Help us make sharing Bulb fairer and more authentic

Hi folks,

We absolutely love it when members share Bulb, but we’ve had a lot of feedback recently that links in reviews make us look bad, and that they’re getting in the way of discussion in the Community, Facebook and Twitter. So we want to get everyone’s opinion on some potential T&C changes in these areas.

What would you think about allowing posting links in these places?

Good to post
:heavy_check_mark: Your Facebook page
:heavy_check_mark: Your Twitter followers
:heavy_check_mark: Other communities
:heavy_check_mark: Your websites
:heavy_check_mark: Email your friends
:heavy_check_mark: Almost anywhere else

Not anymore
✘ Bulb Community
✘ Reviews of Bulb
✘ Bulb’s Facebook page
✘ Mentioning Bulb on Twitter

So, while Bulb’s Facebook page and Twitter mentions are off limits, but everywhere else on Social Media is still fair game. And they’re a great way to share your referral links with family, friends and followers. Also when someone has genuinely asked for someone for a referral link it will be totally fine to share your link with them, regardless of where it is.

If someone accidentally breaks one of these rules, we’ll just get in touch with them to ask them to tweak their post. We won’t be draconian about it.

Why the change?
We think these changes will make the Bulb Community, our social media, and our reviews better places to discuss Bulb.

  1. Referral links make our Trustpilot reviews seem inauthentic. We’ve had quite a bit of feedback where people assume that we’re bribing members with the promise of referral payments to give us good reviews. I hope it goes without saying that we don’t, but prospective members have no reason to believe that. So it reflects badly on us. When we invite members to review us, they hardly ever include their link.
  2. If we let people post their links everywhere we’d just end up flooded with them. We want to keep the Community and social media as a good place to discuss Bulb. Plus, you’d be preaching to the choir anyway as most people in the Community are with Bulb already.
  3. It’s counterproductive for members to be putting their efforts into competing against each other in these areas. More people would go green and more members would earn rewards if all referrers shared their links in different places.

Here are the proposed changes to our T&Cs:

  • 16.2.18. Rewards are not transferable and may not be auctioned, traded, bartered or sold. Upon termination of the Programme or any portion thereof for any reason, or upon cancellation of a User's Bulb account for any reason, any pending or unredeemed Rewards accumulated by the User are forfeited. Rewards that have been added as credit to the User’s account is considered redeemed, and will be refunded to the User on termination of a User’s Bulb account.
  • 16.2.19. Users may offer additional rewards to Recruits as long as it is clear that the additional reward is entirely the responsibility of the User and not the responsibility of Bulb.
  • 16.4.7. Personal Links may not be posted or shared on review platforms such as, but not limited to Trustpilot and Google reviews, in order to protect the integrity of reviews.
  • 16.4.8. Personal Links may not be posted or shared in reply to Bulb’s platforms, or Bulb profiles on other platforms. This includes, but is not limited to: The Bulb Community, comments or posts on Bulb’s Facebook page, replies to @bulbenergy or people tweeting @bulbenergy on Twitter, and similar instances on other social media. This is to ensure that these platforms remain a place for their intended content and discussions.
  • 16.4.9. As an exception to 16.4.8., Personal Links may be shared on Bulb platforms, or Bulb profiles on other platforms as a direct response to a non-Bulb member requesting a Personal Link, as long as the owner of the Personal Link is unaffiliated with the non-Bulb member.

So, how do you feel about the suggested change?

Thanks,
Will

@“Will at Bulb” Please explain the rationale behind 16.4.9.

As I see it, this still allows the major culprits to exploit the system. How will you know whether the owner of the Personal Link is unaffiliated with the non-Bulb member requesting it, and will only one person be allowed to respond or can everyone make an offer?

It will be used as a means to get a link onto the platform, and I can already predict which links we’ll see.

@"Will at Bulb" Please explain the rationale behind 16.4.9.

As I see it, this still allows the major culprits to exploit the system. How will you know whether the owner of the Personal Link is unaffiliated with the non-Bulb member requesting it, and will only one person be allowed to respond or can everyone make an offer?

It will be used as a means to get a link onto the platform, and I can already predict which links we’ll see.

We still want to provide people who want help with the help they need. I’d rather see how it goes with the exception in place and then remove it if we have to than to not have it from the get go.

I completely see your point and agree that there is scope for abuse, but it’ll be easy to see through that abuse and ask the referrer to stop. We did something similar to this on the giffgaff community when I worked there and very rarely had anyone get around it like this, because referrers doing this rely on volume to do it, and volume would make it very obvious.

I think the Twitter usage needs clarification.

From what I can make out I can post referral links “to my twitter followers” but only if I don’t mention @bulbenergy or reply to one of your tweets? Perhaps put that in plain English if that’s the intended change.

I like the steps you’re taking. There are always folks who try to push a good thing too far.

The Twitter instructions are very confusing. It says you can share the link on Twitter but can’t mention Bulb !

I think the Twitter usage needs clarification.

From what I can make out I can post referral links “to my twitter followers” but only if I don’t mention @bulbenergy or reply to one of your tweets? Perhaps put that in plain English if that’s the intended change.

Hmm, an excellent point. We don’t mind people mentioning us at all. We just don’t want people who mention Bulb in an innocent tweet being inundated with referral links.

What do you think about the rest of the suggestions?

Yup, go for it!

People who I’ve tried to refer have gone with companies that do the yearly warm home duscount of £140 per household as they see you do not do it so I gave up on referrals and I must say I am disappointed you don’t do it

It must be handy for people to click links on posts if they are clicking a total stranger’s referral so I think there should be links there but with any referral bonus paid to charity.

Just make it simple for everyone- only when logged in to bilb account!

How can you post links “to your Twitter followers” without “Mentioning Bulb on Twitter” ??

That seems fine to me but as I don’t have a Facebook account, I will continue to use Emails where possible.

Yeah, sounds good to me

I support these changes. When you see all the referral links on FB I feel that it devalues your service and have seen suggestions that this is a dodgy offer. Please do continue to incentivise referrals, but police this so that it applies to family and friends rather than random people. I would suggest that the net result will be a longer term relationship with customers, which I am sure is what you want to achieve.

Personally don’t see a problem with people posting their link anywhere- some people are just more ‘active’ at doing it than others. Seems like a lot of unnecessary policing :slight_smile:

Looks good to me and should sort-out all the TrustPilot nonsense.

Go for it but i don’t use Twitter also only a “mild” Facebook user.
Also agree with PSteve [above] sort out the TrustPilot nonsense i shout about my a/c with Bulb to anyone who will listen.

I agree. I thought the links on TrustPilot made the reviews look at least more positive than they might otherwise be.

Try it and see, can make different changes in future if necessary