Why does BGA claim that *other game site* is illegal?

[tabicat]

I sent a private message to a friend with a link to *another gaming website*, and BGA posted this in response:

*example link*
WARNING: this service has been disapproved by games designers/publishers and is illegal. We strongly disapprove of you using it or to promoting it on BGA. Thanks!

This statement is, of course, completely false. *this website* has permission to implement these games:

*link to the other sites policy*

So why is BGA lying?


*Moderation edits: the links to the other gaming website and the specific name have been removed, but the content of the post has been maintained.

[Calmon70]

My account on *other site* is 10 years old. I had a lot of fun and people are enthusiastic like here. So what is the problem? First time I hear something like this.

*Moderation edits: the links to the other gaming website and the specific name have been removed, but the content of the post has been maintained.

[qwertasdfg]

From what has been said before, they fear that advertisements of other platforms will draw players to those platforms, as opposed to them staying on bga.

That of course would mean bga could be worth less, so they try to stop players mentioning other sites.
Why they use lies for that ... well, I guess it sounds better than saying: you're the product, we want you to stay on here

[N_Faker]

Other sites also trigger this message.

[Yasten]

More like the "loose" def of illegal. Like TOS breaks I guess.

[ufm]

'Please do not promote other sites on BGA' would've been enough. This is a reasonable request.
*other site* abides by the rules. They bring licensed games, they did put down Jaipur and Can't Stop as publisher request.
I think that is a generic message displayed when you post an online board game service link, but surely is a step too far...


*Moderation edits: the links to the other gaming website and the specific name have been removed, but the content of the post has been maintained.

[tabicat]

The problem is that BGA's statement is libelous, and that would be grounds for *other site* to sue.

*Moderation edits: the links to the other gaming website and the specific name have been removed, but the content of the post has been maintained.

[ufm]

I don't see *other site* suing BGA right away over this. They can send a formal request or try any other appropriate approach.
But this leaves a bad taste in the mouth.

*Moderation edits: the links to the other gaming website and the specific name have been removed, but the content of the post has been maintained.

[sourisdudesert]

This is obviously a bug introduced in the last update of BGA, that will be fixed very soon.

We try to distinguish from legal and illegal website, to make sure that we you receive a link to a gaming website (which is prohibited by our ToS, btw), you can be warned if this is an illegal/unethical website. A lot of legal websites has been moved by mistake to the wrong category, and it's going to be fixed.

[voriki]

This is obviously a bug introduced in the last update of BGA, that will be fixed very soon.

We try to distinguish from legal and illegal website, to make sure that we you receive a link to a gaming website (which is prohibited by our ToS, btw), you can be warned if this is an illegal/unethical website. A lot of legal websites has been moved by mistake to the wrong category, and it's going to be fixed.

Is there a list of these sites, so you know, we can avoid breaching the ToS by accident?