Did the WW TOS change?

[ken_b]

I seem to recall that the TOS and/or posting guidelines here contained a policy that disallowed consistent and overtly promotional posts.

Think pay per post as an example.

Think members whose posts seem to mostly defend, support, or promote some business, service, etc.

Is my memory wrong? I've just checked the TOS and Posting guidelines and can't find what I'm thinking of.

[Leosghost]

are you thinking of #25

Self promotional URL drops and whisper campaigns are strictly forbidden within the forums and will be edited out.

?

[ken_b]

No, not really self promotion.

More like constantly posting comments that defend some business or service whenever that business or service is criticized by someone else.

Sort of like reputation management.

[engine]

The short answer is no, however, are you thinking of #26

Claims of action, flames, and calls to action against any company or person will be removed.

[ken_b]

#26

Nope. It would be more like poster "a" jumping in to defend/support example.com whenever anyone else posts a negative comment about example.com.

Oh well, I must have recalled it wrong, too bad.

[Leosghost]

I think you mean "shilling" ..nope nothing specifically against it ..but it does get tiresome ( and even when the poster actually makes some good pertinent points ..tends to make one disregard them as a "wobble in the midst of all the spin" ) ..I think I'm not alone in knowing who you are thinking of ..;)..
Saw them post the other day..
thought to myself ..hey I usually disagree with the poster ..however "superb post"..that really puts it like it is ..
nearly posted to say so ..
10 minutes later ..same poster made the usual flurry of defensive spin posts on behalf of "example.com"..

and I thought ..ah well ..some people must have time on their hands ..or be looking for brownie points .or be on retainer ..or just love the koolaid..

or just do PR for free ..:)

fora are like that ..the golden nuggets here are well worth wading through the rest of the ( sometimes deliberately obscured ) muddy and troubled waters..

[zett]

Interesting question.

I've been wondering for quite some time whether there may be "hidden" Community Managers at WW who could be on the payroll of company X (or act as freelance supplier to that company).

It is weird that some posters do indeed defend a certain company whenever critical posts come up, think 1000's of posts in a calendar year. With the likes of "official" company representatives (e.g. AWA, ASA) I do not have a problem as these can clearly be identified as official company representatives.

It's the "invisible" community managers that really bug me. It's highly annoying that they try to "hijack" or control any critical conversation on company X that comes up. Highly annoying.

[encyclo]

It's worth reading the thread Professional Forum Spammers [webmasterworld.com] for more information. All forums, including this one, suffer from such problems to a greater or lesser extent. We try to keep a tight lid on the practice here. :)

<added> To answer the original question, are you thinking of TOS#13 and #20? </added>

[edited by: encyclo at 7:19 pm (utc) on May 26, 2009]

[Samizdata]

PR for free

The word that immediately springs to mind is "fanboi".

This phenomenon is fairly common in forums.

...