Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 188.8.131.52
Forum Moderators: brett tabke
As a way of giving back, I modded here for quite some time. And then I got busy... I am the CEO of three Internet marketing companies now and I worked hard over the last decade to get to a position where I can travel a lot... which means when I *am* working, my focus needs to be on work... the work that pays the salaries of all my employees and partners. I do however continue to speak at the webmasterworld shows. I know a few of the other names mentioned are also busy running the businesses they've built by getting into the industry early on and being good at what they do, but again, I won't attempt to speak for them in regards to the question posed.
The test isn'tIn the following, I am making a general point not picking an argument.
"Is this person connected with the site being promoted"
"Is a site being promoted"
When mods are participating in a discussion, they should not also moderate that discussion.
If they think a discussion they are part of needs moderating they should ask an admin, or at least another moderator to take a look at the discussion and let the admin or "other-mod" make the decision about moderating the discussion.
[It's too easy to make your point prevail when you can delete the other position from the discussion.]
The as-need-link has always been there and mods do oblige
gpilling* had made a promo-type post, which added nothing to the discussion. I think these should be disallowed.Not true, look at the firestorm it created. It was a little fuel on the fire so to speak. This particular discussion was about the moderation policy.
The article I mentioned on her site is a really good one, similar in quality to the classic '26 steps'. It is detailed, thorough and useful to anyone in this field of work. But we can't even mention the title of it or link to it here, so no wonder that people take their toys and leave.
So, when I have something really in depth to say, I'm going to blog it, rather than post it at webmasterworld... because it's easier for me and more useful for the people who read it... that's the real danger of the current linking policy to useful and helpful information being shared here at webmasterworld.
@kaled Good businesses deal with each other in ways that are mutually beneficial - right now, Webmaster World doesn't seem to have grasped this properly. In the fight against spam (which is laudable) the site is being damaged - think "baby" and "bathwater".I agree. To use another old saying 'WebmasterWorld is cutting off its nose to spite its face'
There is also a well known online tool that security oriented folks like me use - to display the content of any web page in plain text. It also gives the IP of that site and helps reveal if a 302 redirect has been employed on a compromised website.
Given the choice to post an okay post on webmasterworld or a great post on my own site, I'm going to choose the latter every time.
And that's where the danger lies. By a blanket no linking policy, webmasterworld loses good content and webmasterworld members lose good information.
It is worth noting that @tangor has a forum in which the users can disable signature links, but he expressly recommends that they don't do it. Maybe the links are different on Barsoom.
Tired of seeing the same old sigs? Perhaps they are too busy or have a graphic that slows down the process of loading the messages? You have the option to disable signatures from board member messages. Go to Member Center and enter Board Options. Disable (check) signatures.
HOWEVER, this will disable ALL signatures from ALL members! You just might miss out on good info.
This is a display toggle. You can turn it on or off at any time.
Sorry @tangor I didn't think I was quoting you out of context - but then I didn't realize that your forum only had 94 members. All active? Have read a fair bit of ERB myself.