IMPORTANT: Rules for posting affiliate links in this forum

[DuskyRose]

Originally Posted by ScalyFreak

Easy way to recognize an affiliate link: If it is posted anywhere other than on the site that sells the item in question, assume it's an affiliate link. Amazon links from someone other than Amzon, B&N links from someone other than B&N, et cetera... that's what I do anyway. But then, I don't post links here, I just click on them, so I don't need a more detailed approach than that.

While it's probably more true than not, I'd hate to be caught up in a situation where this doesn't work, and then get reamed out for it.

Since I don't know that I won't make a mistake by posting a link, or that this really is a full proof method, I probably won't bother doing so.

All together, for me, it's probably not something I'll worry about clicking on one, since it's even just easier to believe that all links are affiliate and just not care. Which, really, I don't. They put in the work and the time, I don't care if they get a few pennies or not. I'm not paying them, so don't care if someone else does.

As for keeping things simple for the moderators, I've only caught that part of their work is adjusting the headers to match changes in ebook formats when they're offered?

If so, then why not just allow members to edit their own headers? One of the bigger forums I'm on it's easy to edit your own thread header. Comes in handy once in a while, and it's not something people do for fun. It also doesn't bump up the thread, so people don't do it to keep a thread going.

Would that help at all or even be possible?

[ScalyFreak]

Originally Posted by anamardoll

With the greatest respect, ScalyFreak, if you're not posting deals for the other users, then I can see why this policy doesn't make you concerned that you might get in trouble for posting the wrong kind of link. You're pretty much 100% safe, but you're also in a poor position to evaluate the reasonableness of the concerns of the deal-posters. Forgive me for saying so.

Two sides to everything. I'm not in a good position to evaluate the concerns of people posting links, true. But it does make it easier for me to avoid being too emotional, and to see the other side's point of view.

The bottom line from my own point of view is: The rules have changed and will not change back. SO now we figure out how to live with them. If it requires spending a few hours to learn about affiliate links and how to eradicate tags from them, then that's an inconvenience and hassle, but also a necessity.

Believe me, if one day I decide to start posting links here, I will take the time to learn before posting.

[pilotbob]

I have been a moderator here for quite a while, and I can tell you a big secret...

No matter what we do, there are people that like it and people that don't like it.


For example, if we decided... you know what, go crazy, post all the links and duplicates you want, the moderators will just not respond to reports of duplicates and title edits in this section...

Some people would be happy, this is what they want. Some people would tell us we weren't doing a good job, the section is full of spam.

We leave it as it is, some people are happy with it, and some people not.

BOb

[murraypaul]

Seems that a lot more people were happy before the rules changed than they are now.

[murraypaul]

Originally Posted by ScalyFreak

Let's try to break this down into manageable components:

1. Advertising is not allowed on MobileRead. That's what the rules say and that's standard for pretty much any forum community out there.

2. An affiliate link is a form of advertising, since clicking on it give the person posting it a small amount of money. Just like if someone was to post Google Ads on their blog, when you click on those ads, the blogger gets a small amount of money.

3. Logically then, based on 1 and 2, affiliate links are not allowed on MR anymore than any other form of advertising is.

So authors shouldn't be able to list the books they are selling in their descriptions? Or have covers shown as their avatars? That is advertising.
Some forms of advertising are allowed.

[pilotbob]

Originally Posted by murraypaul

Seems that a lot more people were happy before the rules changed than they are now.

One other thing I've found is that people are more likely to be vocal about something they don't like or disagree with than about something they like and agree with. That is why you have to take negative reviews of anything with a grain of salt.

BOb

[ScalyFreak]

Originally Posted by murraypaul

So authors shouldn't be able to list the books they are selling in their descriptions? Or have covers shown as their avatars? That is advertising.
Some forms of advertising are allow.

Don't ask me, I didn't write the rules.

I look at the situation, I break it down into manageable components, I look for a solution. That's my day job in a nutshell, so that's what I do. That's how I think. And that's all there is to this.

[Catlady]

Originally Posted by pilotbob

One other thing I've found is that people are more likely to be vocal about something they don't like or disagree with than about something they like and agree with. That is why you have to take negative reviews of anything with a grain of salt.

BOb

When the status quo is suddenly changed, there ought to be a very good reason for it, and an explanation, if you want to ward off negative comments. First the reason was "complaints" about affiliate links, and that was allowed to be batted around for a few days; now the reason is overwork for the moderators, and that new reason has generated a whole 'nother round of comments. Is there going to be another reason next week?

[murraypaul]

Originally Posted by pilotbob

One other thing I've found is that people are more likely to be vocal about something they don't like or disagree with than about something they like and agree with. That is why you have to take negative reviews of anything with a grain of salt.

Doesn't that also apply to the people originally complaining about the links too?
From a purely selfish point of view, this had made it undeniably more difficult to quickly find a list of the current cheap Kindle books.

[pilotbob]

Originally Posted by Catlady

When the status quo is suddenly changed, there ought to be a very good reason for it, and an explanation, if you want to ward off negative comments. First the reason was "complaints" about affiliate links, and that was allowed to be batted around for a few days; now the reason is overwork for the moderators, and that new reason has generated a whole 'nother round of comments. Is there going to be another reason next week?

No, the reason has not changed, nor has the policy. People are continuing to grumble, and are welcome to, as long as the insults and insinuations are kept out of it.

BOb

[ApK]

Originally Posted by ScalyFreak

2. An affiliate link is a form of advertising, since clicking on it give the person posting it a small amount of money.

That's not advertising. No more than than posting ANY link to a book is (or is not) advertising. It IS a financial interest, though.

[astrangerhere]

I am a little saddened to see this rule as well. Now many of the very prolific freebies posters have disappeared. I depended on this site to filter out the freebies for me daily, and now those posters have stopped doing so because of the link rule.
I also don't see how it mattered in the case of free apps and books...

Am I being lazy? Perhaps. But some users were doing a great and very consistent job of parsing this stuff out daily and now we've lost that resource.

[petercreasey]

Originally Posted by pilotbob

People are continuing to grumble, and are welcome to

Bob, Your attitude in recent postings seems cavalier.

Perhaps more consideration should be given to what most everyone here is trying to convey for the welfare of this bulletin board.

Thanks!

[pilotbob]

Originally Posted by petercreasey

Bob, Your attitude in recent postings seems cavalier.

Perhaps more consideration should be given to what most everyone here is trying to convey for the welfare of this bulletin board.

Thanks!

You are incorrect in your assumption. Everything being said is being considered and we are discussing it in the "Star Chamber" as Marc calls it.

I did actually like someones suggestion that the forum software just munges every product link to an affiliate link for MobileRead.

Also, several of the moderators favor disallowing affiliate links 100%, and this was considered a compromise.

I do resent the fact that people think we (moderators) don't listen or care. That is far from the truth. Most of my time on this form is spent doing mod stuff rather than just having fun and participating in the conversations that interest me.

BOb

[ScalyFreak]

Originally Posted by pilotbob

Also, several of the moderators favor disallowing affiliate links 100%, and this was considered a compromise.

I'd actually be perfectly okay with that, since I don't care either way, but I strongly suspect I'm in the minority here.

Originally Posted by pilotbob

I do resent the fact that people think we (moderators) don't listen or care.

That's complete BS. If you didn't care, you wouldn't stay on as moderators.