IMPORTANT: Rules for posting affiliate links in this forum - Page 7

vaughnmr · 09-27-2011, 09:34 AM

Maybe we need "moderators" for the moderators.

It is a shame that a few disgrunted people can ruin a forum for the rest of us.

blue_skies · 09-27-2011, 10:16 AM

Yes, it's ridiculous that a few petty people are allowed to dictate policy that negatively effects the rest of us.

I used to check the Kindle freebie thread twice a day to see the updates. Now I have to seek out individual threads in this subforum and sift through duplicate listings. So annoying.

petercreasey · 09-27-2011, 10:18 AM

The new policy needs to be reconsidered and reversed by folks who are interested in the welfare of this bulletin board.

Thanks!

anamardoll · 09-27-2011, 10:32 AM

I feel like maybe HarryT could come talk to us? He mentioned in my thread in the Writer's Forum that he had a moral problem with undisclosed affiliate links, so maybe he could explain the opposition viewpoint and why this "special thread" format is considered necessary. He's a moderator, so he wouldn't get jumped on as a "complainer" -- we all know he works hard around here and people respect his opinion as a mod.

And if there is some "legal" reason why they have to do it this way, he would know and would be able to tell us.

Could somebody maybe PM him and ask him to come talk to us? Or is that too forward?

BillSmithBooks · 09-27-2011, 11:11 AM

Not to be part of the herd

but I also liked the old system and thought it worked just fine*

* But I'm on the outside looking in and may be missing out on the internal reasoning for the policy change.

I think the new approach may create duplication or confusion...or I may just be a fuddy-duddy who resists change.

If a link -- affiliate or not -- directs me to a good book I will enjoy, I don't begrudge the person who posted it getting their dime. I trust myself to be discerning enough to determine what is worth my money and don't blindly buy something just because there is, gasp!, an unlabeled affiliate link to it.

ScalyFreak · 09-27-2011, 11:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by anamardoll

Maybe the people who didn't like the links don't feel comfortable speaking up?

If they're not comfortable defending an opinion that a large number of us obviously think has led to making this forum a lot more difficult to use and navigate, they should have kept quiet in the first place.

Quote:

Originally Posted by vaughnmr

Maybe we need "moderators" for the moderators.

I respectfully disagree. If this site works like others I have been to in the past, the moderators don't set policies, they only enforce them. Even if they do set the policies, they tend to do what they do because they think it will make things better. Being a forum moderator is a busy, time-consuming, and often thankless job. The few who remain moderators once the initial glamor wears off are the ones who genuinely care and want to help the community.

Whatever the reason for the change, the site admin or moderators who made the decision did it because they thought it was the best thing to do. I would still have preferred to force disclosure in unique threads, and would very much prefer some more openness and disclosure. But let's not start harping on the moderators as if they deliberately wanted to make things worse.

Blame the ones who ran to mommy and cried, if you have to blame someone. The moderators are just doing their job. And as much as we'd like to think otherwise, they don't owe us any answers or explanations. It would be nice to get them anyway, but let's not try to pretend this is a democracy. Or that we have the same rights as paying subscribers would.

WT Sharpe · 09-27-2011, 11:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JSWolf

You sounded just like a republican congressman.

You know the rules, Jon. If you want to make political comments, do so in the Politics and Religion forums, not here.

Catlady · 09-27-2011, 11:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WT Sharpe

You know the rules, Jon. If you want to make political comments, do so in the Politics and Religion forums, not here.

I'm glad a moderator is reading this thread, but extremely disappointed that THIS is what got responded to, rather than all the questions and comments about the new policy.

DuskyRose · 09-27-2011, 12:25 PM

Total over reaction.

Just have them list in the first post for the freebie that they're an afffilate. Those who object can then just not click on the link, and will have the title and author to search on their own.

I think this needs another re-look by TPTB, as it just seems totally unnecessary.

bshar489 · 09-27-2011, 12:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ScalyFreak

Blame the ones who ran to mommy and cried, if you have to blame someone. The moderators are just doing their job. And as much as we'd like to think otherwise, they don't owe us any answers or explanations. It would be nice to get them anyway, but let's not try to pretend this is a democracy. Or that we have the same rights as paying subscribers would.

I agree that we're not owed explanations. In fact, I would be happy to pay a subscription for this site and not just to have a say in policy

I just get the feeling that there's a lot more to this than what we realize. I can't help but wonder if it was not just the number of complaints but who was doing the complaining....

Bergette

anamardoll · 09-27-2011, 12:36 PM

I know that this isn't a democracy, and that's fine with me. Democracies on the internet rarely work well. And I do appreciate the Moderation team and GREATLY appreciate them for all the unpaid work they put in to making this site awesome.

However, it would be nice to have someone respond to this thread, especially since so many people have asked why the "old way" + "in-post disclosure" wouldn't have worked just as well. Maybe there's a super good reason. But... it would be nice to hear what it is.

ScalyFreak · 09-27-2011, 12:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bshar489

I agree that we're not owed explanations. In fact, I would be happy to pay a subscription for this site and not just to have a say in policy

I wouldn't. I will consider paying for a site who treats its community with respect, and I haven't seen a lot of that in this thread. Not yet, anyway.

jgaiser · 09-27-2011, 12:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bshar489

I agree that we're not owed explanations. In fact, I would be happy to pay a subscription for this site and not just to have a say in policy

I just get the feeling that there's a lot more to this than what we realize. I can't help but wonder if it was not just the number of complaints but who was doing the complaining....

Of course we are not *owed* an explanation. I ran a private marble collectors forum a couple of years ago and my rule was "My site, my rules", but I still listened to my members.

I do find the lack of even comments from moderators strange.

pilotbob · 09-27-2011, 12:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ScalyFreak

I wouldn't. I will consider paying for a site who treats its community with respect, and I haven't seen a lot of that in this thread. Not yet, anyway.

I'm sorry you feel that the community is not respected.

BOb

pilotbob · 09-27-2011, 12:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bshar489

I just get the feeling that there's a lot more to this than what we realize. I can't help but wonder if it was not just the number of complaints but who was doing the complaining....

Bergette

Yes an no. Out of respect for the community I will keep any finger pointing out of this thread.

BOb

09-27-2011, 09:34 AM	#91
vaughnmr Ebook Reader Posts: 605 Karma: 3205128 Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Texas Device: Kindle 3, HTC Evo, HTC View	Maybe we need "moderators" for the moderators. It is a shame that a few disgrunted people can ruin a forum for the rest of us.

09-27-2011, 10:16 AM	#92
blue_skies Evangelist Posts: 402 Karma: 1143880 Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: Ohio Device: Boyue T62+; Boyue Mimas; and my old Kindle Keyboard	Yes, it's ridiculous that a few petty people are allowed to dictate policy that negatively effects the rest of us. I used to check the Kindle freebie thread twice a day to see the updates. Now I have to seek out individual threads in this subforum and sift through duplicate listings. So annoying.

09-27-2011, 10:18 AM	#93
petercreasey Wizard Posts: 1,147 Karma: 1119516 Join Date: Aug 2009 Device: Sony: PRS 950 & T1, Kobo: Aura One & Forma	The new policy needs to be reconsidered and reversed by folks who are interested in the welfare of this bulletin board. Thanks!

09-27-2011, 10:32 AM	#94
anamardoll Chasing Butterflies Posts: 3,132 Karma: 5074169 Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: American Southwest Device: Uses batteries.	I feel like maybe HarryT could come talk to us? He mentioned in my thread in the Writer's Forum that he had a moral problem with undisclosed affiliate links, so maybe he could explain the opposition viewpoint and why this "special thread" format is considered necessary. He's a moderator, so he wouldn't get jumped on as a "complainer" -- we all know he works hard around here and people respect his opinion as a mod. And if there is some "legal" reason why they have to do it this way, he would know and would be able to tell us. Could somebody maybe PM him and ask him to come talk to us? Or is that too forward?

09-27-2011, 11:11 AM	#95
BillSmithBooks Padawan Learner Posts: 243 Karma: 1085815 Join Date: May 2009 Location: www.OutlawGalaxy.com, Foothills of NY's Adirondack mountains Device: My PC...using Puppy Linux (FBReader, Calibre, Kindle Cloud Reader,	Not to be part of the herd but I also liked the old system and thought it worked just fine* * But I'm on the outside looking in and may be missing out on the internal reasoning for the policy change. I think the new approach may create duplication or confusion...or I may just be a fuddy-duddy who resists change. If a link -- affiliate or not -- directs me to a good book I will enjoy, I don't begrudge the person who posted it getting their dime. I trust myself to be discerning enough to determine what is worth my money and don't blindly buy something just because there is, gasp!, an unlabeled affiliate link to it.

09-27-2011, 12:25 PM	#99
DuskyRose Guru Posts: 726 Karma: 9209502 Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Virginia Device: Boox Palma, Kdle Scribe & Paperwhite, Kobo Eclipsa 2e & Libra 2, Ipads	Total over reaction. Just have them list in the first post for the freebie that they're an afffilate. Those who object can then just not click on the link, and will have the title and author to search on their own. I think this needs another re-look by TPTB, as it just seems totally unnecessary.

09-27-2011, 12:36 PM	#101
anamardoll Chasing Butterflies Posts: 3,132 Karma: 5074169 Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: American Southwest Device: Uses batteries.	I know that this isn't a democracy, and that's fine with me. Democracies on the internet rarely work well. And I do appreciate the Moderation team and GREATLY appreciate them for all the unpaid work they put in to making this site awesome. However, it would be nice to have someone respond to this thread, especially since so many people have asked why the "old way" + "in-post disclosure" wouldn't have worked just as well. Maybe there's a super good reason. But... it would be nice to hear what it is.

Advert

Advert