sort of thinking? He's signed an NDA but several people in here have expressed that signing an NDA doesn't really guarantee anything. If it really is common to get 15% equity that's great because I still have room to bring along an investor without giving up control of the company. My questions are:What are some warning flags I should recognize? 2 Does anyone have any experience with Co-Founders lab?Any other helpful advice? Critique?Bonus: I've included how the app works and how we pay athletes etc in the paragraph belowHow it worksHow the app works is simple you play your favorite sports you are rewarded in credits, for wins and points scored. The credits are worth a set value. Ex. 200 credits =$5. Once you earn credits you can challenge another user 1 v 1 in your favorite sport for credits. So say you're at 190 credits. You could put 10 credits up against another user in a game of basketball to 15. Winner takes all. So win you're at 200. Lose you're back to 180There are THREE ways to earnI. Quickplay (Alone) - Head to your usual spot. (Park, Rec center or La. Fitness) Activate the app > tell us what sport you're playing > and how many people are on the court.PLAYAfter the game is finished come back to the app and tell us how many shots you made. Each shot you make is worth 1/2 a creditYou record how much you score. You have 5 quickplay games a day total. You can add another game by watching 5 video ads.Anti- Cheating1.App locks for 15 minutes once started 2. You can only start a game at a app approved location Basketball games are usually played First and Last game to 15 every other game first to 11 or 12. Those are basically the universal street ball rules from state to state in the U.S. So a user will not go over 10 baskets made in almost all cases. Once you activate quickplay the app locks for 15 minutes. This is a standard amount of time that a normal pickup game of basketball would take.II. Challenge Mode - Take the credits you earn in quickplay and challenge any user in your city 1 on 1. Put up your credits against hmanother user winner takes all. To start head over to the map screen and enter your distance your willing to travel. All you do is find a user > Select a location > Pick your sport > Select how much the wager will be (5 credits or lower) then play. Winner takes all!Anti-Cheating 1. 2 Challenges per day (Free) 3 Challenges per day (Paid) 4 Challenges per day (Subscribe) 2. You can't challenge the same person back to back in the free versionSpectator mode allows you to "sideline referee" a game while you wait to play next. Why would a user spectate?Because users earn credits for spectating as well. The more accurate you are the more you get.Monetization Model:Apparel sales, Ads, In app purchases, One time purchase of the app, Subscription to the app, Affiliate MarketingQuickplay ModelSo in the paid version of the app you earn credits at 1/2 shots made = 1 credit. So when a users makes 400 shots then he would have 200 credits which is equal to a 5$ reward. So i'll break down how that works and what that mean. When you start a quickplay match you hold your name, then you select your sport > then select 4x4 or 5x5.After you play you come back a full screen ad appears Ad 1. Let's assume a user plays one more game and repeats the process Ad 2. So at the end of the day a player would look at his app and confirm all the points that he scored Ad 3. That is three ads within a reasonable time frame that is not to annoying (Some time passes and a user has enough for his 5$ cash out. The only way he can cash out is to click our Affiliate link which will bring him to Nike etc Or Amazon Now whatever they buy we get a % of that purchaseChallenge ModeSo that would be the quickplay model. Now lets talk limits. Users get 5 quickplay games a day and 2 challenges per day. You get two of those a day and can't challenge the same person back to back. Users can earn 1 additional challenge a day by watching a few video ads. This is another way users can rack up challenges. If you want another challenge you can actually buy a pack of two challenges for .99cIn app PurchasesWhen you challenge someone and lose. You will want your revenge! You are not allowed to challenge the same person 2x in one day. This prevents a group of friends from challenging each other and rewarded the same dude the winner just to build up credits.However i sell challenge for .99c if you buy a pack of challenges you are allowed to challenge the same person another time in that 24 hour time span.This is just one example of the in app purchases that I plan to monetize with the appAffiliate LinkUsers can only check out using our in app browser using our affiliate link.HoodiesOur official hoodies let you rep your city on the front and back and are highly customizable. I make a profit of about 28$ per hoodie sold.One Time PurchaseThe app is free but a lot of features such as earning twice as fast, and unlocking amazon rewards are exclusive to the paid version.Spectator ModeSpectatir mode is our bread and butter because millions of users play street ball everydayPeople watching the game spectate the game which allows them to earn credits. Using this system the app keeps the users to keep the app open and running similar to a gaming app. So that whole time their recording steals, blocks, and points, going live on Facebook and Instagram from the app...I'm running ads sometimes banner sometimes interstellar, that's more and more revenue Me vs Shark Tank Hoop Maps Similar Y/N = NThe app on Shark Tank allowed you to find and locate pickup games. My app pays users to play basketball, football, & soccer AND challenge people 1 on 1 and take what they earned. Think Pokemon Go' or Uber for athletes.Sports Basketball Only? Y/N = NWe support basketball, football, and soccer while hoping to add volleyball and ultimate frisbee soon!Free VS Paid VS SubscriptionPAID 1 /2 CREDITS PER MADE SHOTREWARDS NIKE, JORDAN, REEBOK,+ AMAZON CHIPOTLE, TROPICAL CAFE, SMOOTHIECHALLENGES 3 CHALLENGES PER DAYFREE 1/4 CREDITS PER MADE SHOTREWARDS NIKE, JORDAN, REEBOK CHIPOTLE, TROPICAL CAFE SMOOTHIECHALLENGES 2 CHALLENGES PER DAYSUBSCRIPTION 1/2 CREDITS PER MADE SHOTREWARDS ALL OF THE ABOVE + DEBIT CARDCHALLENGES 4 CHALLENGES PER DAY. EARN ANOTHER IF YOU WIN 3 OUT OF 4CHEATING = BOTSBots and cheating was the first thing we took into account. Some things we just won't know until we mass launch and see how users are going to try and cheat the system. However that being said I have implemented some unique ideas with the help of developers who were more then happy to give me advice.Captcha No need to explain this you know what it isVerify by pictureTo use Coast 2 Coast there will be a picture shown. You must match the description of this picture and take a picture just like it to have your profile confirmed for cash out. Example A generic picture shown (A man with his thumb down tongue sticking out) you will have to take a picture that matches (this picture will never be shown and only used for authentication purposes)Honey potThe honey pot method is something that I LOVE. What it does is create a hidden field when signing up that only a spam bot can see. For you the user it is a hidden field that you can't see but a spam bot will be able to find it fill it out. Therefore.....bot. A human wouldn't fill it out or touch it because they can't see it, or navigate to it with the "TAB" key, it's not detectable to anyone but a botFacebookThis one is common sense you must link your Facebook, Google+ or Instagram to the accountCHEATING = *PEOPLESpectator ModeSpectator mode allows users that are waiting to play the opportunity to keep the game honest and fair. They can take out their phones and run "Spectator Mode" which allows them to track each other shots and make sure nobody is cheating.WHY WOULD SOMEBODY SPECTATE? BECAUSE YOU EARN CREDITS WHILE YOU DO. Users take out their phones and they ref the game recording points as they see them. Once they do this this allows me to run banner ads at the bottom of the screen 24/7. Business wise I noticed that gaming apps make the most amount of money while staying free. Spectator mode allows for this to happen. Add to the fact that you will soon be able to go live on Spectator mode on both Instagram and Facebook.Common SenseThere is another way. Basketball games are played first game to 15 next game 11 or 12. You cant make 40 shots. To the average player makes 2 or 3 the elites make 8-10 that's it. You get 5 quickplay games a day 2 challenges. So the max max max you could enter is 15. 5x a day. If you tell me you score 15 out of 15 every single day for 3 weeks (Which is our limit btw.) After 3 weeks our logic reviews your point total vs hrs played vs location) then you're lying. Nobody makes 15 out of 15 I've played ball my entire life.EquityIf 10-15%* deal is not on the table and he generally or someone else wants more, what would be a good deal as far as equity? Talking to some personal people that I know in the business world they advised that if I get him under 30% that is excellent. They said start around 20% let him counter with 30% and work down to maybe 25.5 They also cautioned about going to low initially because you don't want to insult the individual. Do you agree with this sort of advice? Or does it vary from person to person

[theconservativebrief]

For those who know their skin care products, Sunday Riley is a beloved brand. Good Genes face acid is a best-seller at Sephora and frequently hailed as a holy grail product. But the company got some unwelcome scrutiny this week after a former employee shared an email directing employees to open fake accounts and leave glowing Sephora reviews of new Sunday Riley products, on the subreddit r/skincareaddiction. The post shocked customers and served to highlight the questionable trustworthiness of online product reviews at retailers like Sephora.

Online reviews are really important to brands. Studies have shown that customers trust products that have a lot of reviews, and it’s human nature to look to peers and “real people” for their opinions. It’s why, especially for makeup and other beauty products, so many people follow bloggers, YouTubers, and Instagrammers. They’re perceived to be authentic (though recent drama in that world has revealed that their reviews can sometimes be purchased for a lot of money).

This is not the first time the authenticity of online reviews has been called into question. Amazon has been singled out frequently in stories alleging that brands pay people to write reviews. It happens enough that there are now even plenty of tips for recognizing when a review might not be what it seems.

In 2017, I reported on this phenomenon in the beauty industry for Racked. There are a variety of companies that offer free products in exchange for “honest” reviews, and small brands admitted feeling pressure to solicit fans to leave positive reviews. But this is the first time a major brand has been called out on the practice, with receipts. It provides insight into the way the beauty industry sells products, and how cutthroat and dishonest it can be.

A user and supposed former Sunday Riley employee calling themselves “throwawayacctSRiley” posted on Reddit and shared a copy of an email that clearly shows that employees had been asked by the company to register as fake Sephora users in order to leave glowing reviews for new acne products that the company was launching. The email lays out in great detail how employees should register as reviewers to avoid having their IP address traced back to the company, and to leave reviews on other brands as well to avoid drawing suspicion to themselves. It was recommended that employees set up several different profiles and “mix and match your identities.”

The most eye-opening section of the email reads:

It helps to make yourself seem relatable — like you know how hard acne is and you’ve tried everything, and this one actually works or mention things like, yes it’s a little more expensive but works incredible [sic] well compared to the cheaper masks out there. If you need any help with things to come up with to say, feel [sic] to ask myself, Sunday, or Addison. As reviews come in, read them too. If you notice someone saying things like I didn’t like “x” about it, write a review that says the opposite. The power of reviews is mighty, people look to what others are saying to persuade them and answer potential questions they may have.

It caused a huge commotion in the beauty world, racking up over 500 comments on r/skincareaddiction. And the news only got bigger when Sunday Riley confirmed that it was true. A brand representative wrote in the comment section of the anonymous beauty industry watchdog/gossip Instagram account Estee Laundry:

As many of you may know, we are making an effort to bring more transparency to our clients. The simple and official answer to this Reddit post is that yes, this email was sent by a former employee to several members of our company. At one point, we did encourage people to post positive reviews at the launch of this product, consistent with their experiences. There are a lot of reasons for doing that, including the fact that competitors will often post negative reviews of products to swing opinion. It doesn’t really matter what the reasoning was. We have hundreds of thousands of reviews across platforms around the globe and it would be physically impossible for us to have posted even a fraction of these reviews. Client word-of-mouth, sharing how our products have changed their skin, has been the cornerstone of our success. In the end, our products and their results stand for themselves.

(Sunday Riley did not return Vox’s request for comment by publication time.)

Responses were swift and decisive. Fans of the brand on Reddit commented things like, “Joke’s on Sunday Riley, even if they actually have good products now I’ll never believe it because of their manipulation” and “As someone who suffers with acne, I find this extremely upsetting. Advising your staff to write a review saying a product cleared your acne is preying on the vulnerable.”

People have strong attachments to brands, especially when it comes to skin care. This was largely seen as a breach of trust.

Sunday Riley is likely not alone here. “This happens a lot. Sephora puts the pressure on brands — they really ‘encourage’ reviews,” says a beauty industry source who wished to remain anonymous so as not to jeopardize their relationship with Sephora and beauty brands. “When you have a new launch, the sales will increase with a ton of good reviews. I do want to reiterate how common this practice for brands is. Sunday Riley just got caught. I’m not defending it, but it’s a vicious cycle.”

Caroline Hirons is a popular and well-respected UK-based skin care blogger and beauty brand consultant. She posted a sponsored video with Sunday Riley a few days prior to this controversy and worked as a consultant to the brand five years ago. She says she was never asked by the brand to post any sort of fake review, and wouldn’t ever agree to do so. But she concurs that it’s a common practice in the industry.

“It’s not the brands. The direction comes from the retailers,” Hirons, who has called out the practice in the past on her blog, says. She notes that she’s never had a request quite as detailed as the Sunday Riley email, though. “I’ve never come across anything that organized. I’ve just had verbal requests in retailer meetings.” (She also clarifies that she’s never heard those requests from UK-based retailers like Space NK, Cult Beauty, or department stores like Selfridges.)

In Hirons’s skin care fan group on Facebook, which has almost 10,000 fans, a user shared a screenshot of communication she had supposedly had with Sephora’s customer service department after she’d asked about the Sunday Riley issue. The email read: “Thank you for taking the time out of your day to reach out to us about this matter. We have recently found out about it and we are looking into it. We do not condone this type of activity. Rest assured we are working diligently on this.” It was signed “Jazlyn, Sephora Client Services.”

A screenshot of the Sephora email, with the customer’s name erased for privacy. Facebook

Sephora declined to comment for this story, but a representative offered the following comment in the 2017 Racked story about its reviews policy: “The goal of Sephora Ratings and Reviews is authentic client experiences that can inform fellow beauty fans on the product solutions and benefits based on their concerns. Reviews are monitored and if needed, removed if they are truly not centered around the product experience, therefore not a benefit to the larger community.”

The shelves of Sephora are crowded, and competition in the beauty industry is fierce. Brands, especially small ones, are under a lot of pressure to sell and to conform to the whims of retailers. Retailers often hold a lot of the cards. Read this cautionary tale about Sephora and the now-defunct makeup brand OCC for an example of how this can sometimes play out.

A small brand owner who wished to remain anonymous wrote in an email to Vox, “We are under a lot of pressure to drive reviews for our products on Sephora.com, but Sephora’s site is also really good about weeding out reviews that aren’t legitimate, so it’s very hard to build up a product page by leaving a large number of ‘fake’ reviews.”

Sunday Riley has struggled in the past few years, facing a lawsuit about false advertising, which was eventually tossed out. It also launched a foundation called The Influencer earlier this year, which no longer appears to be available. But it’s also been actively trying to build its business in the UK, launched a wellness-focused beauty box, and relaunched its website. This will likely be a setback, at least temporarily, but it’s a case that shines a brighter light on how retailers can manipulate customers.

It’s all just a modern-day example of the old adage, “Buyer beware.” As one redditor suggested, perhaps be wary of any review that’s too glowy, and head for mediocre territory: “This is why I tend to trust only the reviews that are 3 stars. That’s where the honesty is.”

Want more stories from The Goods by Vox? Sign up for our newsletter here.

Original Source -> A leaked email reveals why you can’t always trust Sephora product reviews

via The Conservative Brief