One thing I find interesting in Shan's new message today is that apparently the ads in the game have been ironSource all the way, even before the Offer Wall was introduced? Definitely interesting information, whatever you/we/I make of it.
"Don't try to be a great man... just be a man. Let history make its own judgments." -- Dr. Zefram Cochrane, around 2073
On the issue of the definition of "personal data": there is a very clear definition of this under GDPR, and it is also rather a wide-ranging one, including "online identifiers" such as IP addresses and device IDs - indeed, even our DBIDs count. Since there is evidence that these are exactly the sort of things being accessed by IronSource, it seems that the use of the term "personal data" in the statement is not aligned with the GDPR definition, and as such the statement is effectively meaningless for those of us in the EU/UK in terms of whether TP is complying with the relevant legislation.
Given just how long this response has taken, I was really hoping it was because the legal side was grappling with how to ensure compliance and that steps had been taken to ensure that there wouldn't be any doubt whatsoever on that front going forward. The fact that such uncertainty remains is extremely disappointing, and not conducive to the rebuilding of trust that the statement indicates is desired. (I do find it interesting that although this statement has been issued, I have not yet received a response to my GDPR-related CS ticket, which suggests that it is known there is work still to do on that front.)
I remember at the time of the transfer to Tilting Point that there was mention of how "sticky" STT players are - I feel as though they are on the verge of finding out what it takes to get us unstuck.
@Shan - I know you won't see this for a while because of the holiday weekend over there, but when possible can you please ask for clarification about what TP does/doesn't consider personal data, and if it's not the same as the GDPR definition, why not?
I was largely absent from the other thread as the questions I had were covered by others. Thank you for the statement. We appreciate it. It is insufficient to answer the questions many people have already posted. It addresses aspects of questions with WRG and TP, which is a start. It gives a broad statement of denying by default, but doesn't address what is allowed, nor what is being denied (though this is not a surprise in an initial statement). For some users this may be a sufficient start.
It misses a whole subsection, however, in that it doesn't handle specifics of what can be gathered by third parties through Star Trek Timelines.
IronSource continues to be the issue. There is currently legislation against them (and many other SDK companies, developers and Google) for their violation of COPPA. The dismissals have been denied and the case will carry forward.
They also attempted scare tactics against the Berkeley researcher who outed them. Somehow they obtained a draft of his research before it was publicly available. This is from Serge Egelman, Research Director of the Usable Security & Privacy Group at the International Computer Science Institute (ICSI) at UC Berkeley.
As part of our constant commitment to data privacy and transparency, we have also recognized that we have not yet given our players a clear notice about the transition of our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy that we planned to accompany the recent change in game operation from Disruptor Beam to Tilting Point. We are actively in the process of rectifying this, and unifying where and how this is presented to you.
At best, this debacle originated with incompetence. If TP knew TOS had to be updated to go along with what they were planning, there's no excuse for not including that in the announcement for the Wall. None. If TP can tell us "We've found a way to make more money off of you", you can damn well tell us "And we're doing something that requires changing TOS so we could do that".
In the meantime you can view both policies on the Tilting Point website (https://www.tiltingpoint.com). Our Privacy Team has also been diligently working on updating our privacy policy, in an effort to make it more clear. That being said we can confirm that the change in game operation from Disruptor Beam to Tilting Point did not result in any changes regarding how STAR TREK TIMELINES data is being processed other than as we have outlined above.
Does this mean TP changed the small fine print after taking ownership and neglected to tell us, or does it mean that TP implemented new business practices and is only now changing the small fine print?
In any event, none of this mea culpa restores any of my confidence. TP got off to a dismal start with the deceptive Diplomatic Deluge packs, two days after taking ownership. I gave TP the benefit of the doubt at the time, and gave TP credit when the Resilient Romulans pack two weeks later had the language that I and others insisted Deluge should have had. But it never sat right with me that TP made the revision without any formal acknowledgment of having botched Deluge in the first place. This new, far more egregious incident eliminates the benefit of doubt that I previously gave TP. It is clear that TP's standard operating procedure will be to own up to as little as possible. I can't play by the rules if the rules are poorly written or changed without my knowledge, and it leaves me wondering whether TP even respects rules.
For the time being, STT will not be reinstalled on my phone and I will continue abstaining from spending any money. The follow-up to today's announcement will determine whether I even continue playing the desktop version for free.
So I will try to deconstruct it a bit, to make sure we are all on the same page.
We have 3 things at play here:
- the game in itself
- ironSource, that is being used for the ads seen in game, and the Offer Wall
- the various offers presented on the Offer Wall itself
For these 3 things, there is data involved but not in the same fashion
- for the game itself, we've covered it in our statement
- for ironSource, it is operation data to be able to present you with ads in game, and as far as I know (I will ask confirmation on this) the Offer Wall did not change that at all, it is still the same operational data
For me personally, yes these are the three primary areas of concern, and I amore focused on the first 2, as I will not use the offer wall regardless.
For #1: Yes you have mostly answered this, although some further reading is required.
For #2: This is still open, and as you say will get confirmed next week when you can confirm.
The default setting of "no consent" coupled with some homework one of the discord users on the Timelines server dug up from the Iron Source website leaves me satisfied with privacy concerns i had. This is pretty much what I expected to be the case
on a side note, people's definition of "personal data" is more vague than anything WRG/TP has put out there, and the goalposts continue to move to suit people's own suspicions and premature conclusions.
Thank you, Barkley, for posting this. And thank you to the discord user who dug it up.
I found it interesting the words that IronSource chose to use. Multiple times it references "your users who are subject to GDPR" when describing how it handles the data for providers who select No Consent.
But what about those users outside of the EU? Should we infer that IronSource feels it has no restrictions when dealing with those users? Regardless of the no consent setting chosen by TP?
I would love to see a link to this quote from IronSource so that I can read it context. Hopefully it goes on to state that they protect all user's data. Because honestly, the quote posted above is making me think I didn't use nearly enough tinfoil in my hat.
My fleet has been expressing serious concern with the direction STT has gone with this wall. Time to get rid of it and apologize to players if you want to keep them
Is everything still OK to use if we're coming in via the Win10 app or Steam, which don't have the Offer Wall or ads?
Having credible reports, with screenshots, of a forced update to v7.5.3 on Amazon, i'm sure the rest of Android and iOS is next. That also means Windows & Steam aren't going to be far behind. I sincerity hope that i'm wrong but i seriously doubt that i am.
[DCC] bebe
Privileged to be Admiral of the Great Fleet
Dilithium Causes Cancer, maxed Starbase level 134
Featuring photonic flee free holodecks and
All you can drink Neelix's Even Better Than Coffee Substitute!
And with that, I am done with this game. The statement provided completely missed the point that a 3rd party company has been allowed access to this game with the ability to redirect the user to external websites that could compromise their data. Without even a "are you sure" or a obligatory message to make the user aware of what is going on.
I'm sorry but I cannot continue, my game will be uninstalled...
1) Was this "disable consent by default" live at the same time the offer wall and IronSource's SDK first went live?
2) Can you confirm there has not been a data breach of any kind as a result of the offer wall/Ironsource's SDK going live?
I also note that the question of whether the development team fully tested and vetted this "feature" before going live has also yet to be answered.
[was on Sabbatical/Hiatus] Currently a trialist at Galaxy SquadronSTAY SAFE and KBO
And with that, I am done with this game. The statement provided completely missed the point that a 3rd party company has been allowed access to this game with the ability to redirect the user to external websites that could compromise their data. Without even a "are you sure" or a obligatory message to make the user aware of what is going on.
I'm sorry but I cannot continue, my game will be uninstalled...
As I understand it and from the podcast it was a collective (not borg) decision by all contributing authors, to remove the big book resource. Which I also understand that authors have the right do so unless they have sold the rights to a publishing company. Do not see the relevance or the need to get personal about this.
[was on Sabbatical/Hiatus] Currently a trialist at Galaxy SquadronSTAY SAFE and KBO
As I understand it and from the podcast it was a collective (not borg) decision by all contributing authors, to remove the big book resource. Which I also understand that authors have the right do so unless they have sold the rights to a publishing company. Do not see the relevance or the need to get personal about this.
"While some limited items of personal data are necessary for the game to function, we can confirm that we do not collect any personal information without a legal basis such as consent, or our legitimate business interest in providing the best possible game experience to you."
That is not allowed in Europe because it violates the GDPR. I'm looking forward to the renewed TOS.
I was going to stay out of the discussion, but the above is not correct. GDPR allows for six ways that processing personal data can be legal. They are: consent, contract, legal requirement, vital interests, public task and legitimate interests. Of those, generally companies would rely on consent or contract, with legitimate interests considered the weakest of the set. The UK ICO says:
"A wide range of interests may be legitimate interests. They can be your own interests or the interests of third parties, and commercial interests as well as wider societal benefits. They may be compelling or trivial, but trivial interests may be more easily overridden in the balancing test."
Legitimate Interests is a vast area of woolly words, and I don't believe the legal precedent is yet clear as it requires the data controller to balance the interests of the data subject against their own "legitimate interests". One might argue that there is a conflict of interest...
It is important, however, that companies are clear and transparent about what they do with data, and under what basis
As I understand it and from the podcast it was a collective (not borg) decision by all contributing authors, to remove the big book resource. Which I also understand that authors have the right do so unless they have sold the rights to a publishing company. Do not see the relevance or the need to get personal about this.
Every thread seems to have to go down the "...and the equine entity that transported you to this location" path sooner or later. I get tensions are high, but players turning on each other solves nothing. It really doesn't.
🖖🏿🖖🏽🖖🏼🖖🏻🖖
"The truth is like a lion; you don't have to defend it. Let it loose; it will defend itself."
As I understand it and from the podcast it was a collective (not borg) decision by all contributing authors, to remove the big book resource. Which I also understand that authors have the right do so unless they have sold the rights to a publishing company. Do not see the relevance or the need to get personal about this.
As I understand it and from the podcast it was a collective (not borg) decision by all contributing authors, to remove the big book resource. Which I also understand that authors have the right do so unless they have sold the rights to a publishing company. Do not see the relevance or the need to get personal about this.
Every thread seems to have to go down the "...and the equine entity that transported you to this location" path sooner or later. I get tensions are high, but players turning on each other solves nothing. It really doesn't.
As I understand it and from the podcast it was a collective (not borg) decision by all contributing authors, to remove the big book resource. Which I also understand that authors have the right do so unless they have sold the rights to a publishing company. Do not see the relevance or the need to get personal about this.
Every thread seems to have to go down the "...and the equine entity that transported you to this location" path sooner or later. I get tensions are high, but players turning on each other solves nothing. It really doesn't.
🖖🏿🖖🏽🖖🏼🖖🏻🖖
it does when it punishes the fandom
Yeah, it affects the players. Including players who may not have been aware there even is a major problem, because they do not frequent the Forums. Which was a way that the people who created and own the assets felt would make a difference.
"The truth is like a lion; you don't have to defend it. Let it loose; it will defend itself."
As I understand it and from the podcast it was a collective (not borg) decision by all contributing authors, to remove the big book resource. Which I also understand that authors have the right do so unless they have sold the rights to a publishing company. Do not see the relevance or the need to get personal about this.
Every thread seems to have to go down the "...and the equine entity that transported you to this location" path sooner or later. I get tensions are high, but players turning on each other solves nothing. It really doesn't.
🖖🏿🖖🏽🖖🏼🖖🏻🖖
Your comment would be far more persuasive if you applied it to everyone, including biggest bullies in the game. We would have a far stronger community if poor behavior was not condoned based upon one’s spending, which would give all of us more power to oppose tp’s practices that we disagree with.
I have reported the posts that contribute nothing to this thread but personal attacks. As if the issue at hand was not severe enough, you're actively derailing a constructive discussion.
"While some limited items of personal data are necessary for the game to function, we can confirm that we do not collect any personal information without a legal basis such as consent, or our legitimate business interest in providing the best possible game experience to you."
That is not allowed in Europe because it violates the GDPR. I'm looking forward to the renewed TOS.
I was going to stay out of the discussion, but the above is not correct. GDPR allows for six ways that processing personal data can be legal. They are: consent, contract, legal requirement, vital interests, public task and legitimate interests. Of those, generally companies would rely on consent or contract, with legitimate interests considered the weakest of the set. The UK ICO says:
"A wide range of interests may be legitimate interests. They can be your own interests or the interests of third parties, and commercial interests as well as wider societal benefits. They may be compelling or trivial, but trivial interests may be more easily overridden in the balancing test."
Legitimate Interests is a vast area of woolly words, and I don't believe the legal precedent is yet clear as it requires the data controller to balance the interests of the data subject against their own "legitimate interests". One might argue that there is a conflict of interest...
It is important, however, that companies are clear and transparent about what they do with data, and under what basis
Chiming in to agree that Art. 6f is the weakest of all reasonings for data collection. Without going into too much detail, I've worked for an institution that used this as a basis for maintaining communication with their constituents from pre-GDPR to post, instead of presenting each one of them with opt-in messages.
The assessment of two separate law firms broke down to this (disclaimer: this is not legal advice): You could do it like that, but until EU case law has caught up with the issue, you are shifting the burden of proof from your constituents' side to your side. Meaning for us, if a user filed a complaint about the unlawful collection of their data, and TP could produce a contract, or the paper trail of an informed consent, they would be in the clear. Under "legitimate interest", TP would first have to declare what that interest is and in what way they could fulfil that interest only by the means that they are employing.
As I understand it and from the podcast it was a collective (not borg) decision by all contributing authors, to remove the big book resource. Which I also understand that authors have the right do so unless they have sold the rights to a publishing company. Do not see the relevance or the need to get personal about this.
Every thread seems to have to go down the "...and the equine entity that transported you to this location" path sooner or later. I get tensions are high, but players turning on each other solves nothing. It really doesn't.
🖖🏿🖖🏽🖖🏼🖖🏻🖖
Your comment would be far more persuasive if you applied it to everyone, including biggest bullies in the game. We would have a far stronger community if poor behavior was not condoned based upon one’s spending, which would give all of us more power to oppose tp’s practices that we disagree with.
Please provide some examples of my condoning bullying? I would love to hear about how I have done that.....
"The truth is like a lion; you don't have to defend it. Let it loose; it will defend itself."
In a few days, I'll reach level 99. I've been playing since the beginning, VIP whatever. I've never put a cent in any other mobile game and I dumped much more money into STT than I would have ever imagined. It was well worth it.
But lately the frustrating moments within and outside the game just keep getting more and more. This thread topic just may be the last drop. I guess, achieving the highest possible level is just the best time to burn all my dilithium and then say goodbye forever.
I honestly don't see a bright future for STT any more.
In a few days, I'll reach level 99. I've been playing since the beginning, VIP whatever. I've never put a cent in any other mobile game and I dumped much more money into STT than I would have ever imagined. It was well worth it.
But lately the frustrating moments within and outside the game just keep getting more and more. This thread topic just may be the last drop. I guess, achieving the highest possible level is just the best time to burn all my dilithium and then say goodbye forever.
I honestly don't see a bright future for STT any more.
FWIW I feel exactly the same - except I've just hit Level 84, and I have a dilithium pile of 58.
As I understand it and from the podcast it was a collective (not borg) decision by all contributing authors, to remove the big book resource. Which I also understand that authors have the right do so unless they have sold the rights to a publishing company. Do not see the relevance or the need to get personal about this.
5 year book deal incoming.
you don't deserve that money, also the reason it's personal is because i see the removal of the Big book site as punishing the fandom
The only thing I’ve seen so far that rivals the epicness of TP’s failure is your entitlement complex regarding the hard work of other people. If you want to continue whining like a toddler about a toy that was taken away, take it to PMs so we can keep this topic on track.
Which leads me to my response to the announcement: it screams to me of “we’re sorry we got caught not having done our due diligence before the Wall was implemented and that’s what the person or people on the Privacy Team have been doing for the last week.” That TP isn’t personally sharing data is appreciated but is only part of the equation. IronSource is vacuuming up everything they can get their hands on, that’s pretty obvious from their own documentation. What’s not clear is if they are doing this when we interact the game in any manner or if it only starts when the Wall is opened.
The answer to this question will be the difference for me personally between expending all my dil, honor, and merits in a blaze of glory and then deleting the app or continuing to play with limited to no spending until TP has earned back our trust. The comment that IronSource was already involved in ads means I won’t be doing those ever again regardless of when they start collecting data elsewhere.
Comments
-- Dr. Zefram Cochrane, around 2073
Given just how long this response has taken, I was really hoping it was because the legal side was grappling with how to ensure compliance and that steps had been taken to ensure that there wouldn't be any doubt whatsoever on that front going forward. The fact that such uncertainty remains is extremely disappointing, and not conducive to the rebuilding of trust that the statement indicates is desired. (I do find it interesting that although this statement has been issued, I have not yet received a response to my GDPR-related CS ticket, which suggests that it is known there is work still to do on that front.)
I remember at the time of the transfer to Tilting Point that there was mention of how "sticky" STT players are - I feel as though they are on the verge of finding out what it takes to get us unstuck.
@Shan - I know you won't see this for a while because of the holiday weekend over there, but when possible can you please ask for clarification about what TP does/doesn't consider personal data, and if it's not the same as the GDPR definition, why not?
It misses a whole subsection, however, in that it doesn't handle specifics of what can be gathered by third parties through Star Trek Timelines.
IronSource continues to be the issue. There is currently legislation against them (and many other SDK companies, developers and Google) for their violation of COPPA. The dismissals have been denied and the case will carry forward.
https://int.nyt.com/data/documenthelper/295-new-mexico-kid-apps-complaint/206d4ea39896e264fe3a/optimized/full.pdf
They also attempted scare tactics against the Berkeley researcher who outed them. Somehow they obtained a draft of his research before it was publicly available. This is from Serge Egelman, Research Director of the Usable Security & Privacy Group at the International Computer Science Institute (ICSI) at UC Berkeley.
https://blog.appcensus.io/2018/05/10/we-get-letters/
This is who Tilting Point has chosen to associate with.
Still unanswered is whether IronSource's SDK is collecting data beyond what Tilting Point is collecting. This seems quite likely.
Still unanswered is why Star Trek Timelines is now flagging as malware with multiple companies.
Still unanswered are many other questions of users from the other thread.
And this, still.
At best, this debacle originated with incompetence. If TP knew TOS had to be updated to go along with what they were planning, there's no excuse for not including that in the announcement for the Wall. None. If TP can tell us "We've found a way to make more money off of you", you can damn well tell us "And we're doing something that requires changing TOS so we could do that".
Does this mean TP changed the small fine print after taking ownership and neglected to tell us, or does it mean that TP implemented new business practices and is only now changing the small fine print?
In any event, none of this mea culpa restores any of my confidence. TP got off to a dismal start with the deceptive Diplomatic Deluge packs, two days after taking ownership. I gave TP the benefit of the doubt at the time, and gave TP credit when the Resilient Romulans pack two weeks later had the language that I and others insisted Deluge should have had. But it never sat right with me that TP made the revision without any formal acknowledgment of having botched Deluge in the first place. This new, far more egregious incident eliminates the benefit of doubt that I previously gave TP. It is clear that TP's standard operating procedure will be to own up to as little as possible. I can't play by the rules if the rules are poorly written or changed without my knowledge, and it leaves me wondering whether TP even respects rules.
For the time being, STT will not be reinstalled on my phone and I will continue abstaining from spending any money. The follow-up to today's announcement will determine whether I even continue playing the desktop version for free.
As for your breakdown:
For me personally, yes these are the three primary areas of concern, and I amore focused on the first 2, as I will not use the offer wall regardless.
For #1: Yes you have mostly answered this, although some further reading is required.
For #2: This is still open, and as you say will get confirmed next week when you can confirm.
Thank you and have a great long weekend!
Thank you, Barkley, for posting this. And thank you to the discord user who dug it up.
I found it interesting the words that IronSource chose to use. Multiple times it references "your users who are subject to GDPR" when describing how it handles the data for providers who select No Consent.
But what about those users outside of the EU? Should we infer that IronSource feels it has no restrictions when dealing with those users? Regardless of the no consent setting chosen by TP?
I would love to see a link to this quote from IronSource so that I can read it context. Hopefully it goes on to state that they protect all user's data. Because honestly, the quote posted above is making me think I didn't use nearly enough tinfoil in my hat.
Having credible reports, with screenshots, of a forced update to v7.5.3 on Amazon, i'm sure the rest of Android and iOS is next. That also means Windows & Steam aren't going to be far behind. I sincerity hope that i'm wrong but i seriously doubt that i am.
Privileged to be Admiral of the Great Fleet
Dilithium Causes Cancer, maxed Starbase level 134
Featuring photonic flee free holodecks and
All you can drink Neelix's Even Better Than Coffee Substitute!
but a fleet mate just told us that a couple hours after doing an offer, where he did not provide his personal email address,
someone else in a different continent signed him up for a Spotify account with is personal email address.
How?
It would be cool to get an update on the bug too. Still baffled this went live while that was still in the wild.
~· Fly with the Subspace Eddies! ·~
How do you know this has anything to do with the game?
I'm sorry but I cannot continue, my game will be uninstalled...
I don't, but the timing is what it is.
~· Fly with the Subspace Eddies! ·~
1) Was this "disable consent by default" live at the same time the offer wall and IronSource's SDK first went live?
2) Can you confirm there has not been a data breach of any kind as a result of the offer wall/Ironsource's SDK going live?
I also note that the question of whether the development team fully tested and vetted this "feature" before going live has also yet to be answered.
Unnecessary comment removed. ~Shan
5 year book deal incoming.
I was going to stay out of the discussion, but the above is not correct. GDPR allows for six ways that processing personal data can be legal. They are: consent, contract, legal requirement, vital interests, public task and legitimate interests. Of those, generally companies would rely on consent or contract, with legitimate interests considered the weakest of the set. The UK ICO says:
"A wide range of interests may be legitimate interests. They can be your own interests or the interests of third parties, and commercial interests as well as wider societal benefits. They may be compelling or trivial, but trivial interests may be more easily overridden in the balancing test."
See: https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protection/guide-to-the-general-data-protection-regulation-gdpr/lawful-basis-for-processing/legitimate-interests/
Legitimate Interests is a vast area of woolly words, and I don't believe the legal precedent is yet clear as it requires the data controller to balance the interests of the data subject against their own "legitimate interests". One might argue that there is a conflict of interest...
It is important, however, that companies are clear and transparent about what they do with data, and under what basis
Every thread seems to have to go down the "...and the equine entity that transported you to this location" path sooner or later. I get tensions are high, but players turning on each other solves nothing. It really doesn't.
🖖🏿🖖🏽🖖🏼🖖🏻🖖
Unnecessary comment removed. ~Shan
it does when it punishes the fandom
Yeah, it affects the players. Including players who may not have been aware there even is a major problem, because they do not frequent the Forums. Which was a way that the people who created and own the assets felt would make a difference.
Your comment would be far more persuasive if you applied it to everyone, including biggest bullies in the game. We would have a far stronger community if poor behavior was not condoned based upon one’s spending, which would give all of us more power to oppose tp’s practices that we disagree with.
Chiming in to agree that Art. 6f is the weakest of all reasonings for data collection. Without going into too much detail, I've worked for an institution that used this as a basis for maintaining communication with their constituents from pre-GDPR to post, instead of presenting each one of them with opt-in messages.
The assessment of two separate law firms broke down to this (disclaimer: this is not legal advice): You could do it like that, but until EU case law has caught up with the issue, you are shifting the burden of proof from your constituents' side to your side. Meaning for us, if a user filed a complaint about the unlawful collection of their data, and TP could produce a contract, or the paper trail of an informed consent, they would be in the clear. Under "legitimate interest", TP would first have to declare what that interest is and in what way they could fulfil that interest only by the means that they are employing.
Please provide some examples of my condoning bullying? I would love to hear about how I have done that.....
But lately the frustrating moments within and outside the game just keep getting more and more. This thread topic just may be the last drop. I guess, achieving the highest possible level is just the best time to burn all my dilithium and then say goodbye forever.
I honestly don't see a bright future for STT any more.
FWIW I feel exactly the same - except I've just hit Level 84, and I have a dilithium pile of 58.
The game has been ruined for me.
The only thing I’ve seen so far that rivals the epicness of TP’s failure is your entitlement complex regarding the hard work of other people. If you want to continue whining like a toddler about a toy that was taken away, take it to PMs so we can keep this topic on track.
Which leads me to my response to the announcement: it screams to me of “we’re sorry we got caught not having done our due diligence before the Wall was implemented and that’s what the person or people on the Privacy Team have been doing for the last week.” That TP isn’t personally sharing data is appreciated but is only part of the equation. IronSource is vacuuming up everything they can get their hands on, that’s pretty obvious from their own documentation. What’s not clear is if they are doing this when we interact the game in any manner or if it only starts when the Wall is opened.
The answer to this question will be the difference for me personally between expending all my dil, honor, and merits in a blaze of glory and then deleting the app or continuing to play with limited to no spending until TP has earned back our trust. The comment that IronSource was already involved in ads means I won’t be doing those ever again regardless of when they start collecting data elsewhere.