Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: Brian Chandler Oct 8 2006, 10:00 AM

There's been a (slight) change to the rules - it would help to know exactly what the change _is_, since it isn't obvious. Anyway...

I suggest it would help to clarify what "No commercial solicitation" means. Recently someone was trying to ask about their website, and was apparently unsure whether it is OK to post the URL. Well, I don't imagine that's the intent of the NCS rule.

Posted by: Darin McGrew Oct 8 2006, 10:40 AM

The final paragraph is new, the one that starts with the sentence "Also be aware that members can edit their own post for up to 60 minutes."

Posted by: Brian Chandler Oct 8 2006, 01:07 PM

Aha! Thanks Darin.

Meanwhile, what _does_ "No commercial solicitation" mean?

Posted by: Peter1968 Oct 9 2006, 04:30 AM

To me, it means you can't post here advertising a product or a service, which means the viagra and cialis sellers of the world need to go somewhere else.

Tht's how I read it anyway.

Posted by: Brian Chandler Oct 10 2006, 09:47 AM

Yes, the first part of your sentence means that spammers are forbidden. But if you can't post here advertising a product or a service, how does anyone post in the Programmers Seeking Jobs forum? Or any forum in the Service Providers section?

Or are all of these somehow meant to remain empty for ever?

Posted by: John Pozadzides Nov 7 2006, 12:32 PM

Sorry about the long delay in the response to this question...

I've tackled this subject in a few other threads previously, but the summary would be that I don't think anyone here is against a member displaying a link to their home page or business in their sig file, or mentioning a useful service to someone in an appropriate conversation; however, blatant attempts to hijack the board for commercial solicitation will not be tolerated.

The service provider forums are actually purposefully designed for information regarding useful service offerings, but they are not to be used as simply advertising space. They are all moderated so that I can vet the messaging.

John

Posted by: Brian Chandler Apr 7 2007, 10:20 AM

Moved this post from http://forums.htmlhelp.com/index.php?showtopic=2816
/Christian J

Yes, but we've been here before - see http://forums.htmlhelp.com/index.php?showtopic=583

The only explanation of what "Commercial solicitation" means is that Darin or someone knows it when he sees it, and "hijacking of the board for commercial solicitation" will not be tolerated. Whatever that means, exactly.

If A asks how to do something, and B says "I suggest you pay C for xyz service", is this OK? (If not we are a bit stuck trying to help out people who need to get a proper hosting service.) But does that mean that if B and C are the same person this is someone not to be tolerated? How bizarre.

How about this? I recommend to the OP that he should see if glenninoh's hosting solution is the thing he needs. Now perhaps we're all ok: glenninoh hasn't offered, he's merely asked if it would be ok to offer, and I've just said that you could use something I have no personal commercial interest in.

I repeat my original point that I think rules that no-one can actually understand are an Extremely Bad Thing.

Posted by: John Pozadzides Apr 17 2007, 03:26 PM

Brian,

I don't know what to say. I think this is one of the most difficult things to decide with regards to these forums, and that is why so far it has been arbitrarily enforced. Going back to your previous example, if someone asked a question about needing a service and it was one that you personally provide I wouldn't have a problem with you mentioning that. However, if some brand new person showed up and started answering only questions that would commercially benefit themself, and only with answers that are blatantly designed as advertising - well they are going to get banned.

So, how do we break that down into a rule which takes lots of things into consideration?

• The reputation of the person posting the message.
• Whether it seems "annoyingly spammy".
• If it is appropriate to the readers here.

And I don't know what else.

The only thing that I can even remotely come up with would be that we could make the rule such that no one can link to any commercial interest that isn't specifically listed in the Service Providers forums. So, if you were both a participant here and a service provider you could post there first, then after it was approved you could gently point people to that approved message.

I also see problems with this because I don't want people to get a message approved and then hang around just to point to it repeatedly.

On the other hand, I'm not about to censor our trusted, long term members for making recommendations. If I trust you I'll take your opinion into consideration, if I don't I'll also take that into consideration.

So, I'm all ears. Help me find a way to cement the rule and I'll do it, but at this point I don't know how.

John

Posted by: Effovex Apr 17 2007, 03:48 PM

Spam is one of those things that are very easy to detect using a human brain but much more difficult to enforce using strict rules. Which is why spam filters still aren't infallible despite the money awaiting whomever can come up with a perfect ruleset.

"No undue commercial sollicitation" may work, however. Replace "undue" with "crass" at leisure.

Posted by: Brian Chandler Apr 22 2007, 01:28 PM

I think you're making it more complicated than need be - as f(x) says, we all know spam when we see it, and the thing is to have a "No spam" rule. You can then write more or less what you wrote above as as a guide to what is meant by "Spam".