[hazlcha]

OK, I have a few sites with thoughtful content. I want to bring in visitors. One way is to post in forums on related topics and have a link to my site in the signature.

Some forums are fine with this. Others have banned me as a shpemmer. I know that each forum owner can set their own rules, yet I think some courtesy and sanity are in order.

When I post on a forum, my comments are thought out, relevant and real. I am contributing quality content to someone else's site. One particular site removed my signature, but kept the comments because they are good.

The very least I think is fair is to be able to share in the signature who I am and what I do, eg. my website. Ain't sellin' pharmaceuticals on a classical music forum. Instead I'm reviewing recordings and providing other content on my site. Why should I not be allowed to post that site on their classical forum if my comments enhance their forum? Are we so small headed?

Anybody else have thoughts on this, and experiences to share?

[Steve Williams]

Originally Posted by hazlcha

OK, I have a few sites with thoughtful content. I want to bring in visitors. One way is to post in forums on related topics and have a link to my site in the signature.

Some forums are fine with this. Others have banned me as a shpemmer. I know that each forum owner can set their own rules, yet I think some courtesy and sanity are in order.

When I post on a forum, my comments are thought out, relevant and real. I am contributing quality content to someone else's site. One particular site removed my signature, but kept the comments because they are good.

The very least I think is fair is to be able to share in the signature who I am and what I do, eg. my website. Ain't sellin' pharmaceuticals on a classical music forum. Instead I'm reviewing recordings and providing other content on my site. Why should I not be allowed to post that site on their classical forum if my comments enhance their forum? Are we so small headed?

Anybody else have thoughts on this, and experiences to share?

I personally think it is stupid to not allow sig links back to your web site. It gets traffic and hurts no one.

The exception to this I think is the redirects that advetise xxx and illegal content. These can be hard to control on some forums. In that case I can see not allowing it if there is alot of abuse of the policy. Or only a few Mods.

As an Administrator I often wish that people would have some respect and follow the rules. I have turned several users over to the FBI for kiddie porn redirects from france and Russia among other places.

Haiko has a much better Mod Programme than I do/ did so it is not as difficult to keep them enforced. In this case links should be OK.

I hate it when my users use bots to defeat the capcha system {I'm over simplifying it on purpose so don't flame me here} and wind up with a dozen accounts {Or more} so they can spam link their illegal crap on my forum.

As you can see it is a balancing act.

Again, Overall, I think that sig links should be allowed and that the users should have enough respect to keep them PG not XXX.

Hope this helps.

Steve

[Greg Rice]

As a mod here, I can tell you it is a problem. Every day people come here to spam this forum-every day. They do it for the traffic and for the backlink from a popular site.

If left unchecked, this forum would be a useless site packed full of spammer posts. Then people stop coming here because too much time is wasted sorting through worthless posts selling Nike shoes, MLM schemes, etc.

First and foremost, this is a forum so the rules encourage participation and contribution. It isn't about being "small headed", it's about the value this forum offers its members as a forum and not a classified ad site.

The very least I think is fair is to be able to share in the signature who I am and what I do..

What is fair is posting the rules so you can read them before joining. You can then make the decision if you want to join or not.

[hazlcha]

Exactly. When a moderator took the time to read the post, remove the link and keep the rest of the post, that is being small headed. If you don't have the resources to block shpammers and want to eliminate HTML from signatures altogether, that's understandable. That moderator's action was not.

The best way is to help people help you by giving them the right to a signature link if it's appropriate and if they are contributing valuable content to your forum.

Just look at your signature! I don't think anyone would argue that you don't deserve to have those links. You contribute valuably to this forum, so it is fair.

Then again, I don't believe in negative competition. So maybe I am out of touch. Maybe we shouldn't be helping each other.

[Julian]

Originally Posted by hazlcha

Just look at your signature! I don't think anyone would argue that you don't deserve to have those links. You contribute valuably to this forum, so it is fair.

If you are refering to Greg, then he is an OPM, and he pays for the links in his sig. (correct me if I am wrong) Anyone else is restricted to the 3 line sig.

Restricting links in the sig is not small minded. I get tired of seeing all the spam links on this forum. The mods to a great job.

[snappy]

I dont use links in my sig. I usually just place my url in my profile.

[Dynamoo]

You get signatures rights at 250 posts, which prevents one-post spammers. And as Julian says, people who pay to have a board here can have them as well, anything else is up to the admin's discretion.

hazlcha, to be honest if your manual link drop was removed then that's usually the least of your worries. Many moderators would have banned you on the stop.

Yes, it's tough. But it keeps the board clean, and if you contribute to the ABW community then you'll get those rights eventually.

[StarWAHF]

It is quite hard to keep up with spam, the thing that makes no sense to me is why spammers make multiple names and post everyday.

Generally on the forum im apart of i catch them before anyone has seen the offending link, some of them im glad to say dont get through. But on mine as well there is a post limit to gain a signature, because we want you to be a regular part of the forum.

It is a bit slow when you have to earn it but its a learn processand does cut out a lot of the spam, when you get hit with it everyday its a break from having to remove signatures as well.

[rematt]

Originally Posted by hazlcha

OK, I have a few sites with thoughtful content. I want to bring in visitors. One way is to post in forums on related topics and have a link to my site in the signature.

You sound like your main purpose for joining a forum is for the back links that you can get. If that's the case, your posts probably aren't as informative as you think. I joined this forum to be part of a community of like minded individuals. My goal was to learn as much as possible and contribute when I can. To me the value of ABW is the knowledge that I can gain, not a back link.

Originally Posted by hazlcha

Some forums are fine with this. Others have banned me as a shpemmer. I know that each forum owner can set their own rules, yet I think some courtesy and sanity are in order.

Each forum owner can set their own rules. It's unfortunate that you haven't taken the time to familiarize yourself with each forums rules prior to posting your links. Of course I'm just making an assumption and giving you the benefit of the doubt, it's quite possible that you did read the rules and just decided to ignore them.

Originally Posted by hazlcha

When I post on a forum, my comments are thought out, relevant and real. I am contributing quality content to someone else's site. One particular site removed my signature, but kept the comments because they are good.

You want a cookie? The purpose of any forum I've ever visited was to share knowledge and information. You should be happy if you were able to contribute.

Originally Posted by hazlcha

The very least I think is fair is to be able to share in the signature who I am and what I do, eg. my website. Ain't sellin' pharmaceuticals on a classical music forum. Instead I'm reviewing recordings and providing other content on my site. Why should I not be allowed to post that site on their classical forum if my comments enhance their forum?

Because the forum owner decided that it wasn't appropriate. It sounds to me like you should start your own forum. Then you can have all the links that you want. You can allow all of the SPAM that you want also. Take a click over to the warrior forum and take a look at some of the crap that's posted over there. For every legitimate post, there are probably 10 or more SPAM posts (just guessing, I haven't been there in a very long time). I really don't have the time to filter out all of the garbage.

And guess what? Just like warrior, the search engines will start to devalue the forums content once the forum is filled with bull$it links, so not only would you lose any value for your precious backlinks, but you would ruin what I consider the most useful forum for affiliates on the web.

You say you're not here to SPAM, great. How about the other thousand users that would sign up daily once they found out that the rules had been relaxed? Do you really want to wade through all of the crap? Or are you suggesting that you're special and the rules shouldn't apply to you beacause...?

Originally Posted by hazlcha

Are we so small headed?

Anybody else have thoughts on this, and experiences to share?

I'd have to say you're the one being "small headed" and somewhat shortsighted. I like ABW just as it is. If you don't then perhaps another forum would be a better fit.

-rematt

[hazlcha]

I am not referring to ABW, as I thought was obvious in my post.

And I question why a valuable contributor or moderator should have to pay for his link signature. My sites are not relevant to ABW, so I would not link to them from here. That would be splam, unless I'm posting the link as an example of something to be commented on.

Joining and contributing to a forum in order to add backlinks is perfectly legitimate, and a mode of networking that many people use. One can join a forum for a million reasons besides selling "pharmaceuticals". Splam is the abuse of that. I have a site about classical, I post in a public forum about classical and contribute valuable content, why is my site in the sig considered splam?

If there isn't a system to prevent abuse, ok. I already wrote that I get that. If the mod took out the signature and kept the comment, I feel that's small headed. Don't allow html signatures then, forum software should be able to do that. I agree with the minimum post requirement, that's reasonable. Most splammers are one shot wonders.

And why such a nasty toned response? What has become of us?

[loxly]

If there isn't a system to prevent abuse, ok. I already wrote that I get that. If the mod took out the signature and kept the comment, I feel that's small headed. Don't allow html signatures then, forum software should be able to do that. I agree with the minimum post requirement, that's reasonable. Most splammers are one shot wonders.

If the rules are stated and consistently applied, it isn't small headed at all, but is a comment to you to follow the rules and still let your content stand. You build a reputation by participating in a forum, any forum, and when signature rights are allowed you will most likely get real traffic, not just link juice. Also be aware that a large number of forums, like many blogs, have no follow on links anyway, so if you think you are getting (or losing) link juice you may not be anyway.

Concentrate on building reputation and authority. Then traffic will find you regardless of link drops or sigs or not.

[hazlcha]

Yes loxly of course. Nobody is advocating violating rules. I question rules that are limiting in the first place. If you can control abuse, then why not be generous and community minded?

I occasionally delete junk from my forums too, but will allow a relevant link - even if it's to a competitor. I'm grateful someone came and helped my forum grow and be effective. They deserve a link, if it's in line with what we're writing about.

[loxly]

Originally Posted by hazlcha

Yes loxly of course. Nobody is advocating violating rules. I question rules that are limiting in the first place. If you can control abuse, then why not be generous and community minded?

I occasionally delete junk from my forums too, but will allow a relevant link - even if it's to a competitor. I'm grateful someone came and helped my forum grow and be effective. They deserve a link, if it's in line with what we're writing about.

I agree with you, we have forums that allow sigs and links from day 1, but they are forums where people are responsible posters and we have low enough volume to control the spam easily.

**shrug** it's all up to the forum admins, and many have had bad experiences or might be in a niche where spam is rampant. Like with the Yahoo groups I admin, the people on the lists have no clue about what goes on "behind the scenes" as far as keeping the spam away.

[rematt]

Originally Posted by hazlcha

And why such a nasty toned response? What has become of us?

I didn't think that my post was particularly nasty, just stating my opinion. Same as you.

Originally Posted by hazlcha

Some forums are fine with this. Others have banned me as a shpemmer. I know that each forum owner can set their own rules, yet I think some courtesy and sanity are in order.

If I did come off as nasty though, it was probably in response to the arrogance of your statement above. You knowingly and willingly break the forum rules, however the forum mods are discourteous and insane. Please forgive them for having standards (damn, there's that nastiness again).

Originally Posted by hazlcha

Nobody is advocating violating rules. I question rules that are limiting in the first place. If you can control abuse, then why not be generous and community minded?

But you are assuming what the community wants based on what YOU want. I stated what I wanted in my previous post and was accused of being nasty (what I really want is a Kahlua and coffee right now). There is a difference between questioning rules and violating them. Forum owners set rules based on THEIR vision of the community that they're trying to create.

Originally Posted by hazlcha

I occasionally delete junk from my forums too, but will allow a relevant link - even if it's to a competitor. I'm grateful someone came and helped my forum grow and be effective. They deserve a link, if it's in line with what we're writing about.

Ahh, so you do have some standards. As a forum owner you get to decide what is and isn't acceptable behavior. As a forum user you don't. With the thousands of users that could be members of any popular forum it would be extremely hard to please everyone on every issue. That's why the forum owner sets the rules. If a particular forum doesn't meet your needs move on and find one (or start one) that's run the way that you would want it run.

[hazlcha]

Phrases such as "...your posts probably aren't as informative as you think...the arrogance of your statement above...knowingly and willingly break the forum rules" are insulting. I'd explain more, but I have to go send out 3 million v1agra emails-lol.

The Sodomites had standards too, just don't try to find a place to stay there, because their standards see the potential dangers in hospitality. That's why they chased guests away.

Competition should not mean taking the other guy down and hurting his efforts. It should mean helping the other guy too. Competition should never be "against", but rather "with". I compete by constantly improving my efforts, and I certainly hope my competitor succeeds as well.

In a situation where there is only room for one business, eg, a small town with a grocery, I shouldn't open up my grocery there if he got there first and provides a good service. That's a different situation. On the net I can't see how that is the situation. There is abundance.

Is that my opinion? You bet, and I have a right to state it without being called names.

[rematt]

Originally Posted by hazlcha

Phrases such as "...your posts probably aren't as informative as you think...the arrogance of your statement above...knowingly and willingly break the forum rules" are insulting. I'd explain more, but I have to go send out 3 million v1agra emails-lol.

The Sodomites had standards too, just don't try to find a place to stay there, because their standards see the potential dangers in hospitality. That's why they chased guests away.

Competition should not mean taking the other guy down and hurting his efforts. It should mean helping the other guy too. Competition should never be "against", but rather "with". I compete by constantly improving my efforts, and I certainly hope my competitor succeeds as well.

In a situation where there is only room for one business, eg, a small town with a grocery, I shouldn't open up my grocery there if he got there first and provides a good service. That's a different situation. On the net I can't see how that is the situation. There is abundance.

Is that my opinion? You bet, and I have a right to state it without being called names.

Besides the fact that your posts are starting to get waaaay off point, we're probably boring everyone else with this dialog, so let's start wrapping it up.

Regardless of how you feel about the various rules on different forums, the rules are the rules. It's one thing to request a change in the rules, it's another to break them and then insult the forum mods for taking actions that were totally justified by your behavior.

I'm sorry that you think that I'm being nasty, I didn't mean to hurt your feelings. But I'm going to say one last thing that you'll also probably think is mean also, GROW UP!! Everything in this world wasn't put in place for your convenience. The sooner you learn that, the better off you'll be.

Just my opinion, you are certainly welcome to yours.

-rematt

[Merchant Consultant Team]

No need to discuss this further.