# Looking for Wyndham Owners with Scripting Experience



## skotrla (Jul 30, 2018)

I completed a demo of a HICV availability checker (message me if you are not an HICV member, would like to check availability, and would like access) - I'm looking to provide my code to and/or work with someone to do the same for Wyndham using their Club Wyndham account.  Alternatively, if someone has a Club Wyndham account that will be going away soon because they sold their unit, I could use their credentials to develop the script in the short term.  I'm open to pretty much anything at this point - message me if you are possibly interested in working with me on Wyndham (and owners in any other timeshare system with online availability checking for that matter).  Ultimately, it would be great if we could all check availability in all of the major programs prior to being an owner.

For those of you who want to know how the program works, read on.

The script has a web-based component hosted on a Yahoo server that consists of a web form to collect reservation details and a PHP script to post a text file and wait for an html file with results generated by my home workstation to appear.  The home workstation is running a Chrome automation app built in VB.NET using Selenium Chromedriver and the Katalon plug-in for Chrome to record macros - it monitors the web server for new text files with reservation requests, uses Chrome automation to pass the request to the HICV server it's already logged into, and posts a HTML file containing the availability to the web server for display by the PHP script.  It's a kludge and if you are in software development, you are probably cringing (as you can guess I'm not in software development), but it ran overnight without crashing and provided availability to my phone this morning in 30s, so I'll call it successful demo.

Thanks,

Scott
Owner, HICV Google+ Group


----------



## Braindead (Jul 30, 2018)

skotrla said:


> I completed a demo of a HICV availability checker (message me if you are not an HICV member, would like to check availability, and would like access) - I'm looking to provide my code to and/or work with someone to do the same for Wyndham using their Club Wyndham account.  Alternatively, if someone has a Club Wyndham account that will be going away soon because they sold their unit, I could use their credentials to develop the script in the short term.  I'm open to pretty much anything at this point - message me if you are possibly interested in working with me on Wyndham (and owners in any other timeshare system with online availability checking for that matter).  Ultimately, it would be great if we could all check availability in all of the major programs prior to being an owner.
> 
> For those of you who want to know how the program works, read on.
> 
> ...


I’m really starting to wonder if you’re not just another conman looking to take advantage of elderly individuals.
I would advise everyone not to have any personal contact with the OP


----------



## rhonda (Jul 30, 2018)

How does this activity jive within the context of Wyndham's Website Terms of Use?  I'm thinking it may run afoul of section 5?


----------



## HitchHiker71 (Jul 30, 2018)

rhonda said:


> How does this activity jive within the context of Wyndham's Website Terms of Use?  I'm thinking it may run afoul of section 5?



It specifically violates Section 4: 

"In the event that you are provided with user identification numbers or codes (collectively, *"ID's"*), confirmation numbers, and/or passwords (as applicable) in the use of this website, you shall maintain such user ID's, confirmation numbers, and/or passwords in confidence, and you agree not to distribute or disclose the same to third parties. It is your responsibility to notify WVO if WVO needs to change or discontinue any of your ID's, confirmation numbers, or passwords. It is also your responsibility to immediately request discontinuation of an ID, confirmation number, or password upon your knowledge or belief that such ID, confirmation number, and/or password is or may be subject to theft, unauthorized use or access, or a breach of confidentiality. WVO may suspend or terminate your service or access to this website if it believes that such theft, use, access or breach, or any other breach of these Terms, has occurred."


----------



## skotrla (Jul 30, 2018)

HitchHiker71 said:


> It specifically violates Section 4:
> 
> "In the event that you are provided with user identification numbers or codes (collectively, *"ID's"*), confirmation numbers, and/or passwords (as applicable) in the use of this website, you shall maintain such user ID's, confirmation numbers, and/or passwords in confidence, and you agree not to distribute or disclose the same to third parties. It is your responsibility to notify WVO if WVO needs to change or discontinue any of your ID's, confirmation numbers, or passwords. It is also your responsibility to immediately request discontinuation of an ID, confirmation number, or password upon your knowledge or belief that such ID, confirmation number, and/or password is or may be subject to theft, unauthorized use or access, or a breach of confidentiality. WVO may suspend or terminate your service or access to this website if it believes that such theft, use, access or breach, or any other breach of these Terms, has occurred."



That's why I said I'm looking for someone to leverage the programming I did to do the same for Wyndham.  I haven't shared my HICV login info with anyone and if someone has programming experience, they would not have to share their Wyndham login with anyone.

-Scott


----------



## skotrla (Jul 30, 2018)

The other nice thing this does is allow for you to push the same request for a reservation check every few minutes and give you a notification if a reservation opens up with just a few lines of code (working for the HICV version I built).

-Scott


----------



## Richelle (Jul 30, 2018)

HitchHiker71 said:


> It specifically violates Section 4:
> 
> "In the event that you are provided with user identification numbers or codes (collectively, *"ID's"*), confirmation numbers, and/or passwords (as applicable) in the use of this website, you shall maintain such user ID's, confirmation numbers, and/or passwords in confidence, and you agree not to distribute or disclose the same to third parties. It is your responsibility to notify WVO if WVO needs to change or discontinue any of your ID's, confirmation numbers, or passwords. It is also your responsibility to immediately request discontinuation of an ID, confirmation number, or password upon your knowledge or belief that such ID, confirmation number, and/or password is or may be subject to theft, unauthorized use or access, or a breach of confidentiality. WVO may suspend or terminate your service or access to this website if it believes that such theft, use, access or breach, or any other breach of these Terms, has occurred."



I'm thinking there is something in the Club Wyndham program terms and agreements having to do with "unfair advantage".  This might qualify as an unfair advantage.


----------



## skotrla (Jul 30, 2018)

Richelle said:


> I'm thinking there is something in the Club Wyndham program terms and agreements having to do with "unfair advantage".  This might qualify as an unfair advantage.


I could see where automated booking might - not so sure about just checking availability.  Certainly there's a risk of making too many requests through the website and having online access blocked - no idea what that threshhold would be for any system.

-Scott


----------



## ronparise (Jul 30, 2018)

skotrla said:


> The other nice thing this does is allow for you to push the same request for a reservation check every few minutes and give you a notification if a reservation opens up with just a few lines of code (working for the HICV version I built).
> 
> -Scott


There was a time when I knew of owners with scripting experience who developed bots to look for certain availability 24/7. The more sophisticated of them were able to make the reservations as they became available and keep searching.

A big part of my interview after my suspension was trying to get the names out of me. But the fact was that everyone I knew that was doing it had already been caught.

After the suspensions and new website I believe the only way to do what the bots were doing is manually. Ie  hire a team to sit at the computer 24/7 searching time after time for the desired reservation


----------



## Richelle (Jul 31, 2018)

skotrla said:


> I could see where automated booking might - not so sure about just checking availability.  Certainly there's a risk of making too many requests through the website and having online access blocked - no idea what that threshhold would be for any system.
> 
> -Scott



Having something to check availability constantly does give you an advantage.  Or at least it can be seen that way.  Just because it's not booking for you, doesn't mean they cannot invoke that clause.  You are giving someone the ability to check availability more them a regular person can, especially if that bot is checking 24/7.  That's an advantage.  I'm not looking to create any trouble, just a word of caution.  I was told legal does watch these forums, just so you are aware.


----------



## BibbityBoppity (Aug 2, 2018)

Braindead said:


> I’m really starting to wonder if you’re not just another conman looking to take advantage of elderly individuals.
> I would advise everyone not to have any personal contact with the OP



Didn’t sound like he was asking for compensation. Just experience. I don’t think I understand where the con is, especially if you provide the information because you’re exiting and don’t care. 

Theoretically it sounds like a neat idea but I think in real life application it would create an “unfair advantage”. Could be a great product if it doesn’t get abused 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Braindead (Aug 4, 2018)

Deleted


----------



## Braindead (Aug 4, 2018)

BibbityBoppity said:


> Didn’t sound like he was asking for compensation. Just experience. I don’t think I understand where the con is, especially if you provide the information because you’re exiting and don’t care.
> 
> Theoretically it sounds like a neat idea but I think in real life application it would create an “unfair advantage”. Could be a great product if it doesn’t get abused
> 
> ...


Between this thread and skotria post in another thread yes I think he might be a conman looking for victims.

If you get CONNED into participating with this experience it just might cost you your entire Wyndham ownership.
Even if your on your way out and don’t care what about the owner that has 2 or 3 million points bought from Wyndham.
 Do you care about that owner? I do


----------



## skotrla (Aug 4, 2018)

Braindead said:


> Between this thread and skotria post in another thread yes I think he might be a conman looking for victims.
> 
> If you get CONNED into participating with this experience it just might cost you your entire Wyndham ownership.
> Even if your on your way out and don’t care what about the owner that has 2 or 3 million points bought from Wyndham.
> Do you care about that owner? I do



Regarding my request for someone to develop an availability script for non-Wyndham owners to check availability like the one I built for non-HICV owners - I'm asking someone to do what I've already done for another system. I personally find the risk minimal for just checking availability and not booking, but I can at least see where you are coming from. Someone is working on it, so I don't need any help (at least for now).  I'm not sure how this is a con.

Regarding the other unrelated thread, I recommended not throwing away a $17K investment made by someone's parents without looking at exit strategies that could recoup some of that money. Without knowing the particulars (which were never discussed), I don't see how you can possibly draw a line in the sand and say there is no way anyone should ever consider doing such a thing as an alternative to just throwing money away.

-Scott


----------



## Richelle (Aug 4, 2018)

I wouldn’t use the script, simply because I would like to remain a owner, but I am in IT.  I would be interested to know if it works.  Are you using something like iMacros?  We used that at my old company for scraping website data.  It would click on the links and enter in information for you.  It wasn’t super fast though.  It couldn’t be, because it was using the web front end that only moves so fast.  I’m not trying to give you ideas.  I think the software is like $850 any way.  I’m just interested in what you are using, in case I need something like that in my next company.  Especially if it’s cheaper.


----------



## skotrla (Aug 4, 2018)

All rentals are commercial activity and technically prohibited - that's impacting Wyndham's bottom line way more than checking availability, so in my opinion, all rental activities are a bigger risk than this.

-Scott


----------



## skotrla (Aug 4, 2018)

Richelle said:


> I wouldn’t use the script, simply because I would like to remain a owner, but I am in IT.  I would be interested to know if it works.  Are you using something like iMacros?  We used that at my old company for scraping website data.  It would click on the links and enter in information for you.  It wasn’t super fast though.  It couldn’t be, because it was using the web front end that only moves so fast.  I’m not trying to give you ideas.  I think the software is like $850 any way.  I’m just interested in what you are using, in case I need something like that in my next company.  Especially if it’s cheaper.



 The home workstation is running a Chrome automation app built in VB.NET using Selenium Chromedriver and the Katalon plug-in for Chrome to record macros.  It's all free.

-Scott


----------



## dioxide45 (Aug 4, 2018)

Captcha coming to a website near you.



ronparise said:


> After the suspensions and new website I believe the only way to do what the bots were doing is manually. Ie  hire a team to sit at the computer 24/7 searching time after time for the desired reservation


Did Wyndham institute Captcha or a similar system after the website redesign?


----------



## skotrla (Aug 4, 2018)

I actually use my own portal for all reservation checks since I can format results better:

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1b_YaS-IxJetdgzdjZREY1ITTSUC4E3qT

HICV does not provide any sort of visual availability calendar - just the text under the calendars.  I process the data and put it into the calendar form.

-Scott


----------



## Richelle (Aug 4, 2018)

dioxide45 said:


> Captcha coming to a website near you.
> 
> 
> Did Wyndham institute Captcha or a similar system after the website redesign?


For booking, not checking availability. This is just for checking availability.


----------



## Richelle (Aug 4, 2018)

skotrla said:


> I actually use my own portal for all reservation checks since I can format results better:
> 
> https://drive.google.com/open?id=1b_YaS-IxJetdgzdjZREY1ITTSUC4E3qT
> 
> ...



I don’t think checking Wyndham availability would be as simple as a script, but I’m not a developer, so I could be wrong.  I don’t think it would take much for Wyndham to keep that script from working.  They could set it so owners could only check availability 50 times in one day.  Not many, if any, would need to check availability that many times in one day.  That would be every 30 minutes, if you ran it for 24 hours. Availability can come and go within a matter of minutes for prime season reservations.  Even if it did catch it as soon as it hit, the owner would have to login and enter the booking dates and do a search.  That inventory could easily be gone by then, especially with the automatic upgrade system if it’s within 45 or 60 days.  

Btw, if you don’t have an account, why are you writing a script for it?


----------



## skotrla (Aug 4, 2018)

Richelle said:


> I don’t think checking Wyndham availability would be as simple as a script, but I’m not a developer, so I could be wrong.  I don’t think it would take much for Wyndham to keep that script from working.  They could set it so owners could only check availability 50 times in one day.  Not many, if any, would need to check availability that many times in one day.  That would be every 30 minutes, if you ran it for 24 hours. Availability can come and go within a matter of minutes for prime season reservations.  Even if it did catch it as soon as it hit, the owner would have to login and enter the booking dates and do a search.  That inventory could easily be gone by then, especially with the automatic upgrade system if it’s within 45 or 60 days.
> 
> Btw, if you don’t have an account, why are you writing a script for it?



I wrote a script for HICV for non-owners and am looking for the same thing for Wyndham as a non-owner, which I am willing to help with as much as needed.  Availability is a key part of understanding whether ownership is right for a potential owner.  I plan to start with renting points from existing owners, and I've done a few reservation checks via email, but automating this benefits both sides of the transaction.

-Scott


----------



## Jan M. (Aug 4, 2018)

skotrla said:


> I wrote a script for HICV for non-owners and am looking for the same thing for Wyndham as a non-owner, which I am willing to help with as much as needed.  Availability is a key part of understanding whether ownership is right for a potential owner.  I plan to start with renting points from existing owners, and I've done a few reservation checks via email, but automating this benefits both sides of the transaction.
> 
> -Scott



Don't say you and anyone else participating in what you are doing weren't warned. Wyndham does follow the threads on TUG and our posts. If they think you or someone else is using any kind of bot or anything they might consider an unfair advantage in looking for reservations even if you aren't booking them it likely won't end well. Wyndham has invested a lot of time and money to put a stop to this kind of thing.


----------



## Braindead (Aug 4, 2018)

Jan M. said:


> Don't say you and anyone else participating in what you are doing weren't warned. Wyndham does follow the threads on TUG and our posts. If they think you or someone else is using any kind of bot or anything they might consider an unfair advantage in looking for reservations even if you aren't booking them it likely won't end well. Wyndham has invested a lot of time and money to put a stop to this kind of thing.


Exactly right!! It doesn’t matter if the reservation is made or not by skotria system. You are using a 24/7 search mechanism and the next logical step is email and or text alerts on available units. The bot doesn’t have to make the reservation for you to have an unfair advantage.


----------



## skotrla (Aug 4, 2018)

Braindead said:


> Exactly right!! It doesn’t matter if the reservation is made or not by skotria system. You are using a 24/7 search mechanism and the next logical step is email and or text alerts on available units. The bot doesn’t have to make the reservation for you to have an unfair advantage.



As I said before, my wish as a non-Wyndham owner is to check availability on an as needed basis.  Anyone hosting such a script could certainly put any reservation check limits that they feel would limit their risk (e.g. 50/day).

-Scott


----------



## Jan M. (Aug 4, 2018)

skotrla said:


> As I said before, my wish as a non-Wyndham owner is to check availability on an as needed basis.  Anyone hosting such a script could certainly put any reservation check limits that they feel would limit their risk (e.g. 50/day).
> 
> -Scott



Well I gave the warning and more than that I can't do. I hope whoever has the Wyndham account is okay with "no longer being an owner". Wyndham can and does do that.


----------



## ronparise (Aug 4, 2018)

skotrla said:


> As I said before, my wish as a non-Wyndham owner is to check availability on an as needed basis.  Anyone hosting such a script could certainly put any reservation check limits that they feel would limit their risk (e.g. 50/day).
> 
> -Scott


The easier way to accomplish this world be to become an owner. Buy a little account and you can check availability whenever you please


----------



## Braindead (Aug 4, 2018)

skotrla said:


> As I said before, my wish as a non-Wyndham owner is to check availability on an as needed basis.  Anyone hosting such a script could certainly put any reservation check limits that they feel would limit their risk (e.g. 50/day).
> 
> -Scott


If an owner isn’t looking for an advantage. Why in the world would an owner subject themselves to Wyndham discretion over this?


----------



## skotrla (Aug 4, 2018)

ronparise said:


> The easier way to accomplish this world be to become an owner. Buy a little account and you can check availability whenever you please



You really think the value of checking availability is worth $200/year and $500 future closing costs?  I don't see it.

-Scott


----------



## skotrla (Aug 4, 2018)

Braindead said:


> If an owner isn’t looking for an advantage. Why in the world would an owner subject themselves to Wyndham discretion over this?


The same reason people help newbies on this forum?  

Should owners worry about subjecting their account to Wyndham scrutiny and wrath over costing the company millions of dollars per year by constantly telling new owners to rescind?  There are people who don't speak out publicly against some timeshare companies at all to stay under the radar - are they paranoid or is there risk?

-Scott


----------



## SmithOp (Aug 4, 2018)

Jan M. said:


> Don't say you and anyone else participating in what you are doing weren't warned. Wyndham does follow the threads on TUG and our posts. If they think you or someone else is using any kind of bot or anything they might consider an unfair advantage in looking for reservations even if you aren't booking them it likely won't end well. Wyndham has invested a lot of time and money to put a stop to this kind of thing.



In addition to unfair advantage it also puts additional load on their IT system running these persistent queries.  That costs money and potentially slows it down for legitimate users of the system, seems like I’ve read a few threads about how slow and crappy the new system is already. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Braindead (Aug 4, 2018)

skotrla said:


> The same reason people help newbies on this forum?
> 
> Should owners worry about subjecting their account to Wyndham scrutiny and wrath over costing the company millions of dollars per year by constantly telling new owners to rescind?  There are people who don't speak out publicly against some timeshare companies at all to stay under the radar - are they paranoid or is there risk?
> 
> -Scott


I’ll echo Jan M. I’ve served the warning. I will again advise all owners to have NO personal contact with you.


I’m not paranoid of Wyndham knowing my identity but I’m not going to broadcast it on a public forum either. My hats off to posters like Jan,Ron and others who pretty much reveal their identities in a public forum. I have business reasons not to reveal my identity also.


----------



## scootr5 (Aug 4, 2018)

Richelle said:


> Having something to check availability constantly does give you an advantage.  Or at least it can be seen that way.  Just because it's not booking for you, doesn't mean they cannot invoke that clause.  You are giving someone the ability to check availability more them a regular person can, especially if that bot is checking 24/7.  That's an advantage.  I'm not looking to create any trouble, just a word of caution.  I was told legal does watch these forums, just so you are aware.



And Wyndham’s MO is suspend first and sort it out months later...


----------



## skotrla (Aug 4, 2018)

Braindead said:


> I’ll echo Jan M. I’ve served the warning. I will again advise all owners to have NO personal contact with you.
> 
> 
> I’m not paranoid of Wyndham knowing my identity but I’m not going to broadcast it on a public forum either. My hats off to posters like Jan,Ron and others who pretty much reveal their identities in a public forum. I have business reasons not to reveal my identity also.



You don't think Wyndham can find out your personal identity if they want to?  There is no privacy on the internet.

Here's another use case for you: an owner has a dozen deeds, each with a different family member on them, and in order to avoid the commercial use clause, he lets another dozen family members book his unused points.  What's the best way to let his family members check availability?

A) Setting up every person on any deed with full account access
B) Exchanging emails to check availability
C) Doing B more efficiently with automation, without any increase in the quantity of reservation lookups

In this use case 24 people x 10 reservation lookups per year and 5 minutes per reservation lookup is 20 hours per year - what's your time worth?  At $50/hour, that's $1000/year.

I can certainly appreciate recommendations to minimize the use of such a tool to stay under the radar, but recommendations to cutoff all personal contact with someone who suggested such a tool would be useful seems a bit harsh to me. 

-Scott


----------



## Richelle (Aug 4, 2018)

scootr5 said:


> And Wyndham’s MO is suspend first and sort it out months later...



If he’s not an owner, they cannot do that, but that’s not to say they cannot send a nasty gram courtesy of one of their lawyers. If he decides to sell his script to mega renters, they might go further then that. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## scootr5 (Aug 4, 2018)

Richelle said:


> If he’s not an owner, they cannot do that, but that’s not to say they cannot send a nasty gram courtesy of one of their lawyers. If he decides to sell his script to mega renters, they might go further then that.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



I was suggesting that they would suspend whatever owner gave him access to their account.


----------



## skotrla (Aug 4, 2018)

Richelle said:


> If he’s not an owner, they cannot do that, but that’s not to say they cannot send a nasty gram courtesy of one of their lawyers. If he decides to sell his script to mega renters, they might go further then that.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



I was asking for someone with scripting experience to write the code, so I wouldn't even own the code.

-Scott


----------



## Richelle (Aug 4, 2018)

skotrla said:


> You don't think Wyndham can find out your personal identity if they want to?  There is no privacy on the internet.
> 
> Here's another use case for you: an owner has a dozen deeds, each with a different family member on them, and in order to avoid the commercial use clause, he lets another dozen family members book his unused points.  What's the best way to let his family members check availability?
> 
> ...



I think he’s saying, that it would be to other users benefit, to not interact with you at all so they are not associated with you. Not that there is anything wrong with you as a person. Just if Wyndham decides to make a big deal out of something, that might seem small to you, We don’t want other users getting caught in the cross hairs because Wyndham suspects they are using it. They may end up having their accounts suspended if Wyndham thinks it’s a big enough deal. Or Wyndham may not think it’s a big deal and it’s a non-issue. I do see how it could be a useful tool, but I could also see how it could be abused. I’m sure Wyndham could see it too, so they may try to nip it in the bud before it gets abused. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ronparise (Aug 4, 2018)

skotrla said:


> You really think the value of checking availability is worth $200/year and $500 future closing costs?  I don't see it.
> 
> -Scott


If it’s not worth that little bit, why do it?


----------



## dioxide45 (Aug 4, 2018)

ronparise said:


> If it’s not worth that little bit, why do it?


Seems like it would be a lot of time coding and testing to not bother with a few dollars a year to actually see it work in action.


----------



## skotrla (Aug 4, 2018)

ronparise said:


> If it’s not worth that little bit, why do it?


I'll throw a value of $0.10 per availability check - over a 3-year period, I'd have to do 11000 availability checks to break even on owning a small unit for the sole purpose of checking availability.  As a non-owner, I don't see myself needing to do anywhere near that many availability checks.  Now, collectively across multiple users, you could get more value than that, but then you'd probably end up with more code to enable/track monetization than to do the simple availability check in the first place and at scale, the risk of triggering the wrath of Wyndham that people are so concerned about increases significantly.

-Scott


----------



## ronparise (Aug 4, 2018)

Let’s get back to basics. 

Why would a non owner want to know what’s available at a wyndham resort?


----------



## Braindead (Aug 4, 2018)

skotrla said:


> I can certainly appreciate recommendations to minimize the use of such a tool to stay under the radar, but recommendations to cutoff all personal contact with someone who suggested such a tool would be useful seems a bit harsh to me.
> 
> -Scott


You can sugar coat this all you want but your up to no good. I don’t want owners lured into your schemes by having personal contact with you.
Owners can do what they want but yes my advice is for all owners to have no personal contact with you. I don’t see any benefit your offering that wouldn’t jeopardize an owners ownership with Wyndham. An owner has nothing to gain with your schemes and everything to lose in my opinion,


----------



## skotrla (Aug 4, 2018)

ronparise said:


> Let’s get back to basics.
> 
> Why would a non owner want to know what’s available at a wyndham resort?



To determine if being an owner in the future would be worth their time and money?  Availability is everything - it's why the promise of RCI doesn't live up to its expectations and why someone would want to own in a specific system vs. using RCI for everything.

-Scott


----------



## skotrla (Aug 4, 2018)

Braindead said:


> You can sugar coat this all you want but your up to no good. I don’t want owners lured into your schemes by having personal contact with you.
> Owners can do what they want but yes my advice is for all owners to have no personal contact with you. I don’t see any benefit your offering that wouldn’t jeopardize an owners ownership with Wyndham. An owner has nothing to gain with your schemes and everything to lose in my opinion,



Are you suggesting that there is no possible way that looking up availability without having to email an owner and wait for a response could be useful without someone "being up to no good"?

-Scott


----------



## Braindead (Aug 4, 2018)

skotrla said:


> Are you suggesting that there is no possible way that looking up availability without having to email an owner and wait for a response could be useful without someone "being up to no good"?
> 
> -Scott


For the last time. How does your scheme benefit a Wyndham owner ? My advice stands


----------



## skotrla (Aug 4, 2018)

Braindead said:


> For the last time. How does your scheme benefit a Wyndham owner ? My advice stands



Just because your advice to avoid stands (due to risk aversion) doesn't mean I am "up to no good."

I already laid out a use case where a Wyndham owner could benefit from limited automation:

https://tugbbs.com/forums/index.php...ripting-experience.277326/page-2#post-2174077

-Scott


----------



## scootr5 (Aug 4, 2018)

skotrla said:


> To determine if being an owner in the future would be worth their time and money?  Availability is everything - it's why the promise of RCI doesn't live up to its expectations and why someone would want to own in a specific system vs. using RCI for everything.
> 
> -Scott



But what’s available today is not nescessarily representative of what availability will be like in a year.


----------



## Jan M. (Aug 4, 2018)

skotrla said:


> Just because your advice to avoid stands (due to risk aversion) doesn't mean I am "up to no good."
> 
> I already laid out a use case where a Wyndham owner could benefit from limited automation:
> 
> ...


 

Scott, I'm truly sorry if it seems like you are being picked on. It finally dawned on me that you are being defensive and also thinking some of us are paranoid because you don't know the history of what went on in the past few years. If you were a Wyndham owner who experienced or closely followed what went on in 2016 and 2017 you would understand why some of us are reacting the way we are. Wyndham is watching and you are definitely proposing doing something that crosses a line Wyndham has already drawn. What Wyndham will see is an owner who is looking to test the parameters of what they can get away with in the system. And let me tell you there are a number of owners who would gladly report you and your cohorts themselves rather than see the return of the era of mega renters and point managers who used the bots. While it might all seem interesting and a fun challenge to you if you aren't a Wyndham owner then you aren't the one with something to lose. Those of us who have been around awhile would be negligent and uncaring if we didn't speak out advising other Wyndham owners who might not know what went on in the past not to get involved in this.


----------



## skotrla (Aug 5, 2018)

scootr5 said:


> But what’s available today is not nescessarily representative of what availability will be like in a year.



Sure, availability can change - doesn't mean the information is not useful.  Even without being an owner, I may still want someone to book something for me.

-Scott


----------



## skotrla (Aug 5, 2018)

Jan M. said:


> Scott, I'm truly sorry if it seems like you are being picked on. It finally dawned on me that you are being defensive and also thinking some of us are paranoid because you don't know the history of what went on in the past few years. If you were a Wyndham owner who experienced or closely followed what went on in 2016 and 2017 you would understand why some of us are reacting the way we are. Wyndham is watching and you are definitely proposing doing something that crosses a line Wyndham has already drawn. What Wyndham will see is an owner who is looking to test the parameters of what they can get away with in the system. And let me tell you there are a number of owners who would gladly report you and your cohorts themselves rather than see the return of the era of mega renters and point managers who used the bots. While it might all seem interesting and a fun challenge to you if you aren't a Wyndham owner then you aren't the one with something to lose. Those of us who have been around awhile would be negligent and uncaring if we didn't speak out advising other Wyndham owners who might not know what went on in the past not to get involved in this.



I can certainly respect recommendations to avoid behavior deemed too risky by people with more experience than me - certainly more than accusations that I am "up to no good."

-Scott


----------



## Braindead (Aug 5, 2018)

skotrla said:


> I can certainly respect recommendations to avoid behavior deemed too risky by people with more experience than me - certainly more than accusations that I am "up to no good."
> 
> -Scott


Jan M and Scooter informed you of Wyndhams history when something like your scheme gets shut down.
You can start however small and innocent as it seems to you.
But then - oh this works and balloons.
Now some are getting reservations that are very hard to get at less than 10 months.
Oh wow!! I can rent these reservations and make some $
All mega renters started small just like your schemes.
What happens when Wyndham drops the hammer on your shenanigans?

All owners will lose benefits especially VIPs!!
That’s what happened everytime.

If someone younger with IT experience like Richelle[I have no idea how old she is] wants to get involved with you. I can’t stop that.

But the last thing I want to see is you getting a hook in some seniors and start realing them in.
I’m not getting involved as you should know.

In my opinion you kept backing down to lower levels with this scheme yesterday until it looks all so innocent.
That’s exactly what conmen do to get a hook set on some unsuspecting victims.
I will do everything I can to stop you dead in your tracks!!

For an individual owner to find availability like your scheme with one click it would take that owner hours or even days.
You’re trying to get an unfair advantage on every single reservation with your scheme no matter how you cut it


----------



## Braindead (Aug 5, 2018)

I see the next Winpoint or similar business is trying to get developed here.
Scott wants to use owners accounts is what this boils down to.

Scott if you haven’t heard of Winpoint just do a search here on TUG
I don’t think you have any intention of being an owner only looking to use owners accounts at your will.

We can tell you as owners that you can get about anything you want at 10 months unless your wanting specific event weekends- weeks,summer weekends at some beach resorts and winter ski season.

If you genuinely want to know only about availability before you buy. We can answer that question without you having access to an owners account. But that’s not what your upto is it?


----------



## Braindead (Aug 5, 2018)

Scott

Follow up to above post:

When Wyndham drops that hammer next time you’ll walk away Scott free. 
With all of us owners as the losers!!!


----------



## ronparise (Aug 5, 2018)

Braindead said:


> Jan M and Scooter informed you of Wyndhams history when something like your scheme gets shut down.
> You can start however small and innocent as it seems to you.
> But then - oh this works and balloons.
> Now some are getting reservations that are very hard to get at less than 10 months.
> ...



A little off topic but why is it ok to mess with young people but not seniors?


----------



## Braindead (Aug 5, 2018)

ronparise said:


> A little off topic but why is it ok to mess with young people but not seniors?


I can’t stop either.
But I would hate to see unsuspecting seniors get drawn in. Just the old adage of trying to protect senior citizens”elderly “.

I advised ALL owners to not get involved. If someone younger gets involved I hope Wyndham steps in quick and drops the hammer on that individual owner!!

Leaving the rest of us unscathed!!


----------



## skotrla (Aug 5, 2018)

Braindead said:


> Scott
> 
> Follow up to above post:
> 
> ...



Using my detailed use case posted above, an owner could use such a script with a configured limit of 10 one-time searches/day and cover his 240/year.  Each search is the exact same search as the website search, so there is no advantage other than time savings of processing an availability check from email.

I've had multiple people tell me that they would rent from a VIP owner rather than trying to get VIP themselves if they were doing it all over again - that's the current avenue I am pursuing.  I have a 3-year payback on timeshare purchases - if the program works for me, and purchasing a unit will be cheaper than renting at $6/1K (plus guest fees), then I'll make a purchase.

Regarding availability, I book almost nothing at 10 months (non-Wyndham).  Most of my reservations are at 3 to 6 months out, and in that timeframe, availability varies widely.

Regarding, Wyndham's desire to prevent scripts, they made a conscious decision to use captcha on reservations and not searches - to me, this says that they were trying to stop high volumes automated bookings and not low volume searches.

If an owner were to do what I've described with a low limit of searches per day, how could I possibly do the things you are describing without being an owner?  Only an owner controls the script.

-Scott


----------



## Braindead (Aug 5, 2018)

skotrla said:


> so there is no advantage other than time savings of processing an availability check
> 
> -Scott


Thank you for admitting your look for an advantage and doing anything you can to do it with an owner instead of putting your own ownership at risk.

Your looking to book an available unit that just popped up before another owner finds it.

Again I advise ALL to have no involvement with you what so ever.

Thank you exposing your motives!!


----------



## skotrla (Aug 5, 2018)

*SAM: * I strenuously object? Is that how it works? Objection. Overruled. No, no, no, no, I strenuously object. Oh, well if you strenuously object, let me take a moment to reconsider.
*
JO: *I got it on the record.
*
SAM: *You also got it in the jury's head that we're afraid of the doctor. You object once so they can hear you say he's not a criminologist. You keep after it and it looks like this great cross we did was just a bunch of fancy lawyer tricks. It's the difference between paper law and trial --


----------



## skotrla (Aug 5, 2018)

Braindead said:


> Thank you for admitting your look for an advantage and doing anything you can to do it with an owner instead of putting your own ownership at risk.
> 
> Your looking to book an available unit that just popped up before another owner finds it.
> 
> ...



You got me there - my motive for an availability checker is to check availability.  It's not easy to pull the wool over your eyes!

Explain to me how a one-time search (not the same search every x minutes indefinitely) is going to possibly find a unit that just popped up?

-Scott


----------



## Braindead (Aug 5, 2018)

skotrla said:


> You got me there - my motive for an availability checker is to check availability.  It's not easy to pull the wool over your eyes!
> 
> Explain to me how a one-time search (not the same search every x minutes indefinitely) is going to possibly find a unit that just popped up?
> 
> -Scott


Only someone very naive would believe it stops there!!


----------



## skotrla (Aug 5, 2018)

Braindead said:


> Only someone very naive would believe it stops there!!



How about this?  I'll lay out the beginning and you tell me what happens next.

Someone develops such a script (limit of 10 searches/day) and they give me access.  I do 5-10 searches/day (someone else may get the other 5) that are identical to the searches that other Wyndham owners are doing (in some cases the same searches that would have been done via manual emails).  Maybe I find some reservations that work for me and I get someone to book them for me, but since I don't have an account, it takes me hours to get the reservation booked, so anything in high demand is gone before I can book it.

What happens next?

-Scott


----------



## Richelle (Aug 5, 2018)

skotrla said:


> You got me there - my motive for an availability checker is to check availability.  It's not easy to pull the wool over your eyes!
> 
> Explain to me how a one-time search (not the same search every x minutes indefinitely) is going to possibly find a unit that just popped up?
> 
> -Scott






Shear luck and possibly figuring out when inventory gets put back in the system.  I assume it’s done in batches through out the day, because I told one person I had the best luck at 8:30 am. She had been checking through out the day, for a week.  She tried at 8:30ish and something popped up that she wanted.  It would not make sense to dump all the inventory at the same time everyday or else it would give people who figured it out, an unfair advantage.    So I assume they dump it in intervals using an automated process.  Possibly so the automatic upgrade system can get it in a separate automated process.  If it’s not released, it cannot be used to auto upgrade.  My theory is, the release process drops them into inventory, and the auto upgrade process has to wait for the process to finish.  It cannot pick it up until the release process is done.  So there is probably a couple minutes between the two processes running, that there is some inventory available. I base this in the fact, that when I find desirable inventory, like a presidential, it doesn’t last for long.  Maybe a minute before it disappears.  If that only happened to me once or twice, I could assume someone else picked it up.  I’ve seen it happen several times, when I was waiting for a bigger room to pop up.  The two and three bedrooms would disappear in a matter of minutes.  I’m sure if I checked multiple times a day for a week, I could figure out the interval, but I am not interested in doing that.  I’m not a mega renter.  I have no need to have an unfair advantage like that.  I’m sure someone will figure it out and publicize it, but it won’t be me that does it.  Since a Wyndham watches these forums, it wouldn’t take much for them to change the schedule, so the release and pick up happen at different times.  Just like they will eventually catch onto your script and do something to block it or make it unusable.  Best of luck to you.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Braindead (Aug 5, 2018)

skotrla said:


> How about this?  I'll lay out the beginning and you tell me what happens next.
> 
> Someone develops such a script (limit of 10 searches/day) and they give me access.  I do 5-10 searches/day (someone else may get the other 5) that are identical to the searches that other Wyndham owners are doing (in some cases the same searches that would have been done via manual emails).  Maybe I find some reservations that work for me and I get someone to book them for me, but since I don't have an account, it takes me hours to get the reservation booked, so anything in high demand is gone before I can book it.
> 
> ...


You can throw any scenario you want at me.
My answer will remain the same. I hope Wyndham can detect what your up to and drops the hammer on that individual owner. Leaving the rest of us alone with our benefits and programs intact.

Wyndham doesn’t allow automatic searches period. Every time us owners login we have to start the search over manually . If we move on to a new search and want to go back to the previous search we have to it manually. Any type of script (bot) searches aren’t allowed period.

If someone reading this thread gets caught up with you and loses their Wyndham ownership. My baby scenario of now your sitting in it. Couldn’t fit better


----------



## CruiseGuy (Aug 5, 2018)

All I'm going to add is that I regularly interact with Information Security at my company. They have ways to detect bots and scripts attempting to log in, and once logged in whether data is being entered by a keyboard or some kind of script/emulator. Plus they detect unusual patterns of access (for example: one person/IP accessing the accounts of multiple individuals). When they detect this type of activity, it is shut down and blocked. Unless you have an agreement with the company to do this only for legitimate purposes, within a limited scope allowed by the company, and your bot identifies itself as one of those parties, and agrees to specific terms of use. (I can count the number of parties currently permitted to do this on one hand, and they are financial services that provide combined financial information to people and help them file taxes and budget better by tracking all spending. And they have to obtain specific consents from those individuals to provide this type of service.)

I also wouldn't be surprised to see Wyndham implement two factor authentication within the next 1-2 years, which can make these automated interactions even more difficult to script around and easier to detect, because the individual has to provide the authentication codes sent to their phone/email during the login process or the script/bot can't get in.


----------



## skotrla (Aug 5, 2018)

CruiseGuy said:


> All I'm going to add is that I regularly interact with Information Security at my company. They have ways to detect bots and scripts attempting to log in, and once logged in whether data is being entered by a keyboard or some kind of script/emulator. Plus they detect unusual patterns of access (for example: one person/IP accessing the accounts of multiple individuals). When they detect this type of activity, it is shut down and blocked. Unless you have an agreement with the company to do this only for legitimate purposes, within a limited scope allowed by the company, and your bot identifies itself as one of those parties, and agrees to specific terms of use. (I can count the number of parties currently permitted to do this on one hand, and they are financial services that provide combined financial information to people and help them file taxes and budget better by tracking all spending. And they have to obtain specific consents from those individuals to provide this type of service.)
> 
> I also wouldn't be surprised to see Wyndham implement two factor authentication within the next 1-2 years, which can make these automated interactions even more difficult to script around and easier to detect, because the individual has to provide the authentication codes sent to their phone/email during the login process or the script/bot can't get in.



Sure, there's plenty of technology available to detect unusual activity, but generally there's a volume trigger to prevent false positives.  In my opinion, the risk is proportional to the volume and almost non-existent at the volumes I am talking about, but I certainly can't make any guarantees.

I also agree that there's plenty of technology available to limit automation like 2-factor and captcha, but all that says is that Wyndham has tools available to prevent automation if/when they decide to do so.  To me, that says that making a big time/money investment in automation is risky - that's a good reason why becoming a Wyndham owner for the sole purpose of checking availability doesn't make sense.  From a time perspective, scripting is hours of work and not days/weeks, so what Wyndham might do in 1-2 years doesn't have that big of an impact.

-Scott


----------



## skotrla (Aug 5, 2018)

Braindead said:


> You can throw any scenario you want at me.
> My answer will remain the same. I hope Wyndham can detect what your up to and drops the hammer on that individual owner. Leaving the rest of us alone with our benefits and programs intact.
> 
> Wyndham doesn’t allow automatic searches period. Every time us owners login we have to start the search over manually . If we move on to a new search and want to go back to the previous search we have to it manually. Any type of script (bot) searches aren’t allowed period.
> ...



Can you provide documentation on "Any type of script (bot) searches aren’t allowed period."  We've talked about unfair advantage clauses, but at the low volumes we are talking about now, that's definitely a stretch.

You suggested that I had plans beyond the low volume searches we are talking about now, but have not provided any hypothetical situation where I gain anything beyond what I have already spelled out.

-Scott


----------



## Braindead (Aug 5, 2018)

skotrla said:


> Sure, there's plenty of technology available to detect unusual activity, but generally there's a volume trigger to prevent false positives.  In my opinion, the risk is proportional to the volume and almost non-existent at the volumes I am talking about, but I certainly can't make any guarantees.
> 
> I also agree that there's plenty of technology available to limit automation like 2-factor and captcha, but all that says is that Wyndham has tools available to prevent automation if/when they decide to do so.  To me, that says that making a big time/money investment in automation is risky - that's a good reason why becoming a Wyndham owner for the sole purpose of checking availability doesn't make sense.  From a time perspective, scripting is hours of work and not days/weeks, so what Wyndham might do in 1-2 years doesn't have that big of an impact.
> 
> -Scott


Now that you’ve been exposed of knowingly wanting Wyndham owners to violate  Wyndham policies.
I will even go a step farther and wish TUG could attach a warning to all your PMs that thier ownership could be at risk if they allow you access to their ownership accounts. That way Warning to all those that didn’t read this and to all timeshare owners of any system

I wonder if anyone thinks I’m badgering you.

PS. I’m done responding


----------



## skotrla (Aug 5, 2018)

Braindead said:


> Now that you’ve been exposed of knowingly wanting Wyndham owners to go against Wyndham policies.
> I will even go a step farther and wish TUG could attach a warning to all your PMs that thier ownership could be at risk if they allow you access to their ownership accounts. That way Warning to all those that didn’t read this and to all timeshare owners of any system
> 
> I wonder if anyone thinks I’m badgering you.
> ...



I regret my post early on that mentioned doing availability checks every x minutes, since that was not the intent of the discussion and since it could be seen as violating the "unfair advantage" clause.  The current direction is extremely low volume automation, which I haven't seen anything on regulations against.  My personal use case is renting, which violates "commercial use" clauses, so I'm don't know that what is being proposed is any more risky than doing rentals (which are generally accepted).

I laid out a simple use case for an owner - either that simple use case is violating Wyndham regulations or it is not.  If it's not, then someone would have to suggest how that use case evolves into one that does violate Wyndham regulations because I don't see it.  And the enablers of the evolution of that use case is what owners would need to look out for, not any personal contact with me.

Based on what I've seen on this thread, the spreadsheet thread, and the LT transfers thread, it seems like you badger anyone you don't agree with it, but don't worry about me - I am an outgoing guy with thick skin.

-Scott


----------



## BibbityBoppity (Aug 5, 2018)

Braindead said:


> Between this thread and skotria post in another thread yes I think he might be a conman looking for victims.
> 
> If you get CONNED into participating with this experience it just might cost you your entire Wyndham ownership.
> Even if your on your way out and don’t care what about the owner that has 2 or 3 million points bought from Wyndham.
> Do you care about that owner? I do



I don’t think it’s a contest as to who cares about owners the most. The owner that has 2-3 million points directly purchased OR the owner that has 28,000 points directly purchased should weigh the risks and heavily consider what they’re looking to get involved in before divulging their information to someone they don’t know beyond a username for ANY reason. Not just scripting. There’s very personal information gained with this access as well. 

Again, it’s a great idea if it weren’t easily subjected to abuse and advantage. Similar to RCI ongoing searches that people pay a nice $239 for for EACH search. One may go down the conjecture rabbit hole and wonder if that’s the real end game, your own ongoing search for Wyndham that’s paid for by others similar to RCIs. 

It’s one of those ideas had over a couple of drinks with friends that died at the bar before you hit the door. It’s ambitious, but may hurt more people than it helps the few. Also, if a non owner wishes to view availability before purchasing, why not just ask someone else for a screenshot of the availability calendar? It gives them an idea of what it looks like and puts no one at risk. 

All this heeding given, just let the idea die at the door. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## skotrla (Aug 5, 2018)

BibbityBoppity said:


> I don’t think it’s a contest as to who cares about owners the most. The owner that has 2-3 million points directly purchased OR the owner that has 28,000 points directly purchased should weigh the risks and heavily consider what they’re looking to get involved in before divulging their information to someone they don’t know beyond a username for ANY reason. Not just scripting. There’s very personal information gained with this access as well.
> 
> Again, it’s a great idea if it weren’t easily subjected to abuse and advantage. Similar to RCI ongoing searches that people pay a nice $239 for for EACH search. One may go down the conjecture rabbit hole and wonder if that’s the real end game, your own ongoing search for Wyndham that’s paid for by others similar to RCIs.
> 
> ...



The current proposal is a limit of 10 one-time searches per day - I can certainly agree with a blanket warning to owners that the larger the number the greater risk.  Assuming an owner doesn't allow large number of searches on their account, how could I personally ever have an ongoing search?

My use case was an owner who does ~240 searches for family members a year - such a script saves them time and get the family members results quicker.  I am talking about automating that exact task you are mentioning, which I call a manual search via email.

-Scott


----------



## Sandi Bo (Aug 5, 2018)

Sorry if this has already been posted.  

From Item 7 of the Terms and Use (link is on every page of the site, including the login page (so if you don't have login, you can still see the info)):

You are specifically prohibited from any use of the Web Services, and you agree not to use or permit others to use the Web Services, to do any of the following:  ......     
... (e) interfere with, disrupt, disable or damage (or attempt to interfere with, disrupt, disable or damage), in an unauthorized manner, the use or operation of the Web Services or our, our affiliated or related entities’ or the Providers’ systems, equipment or applications, or service to any user, host, or network, including by use of any programs, scripts, commands, robots, spiders, scrapers, viruses, worms, web bugs, harmful code, Trojan horses, other contaminants, or otherwise, which includes “denial of service” attacks, “flooding” of networks, deliberate attempts to overload a service or to burden excessively a service’s resources, attempts to “crash” a host, and/or modifying or rerouting any Content or services provided via the Web Services
... (i) use, permit another person or entity to use, or assist another person or entity in using any robot, spider, intelligent agent, meta-searching, scraper, script or other automatic device or means, or manual process to access, use, search, monitor or copy the Web Services’ pages, domain, or the Content without our prior written permission, provided that generally available third party web browsers such as Microsoft Internet Explorer® may be used without such permission.

It was also in the terms of use of the old website.  Absolutely, no doubt, there were bots running although I don't know if Wyndham ever acknowledged it.  It was quite frustrating to watch them in action (people boldly cancelling and rebooking multiple prime time reservations any time of day and we could only watch (no chance at catching the reservation before the bot)).  On the old site, recaptcha was implemented on searches (although there were some simple work arounds). 

I also see little value in taking the time to script something with the new system.  Gone are the days of cancel rebook. I guess you might find something in a great while. I don't think a strategy of picking up a reservation before the next guy would be very successful with the new system.  The new system is multi-stepped and cumbersome - and that is why, IMO, recaptcha is not needed for the search.  The site, I guess is getting more stable.  But any system update might require an update to your script.  So it's not like you'd pay someone for it one time, and it's done.  You'd need ongoing maintenance of your script.  Consider the money spent for scripting the old system - $0 value today.

That said, Wyndham has a heavy arm.  They will lock out an account in a heart beat, and ask questions later. Months and months later you could still be locked out, whilst you are "audited".  They answer to no one. I would never chance it.


----------



## skotrla (Aug 5, 2018)

Sandi Bo said:


> Sorry if this has already been posted.
> 
> From Item 7 of the Terms and Use (link is on every page of the site, including the login page (so if you don't have login, you can still see the info)):
> 
> ...



No one posted this yet - thanks for the relevant post.

Although, from what I read, scripting in a generally available third party browser like Chrome seems to be allowed.  This clause seems like it is meant to limit scripts that are using custom code to access the website directly without a user interface.

As I said before, we are talking about checking availability and not booking, which is already limited by captchas, and we are talking about non-owner access for family and friends.

Any person who does a lot of availability checks for family and friends can simply take the typical qty they do per year x the time per check x the value of their time to determine what sort of time savings they would get - in my example the number was $1000/year, but YMMV.  If you don't regularly do availability checks for other people, then such a script would have no value to you.

-Scott


----------



## Sandi Bo (Aug 5, 2018)

Hmmm.  So you think when they say Web Services they for real mean services and not the web site itself (services available on the web site). 

I'm not saying it wouldn't be of value, I just have always thought that it was against their rules and wouldn't chance jeopardizing my account. 

Nothing to do with automation, but it sure has been nice to allow other owners to have their own logins and check availability (and book) for themselves.  You are still limited to one person transacting (booking) at a time, but we've managed it fine in our account.  I think that is the 3rd nice thing I've said about the Wyndham site today, at least the 2nd.  I better go check my temperature.


----------



## skotrla (Aug 5, 2018)

Sandi Bo said:


> Hmmm.  So you think when they say Web Services they for real mean services and not the web site itself (services available on the web site).
> 
> I'm not saying it wouldn't be of value, I just have always thought that it was against their rules and wouldn't chance jeopardizing my account.
> 
> Nothing to do with automation, but it sure has been nice to allow other owners to have their own logins and check availability (and book) for themselves.  You are still limited to one person transacting (booking) at a time, but we've managed it fine in our account.  I think that is the 3rd nice thing I've said about the Wyndham site today, at least the 2nd.  I better go check my temperature.



I'm not sure - is there a clause prohibiting "commercial use" that we can analyze for comparison purposes? To me, that's really the valid question - is low volume scripting for personal use more or less prohibited than renting for commercial use (which is a generally accepted practice)?

-Scott


----------



## Jan M. (Aug 5, 2018)

Sandi Bo said:


> I think that is the 3rd nice thing I've said about the Wyndham site today, at least the 2nd. I better go check my temperature.



On general principle it hurts to have to say something nice about the website but to do it several times in one day, you are out of control! You must be coming down with something. I hope this isn't contagious and can't be transmitted online. Lol.


----------



## capital city (Aug 5, 2018)

I think that from the past we have learned that Wyndham is much like the IRS when it comes to rentals. Commercial use is for big time renters. Small timers looking to offset m/f would be considered more of a hobby. Besides that they cant completely disallow rentals as that is still a big part of their sales spiel.

If you dont see it as an unfair advantage I'm not sure what else can be said to you really. At the very least Wyndham will have us all do a captcha for searches if they find out.  Knowing Wyndham they will see the money in this and provide their own ongoing sersch and charge us a "low" $99 fee to to do it for us.


----------



## skotrla (Aug 5, 2018)

capital city said:


> I think that from the past we have learned that Wyndham is much like the IRS when it comes to rentals. Commercial use is for big time renters. Small timers looking to offset m/f would be considered more of a hobby. Besides that they cant completely disallow rentals as that is still a big part of their sales spiel.
> 
> If you dont see it as an unfair advantage I'm not sure what else can be said to you really. At the very least Wyndham will have us all do a captcha for searches if they find out.  Knowing Wyndham they will see the money in this and provide their own ongoing sersch and charge us a "low" $99 fee to to do it for us.



Just to be clear, are you suggesting that searching availability one time (say New Orleans on 10/15) is an unfair advantage (via script vs. manually via email request) or rather that doing the same search every x minutes forever is an unfair advantage?  I've acknowledged the second one could be construed as an unfair advantage.

-Scott


----------



## capital city (Aug 5, 2018)

I would suggest that any search function that makes it easier for someone else to make a search then it does does for the average owner would be an unfair advantage. Myself and almost every resale owner thought the same thing about the method of cancel rebook. I did not mind at all that they got and supposedly still do get the upgrade but I did mind that a owner was locking up say a 3 bedroom for 10 months or more with no intention on using it unless they were able to cancel  that room and make the 1 bedroom they were also locking up and turn into the 3 bedroom for half of the 1 bedroom price.


----------



## skotrla (Aug 5, 2018)

capital city said:


> I would suggest that any search function that makes it easier for someone else to make a search then it does does for the average owner would be an unfair advantage. Myself and almost every resale owner thought the same thing about the method of cancel rebook. I did not mind at all that they got and supposedly still do get the upgrade but I did mind that a owner was locking up say a 3 bedroom for 10 months or more with no intention on using it unless they were able to cancel  that room and make the 1 bedroom they were also locking up and turn into the 3 bedroom for half of the 1 bedroom price.



I would say it would make it as easy for friends/family of owner to check availability as it is for an owner, but not significantly different for the owner themselves (assuming the owner normally saves his login and password in his browser).

-Scott


----------



## Sandi Bo (Aug 5, 2018)

skotrla said:


> I would say it would make it as easy for friends/family of owner to check availability as it is for an owner, but not significantly different for the owner themselves (assuming the owner normally saves his login and password in his browser).
> 
> -Scott


There is no such thing as a 'search only' login.  Every login has full access to the account, no restrictions.  Relinquishing your login info would be opening up your account to whomever you were allowing to use this 'search script'.  Unless you found a way to call some type of search service (if that is how the site is coded - this is an assumption in itself).  If that were the case, you are now truly calling a service and you have failed to follow and abide by the Terms of Use and could be subject to suspension or termination of your access to the Web Services.


----------



## skotrla (Aug 6, 2018)

Sandi Bo said:


> There is no such thing as a 'search only' login.  Every login has full access to the account, no restrictions.  Relinquishing your login info would be opening up your account to whomever you were allowing to use this 'search script'.  Unless you found a way to call some type of search service (if that is how the site is coded - this is an assumption in itself).  If that were the case, you are now truly calling a service and you have failed to follow and abide by the Terms of Use and could be subject to suspension or termination of your access to the Web Services.



The idea is that the owner is logged in via his home PC with a Chrome browser with automation enabled and accepts a limited number of availability check requests each day (e.g. 10) from family/friends/minor account holders via a webpage and then outputs the availability check results to the same webpage, allowing family/friends/minor account holders to check availability without having full account access, turning what happens on a regular basis via email today into something more efficient (less time spent by owner, faster response time for family/friends/minor account holders).

-Scott


----------



## Jan M. (Aug 6, 2018)

skotrla said:


> The idea is that the owner is logged in via his home PC with a Chrome browser with automation enabled and accepts a limited number of availability check requests each day (e.g. 10) from family/friends/minor account holders via a webpage and then outputs the availability check results to the same webpage, allowing family/friends/minor account holders to check availability without having full account access, turning what happens on a regular basis via email today into someth ing more efficient (less time spent by owner, faster response time for family/friends/minor account holders).
> 
> -Scott



tomayto, tomahto like Sandi Bo said.


----------



## RX8 (Aug 6, 2018)

I don’t own Wyndham so I have been reading for pure entertainment. However, it came to me that this might be the new exit strategy. Do something against the rules and hope that they pull your ownership. Westgate owners and others, start studying the rules book.


----------

