Results 1 to 25 of 25
  1. #1
    Full Member
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    218
    This one really pissed me off. As an owner of dozens of websites that utilize affiliate marketing, I spend over $60,000 a year in Overture clicks. Yesterday they deleted dozens of my listings and sent me this e-mail;

    On October 1st, 2001, we notified you about our new guidelines regarding
    sites whose relevant content is in the form of a link or banner. This
    change was made as part of our efforts to continue providing a highly
    relevant search experience. As part of this process, we are currently
    reviewing all of our advertisers' listings against this and all existing
    guidelines.

    Please be advised that we are conducting these reviews by category and as
    a result you may be receiving multiple notices regarding your listings.

    If you choose to modify your site or listings in order to meet our
    guidelines, please submit your modifications through the DirecTraffic
    Center at <http://dtc.overture.com>. Unfortunately we cannot conduct
    Secondary Reviews for the below listings.

    We have removed the following listings from your account for the reasons
    explained below:


    Account ID: *********
    Search Listing Request ID: ******

    Removed Search Listing(s):
    ******(URL: http://www.******.com/)
    Reason(s): Guideline for Sites Featuring External Links
    Here is why we feel we need to take this action.

    Guideline for Sites Featuring External Links
    Under this revised guideline, content in the form of a text link, banner,
    or tile that directs users to another Web site is not eligible for search
    terms. We will only accept listings for search terms if the Web site
    provides substantial content that is clearly reflective of the search
    term. Additionally, the substantial content must be related to the overall
    subject matter of the Web Site.

    Each of the following elements describe sites that would fulfill our
    requirement for substantial and/or sufficient content:

    1. Detailed (comprehensive) product reviews or information.
    2. Multiple (two or more) discounts, coupons or deals relating directly to
    the search term. These discounts must be available through your site
    (i.e., they can't simply be a description of offers available on a site
    the advertiser links to).
    3. Comparative information spanning multiple dimensions, such as pricing,
    features or availability. (Note: comparison shopping engines fall in this
    category.)
    4. The advertiser provides detailed commentary or information that does
    not appear on the site being linked to (e.g., comprehensive investment
    information, critiques or evaluation of company, information for
    enthusiasts, information compiled from a variety of sources).

    The mere presence of the following elements on a Web site is not enough to
    justify search terms:

    1. A link, banner or picture.
    2. A brief description of a link.
    3. Lists of text without additional content (e.g., a site listing all the
    diseases a given drug treats does not have sufficient content to qualify
    for the individual diseases as search terms.)
    4. Contact information (address, phone number, Web address, e-mail, stock
    symbol, etc.)

    Thanks for your cooperation and understanding.

    Sincerely,

    Jeff McNabb
    Relevance Analyst
    Search Quality Team

    Overture
    74 N. Pasadena Avenue, 3rd Floor
    Pasadena, CA 91103 USA
    E-mail: qualityservices@overture.com


    What pisses me off even more is that if you look under hundreds of search terms you will still find affilaite sites with zero content, just a sales page with links and banners (take a look at the search term "amazon.com" and you'll see what I mean).

    I understand that in their eyes it makes for a better search engine to exclude affiliate listings. However, as a stockholder, I am even more pissed. If they comb through the entire database, they'll probably delete MILLIONS in revenue.

    This is so bad!

  2. #2
    ABW Ambassador
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    1,447
    Do they give you a refund when they do this?

  3. #3
    ABW Ambassador
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    West Coast USA
    Posts
    3,043
    Had you asked for any changes to the listings this mouth which would have given them an opportunity to go to your account?

  4. #4
    ABW Ambassador Packy's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Syracuse
    Posts
    4,205
    Seaslug, Below is another thread about this that might be of interest to you. If I was a stock holder I would be ticked also. Also if I was spending the amnt of money that you are you can bet I would place a call or 2 to their company. I only spend about $500-$700 a month on them so to them I don't count. But put 10,000 of us little guys together and it's a different picture IMO.

    http://www.abestweb.com/cgi-bin/ubb/u ltimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=5&t=000213

  5. #5
    ABW Ambassador
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    1,005
    Yeah - I noticed everytime I submit new listings it's like sheduling an audit for yourself. They then go into your account and not only do they decline your new terms but they delete a bunch more on top of that.

    I am not submitting any new terms to them. They are so stupid. They will die in a few years if they keep cutting of clients like they are now.

  6. #6
    Super Sh!t Stirrer SSanf's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    9,944
    Humm. So, they want to be a serious search engine. As an internet user, I couldn't be happier. All the real search engines are gone. They went broke or something. Finding real information is a heck of a challenge nowadays.

    As a marketer, if I want to be listed, I guess I will have to be thinking of ways to give people some value other than a referral to someone else who actually sales an item.

    For example, a site that teaches about cooking, defines what terms such as "sauté" and "dredge" mean in cooking and then sells cookbooks is the kind they want now.

    I can see their point. I never use them for a search so there is no opportunity for them to make money from me. Why would I use them? All I would get is a bunch of ads that don't have much of anything to do with what I am looking for. Perhaps, I will at least click on a few links if affiliates are forced to have some kind of content. But, be warned I am very hard to sell. I would really have to see the value of a product since I won't come looking to buy anything.

    But, what the hey. You will have to work a lot harder and pay for me to view your content pages just like I am real prospect or something. Otherwise, you won't get a shot at the real buyers.

    Overture can't lose. You will work harder developing content, pay for the buyers clicking on your links and also pay for the never gunna be buyers like me. They will make money off of everyone who uses the internet. You will pay for everyone who uses the internet. Better start figuring a way to make the merchants pay more or you will lose your shirts.

  7. #7
    ABW Ambassador
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    2,402
    Quick question...when you guys submit to them, are you submitting the qksrv link. Couldn't you just set up the product info on a page on your site (or use a redirect on the page itself) and submit that to them. Then they are seeing a url that goes to your site and not a qksrv link.


    Tom Pyles

  8. #8
    Newbie
    Join Date
    January 17th, 2005
    Posts
    1,537
    You can buy put options on Overture...

    Might as well make money off their stupidity.

    Come summer, they be the Enron du jour.

    The only real deal now is to buy listings thru Inktomi.

    Might be a good spread: Long Inktomi - Short Overture.

    And of course my new directory coming in February....how does 'clickhere2findit'
    sound as a domain name.

    Abest web people get first crack at listings
    and being affiliates.

    I figure paying 8 cents per click thru to individual categories ought to get some serious traffic to the various category pages.

  9. #9
    Resident Genius and Staunch Capitalist Leader's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    12,817
    SEASLUG44, a while ago Professor (Fred) DID call OverSure and holler because he is a stockholder and saw the same thing you did as to the deletion of millions of dollars.

    According to him, they told him they have ALREADY deleted millions!!!

    He talked about a shareholder lawsuit. It would be nice if someone actually DID sue over the new policies, I'd think what they are doing counts as a breach of their fiduciary duty.


    Ssanf,

    I do believe OverSure will indeed soon be dead. "End user experience" and the rest of their stuff aside, IT'S BUSINESS SUICIDE to pay for clicks to a content site in any serious way, and to the chagrin of Over, the vast majority of content webmasters have already found that out! Just look at the lack of paid bids to c*ntent sites on Over and see...they're not being prevented from listing--they aren't on Over because they don't want to be there!

    It's also business suicide to take a performing affiliate site and turn it into a content site with a few pay links grafted on!


    "But, what the hey. You will have to work a lot harder and pay for me to view your content pages just like I am real prospect or something. Otherwise, you won't get a shot at the real buyers."

    I don't know what you would wish such harm on this business for, but may it return to you in spades, while bouncing harmlessly off of me! Anyway, that proposition is BS. People have been telling me I'd have to work for this and that all my life and it's ALWAYS been BS and that claim is no different.

    Not only will no one "have to" treat a content moocher as a real buyer, we WON'T, at least those of us who are in business to make money (which is THE point of business). We will simply advertise somewhere else, and leave the CARCASS of OverSure to rot.

    Content seekers can get their info from a taxpayer-funded university's site like they used to, or from some site that doesn't want to make any real money.

    Nothing's preventing content sites from doing Search Engine Optimization for Free engines just like we Revenue people do, though. Perhaps they just do not have the incentive to bother like we do!

  10. #10
    Full Member
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    260
    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>I noticed everytime I submit new listings it's like sheduling an audit for yourself.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    That's what happened here.. I submitted a request to change to URL on some listings, that was refused and overture deleted most of my other listings.. if you've got some good listings on overture just keep your head down and hope they won't notice you

  11. #11
    Resident Genius and Staunch Capitalist Leader's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    12,817
    Tom, I didn't see your question because I was typing my above post.

    I have always submitted links to MY OWN site (not qksrv or other aff. links). Still, I have had deletions under their new rules.

    My revenue pages do not match the criteria in the rules in the first post. There's not two or more coupons to the same item (HAR HAR! Sometimes there's not two MERCHANTS to the same thing!), if any coupons do appear, there's one and it's usually not a "my site" type coupon.

    I don't have a comparison shopping engine, either. There's no point in mentioning a product only to show a cheaper place with the same thing on the same site (guess what they'd buy and which merchant would soon drop you for having 0 conversions?)...

    The "detailed commentary" all boils down to Buy This, from my merchant! Of course I say a lot more than that but that's what it MEANS...I'm not pretending to write an objective review. My sales pages are SALES pages and proud of it! (Even if a pseudo-objective review would sell, it's just tooo bogus.)

    FRED--"ClickHere2BuyIt" might be better...let those content-seekers know to Stay Away before they ever show up! If you could keep those content-seeking dud-clickers away the 8c would be a lot more worth it because there wouldn't be that dilution rate that Over has from pretending they have content!

    How about FindAStore.com? That's not quite so In Your Face but it gets the point across!

  12. #12
    Newbie
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    1,336
    [ 02-03-2002: Message edited by: Icicle ]

  13. #13
    ABW Ambassador
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    641
    What do you think Yahoo! will do in April when they are supposed to decide whether to continue it's partnership with Overture , or start their own sponsored listings ?

    Wondering now if the deal was a very intelligent trick on Yahoo's end, making their own stock go up, making Overture dump advertisers and change it's policies around to reduce their profits, and weaken ties with it's advertisers , then , all of a sudden, dump them and announce the new Yahoo PPC service.

    I would love to see this happen. Overture deserves the same treatment it has shown to it's advertisers,and a little stab in the back would serve them good [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif[/img]

    Lisa

  14. #14
    Newbie
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    591
    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>I noticed everytime I submit new listings it's like sheduling an audit for yourself. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Jada,
    I agree. I haven't submitted a few new pages and terms to overture because I don't want to prompt an "audit" on my other pages. :eek:

  15. #15
    Resident Genius and Staunch Capitalist Leader's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    12,817
    Icicle, I HEAR YOU and I WISH! But unfortunately, I can't have Over shot--or sent to Cuba. And we're not drafting so Afganistan is out unless they actually sign up [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_frown.gif[/img] . Although they ARE in California, heh heh heh...it's entirely possible that an ENDANGERED SPECIES could be "discovered" living only around their location(s)--which, of course, would mean that their locations would immediately have to be turned into nature preserves and vacated by humans! Shot--California style. (The law may be technically the same all over the nation but the enforcement varies greatly! From what I understand, Calif is very strict!)

    Lisa--"Wondering now if the deal was a very intelligent trick on Yahoo's end"

    Actually I mentioned that a couple of months ago--(the search thingy here is like molasses or I'd pull up the post)--that's EXACTLY what I think Yahoo is up to! I don't know about them running a PPC or just hogging up more searches for themselves, but I STRONGLY believe that the death of Over is what they are after!

    Over does deserve a big can of whoop-@ss and if Yahoo delivers it I might send Over an email that says "BWAAA HAAA HAAA, Serves You Right!!!"

  16. #16
    ABW Ambassador
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    641
    Leader -
    Figures you would have thought of that too , and before me - darnit ! [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_frown.gif[/img]
    Only problem is... if they do that, how picky will Yahoo! be in their relevency policy ?

    May not be such a great thing after all, but it would still be sweet . [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif[/img]

    Lisa

  17. #17
    Super Sh!t Stirrer SSanf's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    9,944
    "I don't know what you would wish such harm on this business for"

    I don't. I was being sarcastic.

    But, I would like to see search engines labled for business or for content. I would also like to know where to get a good search engine for content sites. It doesn't seem like there are any good search engines for content anymore. It really ticks me off that they are all gone. It is so hard to find the simplest information any more. And, there are thousands of sites with information whose designers are just wishing you could find them.

  18. #18
    ABW Ambassador
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    2,118
    I hate to be the one to defend Overture, I am unhappy with the new policies too.

    But, you are twisting their words. The policy is NOT about getting content sites. It does not say you have to have any content whatsoever. I repeat, there is no content requirement to list in Overture. OVERTURE in fact does not want to fill itself with content sites (believe it or not!).

    As for the loss of revenue and shareholder lawsuits -

    OK I could see it and maybe agree if you were arguing that GOTO searchers use GOTO because they want affiliate sites (because that is what made GOTO famous and the searchers will leave when they do not find them anymore).

    But if you are saying they are losing money because advertisers are getting turned away, then you are just misrepresenting the market forces that ppc's operate under.

  19. #19
    Resident Genius and Staunch Capitalist Leader's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    12,817
    Jimbo--IF Fred's report of OverSure ADMITTING that their new policy has caused the deletion of millions of dollars, and whoever told him that is right (sometimes the people on the phone don't know squat) then I think that is not a "misrepresentation" of the economics of PPCs. However I also know that sometimes phone people just make up stuff to get a person to stop yelling in their ears [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif[/img] ! Still, for a PPC to make money there has to be a bidded listing to click on so it would stand to reason that chasing out advertisers is costing them a mint unless they are able to replace those lost advertisers.

    SSANF--Glad to know you were only being sarcastic!!!

    As for your comment "But, I would like to see search engines labled for business or for content," there used to be one of those engines (forgot the name, sorry), but I think they didn't have enough financial backing to keep it running. At least I haven't heard of them in over a year.

    It's actually quite a good idea to separate the two main categories of sites and would reduce frustration for both sides. Being buried by The Other Kind of site, at least, wouldn't have to be a concern. Of course, spammers (the real spammers, who want their site to come up under irrelevant stuff) would have to be convinced that it was really a waste of time to force their sites into the Content category but if they have any business sense at all it might not be that hard--even spammers don't like to waste their time.

    It would be nice if a new search engine did that and had enough $$$ to really become something--provided they like affiliate sites, of course!

    As for getting a c*ntent site found, it's possible--setting up the pages in the same manner as revenue pages has worked well. That is, lots of keyword optimization!! Regular-style writing has a lot of other words which look like keywords to the search engines and the basic thing (it worked for me) is to amp-up the ones you want to show and minimize other important-seeming words. (important-seeming in the "eyes" of the SE algo, that is.)

    Until the search engine that seperates the sites by type reappears, here's a tip:

    If you look for a hodgepodge of words related to the subject it actually can be quite easy. Like if you want a gardening site you might search for "garden fertilizer plant roots hole".

    It's an odd way of searching that I picked up after seeing searches like that appear in the stats for Marilynn's Master Gardening! Someone wanted to find where I talked about Milorganite fertilizer and typed something like "Milwaukee organic gross waste biodegrade" and I realized they were onto something searching like that! So that's how I look for c*ntent now and it cuts most of the stores right out. Easy once you get the knack of it!

    HTH

  20. #20
    Newbie
    Join Date
    January 17th, 2005
    Posts
    1,537
    Overture (boy that name sure sucks) told me that the new policy had to do with three things:

    1. Partnership with Yahoo
    2. Site RELEVANCY
    3. Content

    Yahoo was paying them so Yahoo got to make some new rules. The rules being Yahoo gets
    preferential treatment. For and how they didn't say. But my guess is since Yahoo went to $299 per year for a listing they will be sharing these paid listings with BendOver and since they are technically NOT PPC LISTINGS, BendOver would have to get rid of the (in Yahoo's eyes) NON-RELEVANT listings
    so Yahoo's listings will replace them and get seen and clicked on enough to warrant the $299 per year.

    Yahoo people are dumb, not stupid. They know very few people are going to pay $299 for a listing if it doesn't get SEEN and there can only be so many of the $299 listings on the first page of any keyword. If they can get BendOver to wipe out all the affiliate listings then the Yahoo paid listings get seen way more often and it also helps merchants pay lower amounts as they don't have to compete with their affiliates, so they buy more keywords in bigger $$ amounts.

    I would be willing to wager that sometime this year, Yahoo either buys a big chunk of Overture and then the rest of it next year.
    Or if BendOver stock drops enough they the whole BendOver thing this year. Probably in the summer. I think there is a whole lot going on behind the scenes.

    The reason reported for all the listing deletions was site relevancy per KEYWORD. For example: I could list my NY Times site in the keyword NY Times but not in the keywords, New York, New York City, News, Newspapers or CNN. Why, because it wasn't relevant enough - I would have had to add
    content about the specific keywords. Plus,
    since it was an affiliate site, it had to have my specific contact info - name, address, phone, email at the bottom of the page - which is a YAHOO requirement for listing on YAHOO and seems to have been borrowed by BendOver.

    The NY Times, however, could list on all the
    keywords I was denied because there are no middlemen between them and the customer. In effect, the rules are if you are the person supplying the product directly then real relevancy doesn't apply.

    As for content, you have to have content - original words and stuff - if you are NOT the directly responsible merchant.

    The only exception is the keyword for your domain name. If your domain name is joeblow.com - you do not need any content to get listed under joeblow.com

    This, I was told, was done to enhance the 'happiness' of the searchees who supposedly complain they can't find stuff.

    What I find most interesting is that you can by pass a good chunck of this BS, simply by
    buying listings in Inktomi. Since Inktomi is the backbone of both Yahoo and BendOver they are the people really in the drivers seat. Yahoo can't really piss them off, because they pull the plug and no Yahoo for at least a month til Yahoo figures out how to get back online and without the shared listings from AOL, MSN, etc. And Yahoo pays Inktomi to run the servers and database for them, but has no say so about Inktomi listings. Yahoo has to include Inktomi listings in their directory. And they probably have to sort the Inktomi listings randomly at worst or get the plug pulled.

    Google in a sense has the same problem. Instead of wasting time trying to optimize for google keywords you can get the same bang for your buck by buying a listing in Inktomi and optimize that for mega searched words.

    The latest idea is to make domains names mega search term specific. Buy a listing in
    Inktomi and you almost are certain to be on the first page of one or more of the engines Inktomi runs for those words which includes AOL and MSN.

    For example: A domain name - 'clothesfor women.com' if optimized for Inktomi would have a real good chance of ending up on the first page of the keywords, clothes, women and the phrase 'clothes for women.' Three highly searched terms.

    What's really cool about this is that the down the road domain names like this will be worth big bucks, because they automatically optimize searches for the business that owns them and the traffic is relatively free.

  21. #21
    Resident Genius and Staunch Capitalist Leader's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    12,817
    Fred--
    Only problem with Inktomi is if you go for any word that has lots of directory listings a #1 in Ink isn't worth squat because it will be buried. Take a look at how far down the Inktomi listings start for a keyword like Mortgages or a keyphrase like Home Equity Loans and you'll see what I mean. So Google still has the "bang for the buck" when it comes to the mega-searched words in popular categories.

    As for OverSure's "relevency" BULL, they kicked out my bonsai tree sales page the other day from the keyword--get this, "BONSAI TREES"!!! DUH! DUH! DUH!

    That term is dead-on for what's advertised on that page, not marginally related like CNN is to New York Times (I admit I fail to see any connection at all), or even New York for New York Times. "Bonsai Trees" is an EXACT MATCH for what's for sale on my page and they booted it anyway!

    As for the assertion that Yahoo has Inktomi listings, I find it more than strange that I haven't gotten one Yahoo hit to an Inktomi page!!! Please be more specific, Fred--where on Yahoo are Inktomi listings running??? I get lots of Google/Yahoo traffic but no Ink/Yahoo traffic at all. Inktomi, however, does send hits from places like MSN, AOL, and the occasional, but very satisfying, hit from OverSure, along with a few other of their partners.

  22. #22
    Newbie
    Join Date
    January 17th, 2005
    Posts
    1,537
    The Google/Yahoo are the Ink pages...

    In any case, it gets more bizarre on BendOver everyday...

    I get a good amount of stuff from AOL thru the Inktomi listing...that's the main reason it's a deal. $39 divided by 12 is $3.25 per month. Anything over 325 visitors
    per month from anywhere makes the Ink deal a steal...I got over 1,500 last month that had to come from the INk listing because I never submitted that particular page anywhere else.

  23. #23
    Super Sh!t Stirrer SSanf's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    9,944
    Uh...how come I have hundreds of pages in Google but only three in Yahoo?

  24. #24
    Super Sh!t Stirrer SSanf's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    9,944
    Leader
    Thanks for the search tips. Makes sense.
    [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif[/img]

  25. #25
    Resident Genius and Staunch Capitalist Leader's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    12,817
    Ssanf--you're welcome. Just as long as at least one of the words is something that isn't for sale (like nobody puts "gross" in their product description unless it's a typo) it should work.

    As for only 3 pages in Yahoo, Yahoo proper (the directory) may not have them, but if you use a term with no/few directory listings, Yahoo will pull up the Google listings as "web page matches". That's where your Google listings show up...usually the major categories won't give you any first-page listings, though, because the Yahoo directory takes precedence.

    FRED, I'll have to check out the Yahoo listings again to check out how Inktomi's showing up...I have a few listings that are still only at Ink so I should be able to see them if they're coming up at Yahoo. From what I've seen in my logs, though, I don't get any traffic coming in from Yahoo until my pages get in Google. If it's just a matter of optimizing for Ink better, then I believe I will be tweaking some pages!

    I agree that Ink's a great deal, not only is it cheap-cheap (even cheaper after the first URL) but also if Over decides to be a putz with them they have lots of other partners that actually send hits! And once that first URL hurdle is passed, the price drops to $25 so it takes even less hits/month to get the traffic at less than a penny/hit...

  26. Newsletter Signup

+ Reply to Thread

Similar Threads

  1. Overture buys AltaVista ....free listings anyone?
    By ecomcity in forum Search Engine Optimization
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: February 19th, 2003, 03:13 AM
  2. site pages and listings..........
    By john dundas in forum Search Engine Optimization
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: February 13th, 2003, 04:23 PM
  3. OVERTURE - Still Sucks!! Deleting Terms for Underperformance
    By JadaKiss in forum Search Engine Optimization
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: October 8th, 2002, 07:38 PM
  4. Site Listings/Ranks Increase !!
    By john dundas in forum Search Engine Optimization
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: January 11th, 2002, 05:27 PM
  5. Overture is still deleting and monitoring accounts..
    By JadaKiss in forum Search Engine Optimization
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: November 15th, 2001, 09:02 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •