Self-promotion and this forum

[Shift]

When I first arrived on this forum in 2009 (this isn't my first account), there wasn't really any self-promotion. The furthest it went was signatures.

Fast-forward to now. There's a big difference in the level of self-promotion. Threads are being created that center around someone's blog post. I've seen a couple of members who are posting in a style that I can only describe as branding. I don't believe this is what the forums are here for, and I think the forums are suffering as a result.

What are your thoughts? Any old-timers notice the difference?

[VinceG]

I've been told by the mods that one of the reasons Steve started this forum was for it to be an engine of growth. Finally I think that's manifested. So many people are now striking out on their own and deciding to create businesses around their perceived strengths.

Perhaps a few could learn better networking strategies. But all in all, I think it's a good thing to see so much growth here, not a bad thing.

[ZephyrusX]

It doesn't really bother me that much. I can think of a couple of times where the self-promotion came across as incredibly distasteful given the circumstances, but if someone has something of value or quality to offer, I generally don't mind the links to blog posts. I've come across some interesting stuff this way. Especially if the person in question has an active account and I able able to discern his/her character. I am more likely to visit the links and the posts made by forum members who resonate with me in some way. It is a good filtering technique.

[Shift]

I guess my thing is... where do you draw the line?

I understand how it goes. If your business is personal development, this forum is basically your target market. However, according to what I've read, it was never intended to be a platform for self-promotion. I've seen some successful people on the forum create high-quality, lengthy replies and do just fine with a signature link. If I read a post that knocks me on my ass, I click through the sig to read more.

The truth is, I've never been on a forum that allowed this to go on. They either have a classified section (paid or non) or they go through sigs. Some don't even allow signature marketing.

Put it this way: does everyone have the right to promote their PD sites on this forum, however they see fit? Should there be some ground rules clarified for self-promotion? I'd hate to see the day that dozens of people are doing this.

[Curious cat]

Hi. I'm relatively new here and never really did the forum thing, but for me personally, self-promotion doesn't bother me. Like anything, if i don't like a post, i can just ignore it and it won't change my life because it doesn't matter (to me).

I respect these people actually because they have initiative to pursue their dreams. Kind of like the guys who hang out at traffic lights, offering to wash your windscreen for change.

Where i draw the line on this matter is if they go all pushy car salesman on me and i start receiving sales pitches via personal online communication.

[Brutha]

At the beginning there were much more commerically driven messages. In end 2007/2008 we drastically reduced the amount of commerical messages.
Now we have a bit more but a lot of them come from people who aren't here primarily to promote their websites.

They just have a website and therefore also want to talk about it because it's part of their lives.

Put it this way: does everyone have the right to promote their PD sites on this forum, however they see fit?

No. The amount of promoting that we grant people depends on the amount they are involved in our community.

If you feel that a particular poster goes overboard with the amount of self promotion that they do, feel welcome to use the "report post" button.

[Shift]

Originally Posted by Brutha

At the beginning there were much more commerically driven messages. In end 2007/2008 we drastically reduced the amount of commerical messages.
Now we have a bit more but a lot of them come from people who aren't here primarily to promote their websites.

They just have a website and therefore also want to talk about it because it's part of their lives.
No. The amount of promoting that we grant people depends on the amount they are involved in our community.

If you feel that a particular poster goes overboard with the amount of self promotion that they do, feel welcome to use the "report post" button.

Thanks for the clarification Brutha!

[Orionjoel]

I would say that I have not noticed it a to a large degree. But then I don't read every single post in every topic here.

There is the odd thing that stands out, as maybe not entirely right, but as Brutha said, to a large degree it will depend on the context and the way the user generally participates whether it is allowed or not.

The primary one i did not entirely agree with recently I saw a thread started while in the context of the forum that it was in, had an affiliate link in the post. With the member placing the post saying they know it is an affiliate link, but why not.

[Agota]

I believe it depends on the way promotion is done. There's a big difference whether someone is promoting their site with an intention to share value or whether someone is promoting their site with the sole intent on cashing out. The latter comes off as sleazy, but I haven't seen much of it here, to be honest. I also haven't seen people promoting their paid services, except in cases when someone recommends something to others or in very rare cases when it's clearly done with an intention to help another person.

I've recently created two threads on my articles, one about computer games and other about nice guys. It is self-promotion, but I believe that forum members will find the ideas interesting, therefore I share it here. Computer games thread has 75 posts in it and nice guys thread has 28 posts in it. I assume that other members find the articles valuable in one way or another, since these thread sparked discussions around their topics.

I also sometimes post a link to a relevant article to a relevant forum thread. In many cases, post it there so I wouldn't waste time writing a lengthy response when I already have an article on that. Also some threads inspire me to write an entire article, therefore once I'm done I post it there. It's always relevant to discussion and I haven't heard any complaints on that so far.

I think that there's nothing wrong with promotion as long as you're sincerely sharing value as opposed to pulling sleazy marketing stunts

[Clint Cora]

I generally do not post my blog articles as an initial post. What I usually do is respond to threads where I feel I can make some type of contribution and may link to an article and/or video ONLY if I feel that the content there will be of help to the original poster. If I respond to any threads, I honestly want to help and in some cases, if I feel that a past article or video will help, then I will link to it.

If an initial post is either too long or not of big interest to me, I would not even respond to the thread. I contribute where I think I would be most helpful.

[chadcharlie]

Originally Posted by Shift

The truth is, I've never been on a forum that allowed this to go on. They either have a classified section (paid or non) or they go through sigs. Some don't even allow signature marketing.

I'm definitely new to this forum, discredit as you will BUT, compared to other forums I've participated in, the self plugging her is mild and as a whole pretty tasteful. That's either a testament to great modding (and I loved one of the mods responses above) or an engaged community.

From what I can tell, there is a bit of something for everyone in Steve's spectrum, and people are kind of sticking to their major interest and contributing within the smaller range of a broad site.

I've been on some forums where it's so locked down that you can't pass on relevant sites via URL to another member when that read will address the topic spot on.

I understand the friction that comes with growing community though. I left my last board because the proprietor launched a new major product, brought in this entirely new wave of visitors, of which flooded the boards and changed the whole energy. I was happy for his success, but bid the board adieu!

Kind Regards,
Chad.

[Andrew Brunelle]

I don't think I've done this on this forum, although I wouldn't have mixed feelings about it if I did. I don't see a real problem with it unless the same forum member is posting every blog post he or she creates to this forum. The only person who should be allowed to do that is Steve, seeing how it is his site. But if you have some insights from your blog, why not share the good ones that we all can benefit from?

[momo3bur]

I actually think it's really nice that Steve will allow his members to do this for free. There are people who are struggling to get their business going, their blogs out in the open, etc., and this may help bring in a few readers.

It's especially nice that he allows it considering many of these people are in the same biz as he is. I think they should give him a thanks for that, TBH.

It does get a little annoying when that is their only purpose on this forum and threads are interupted or manipulated in order to somehow work these promotions in, but who can blame them? When you need to get your site out in the public, you simply need to get your site out in the public and when you're hurting for the $$$ or you make no income from your site, you take every opportunity you can. People have done far worse things for business in the past.

[Andras]

Its the job market silly...there are no jobs but anyone can become a "guru", or a psychic, angel guide, or a channeled being etc, it is big business if you can pull it off. The caveat is that most of it is all phony and bad karma. (you cannot sell god's consciousness as a sack of potatoes, well in the US where money talks you can try.) IMHO, It does not work and never will. The "experts" are literary coming out of the woodwork. I do not blame them personally but in general they are prostituting spirituality. It should all be alms, never ask money take what it is offered, except then you are taken advantage (I have tried that too). We are a F'd up materialistic society who is hell bent on spirituality. Well it is OK, we all need to eat but really, there are other businesses. I frankly do not think a person now has a chance in hell to make a living ONLINE unless she is a very attractive psychic or willing to stomach the psychic fair bit, well I cannot, it is so weird. I have more admiration of light-workers who are artists, decorators, antiquers or into some other real, CREATIVE fields like bookstores, publishing and that can actually be lucrative.
... and just to throw this in check out my blog on hundreds of REAL business ideas from home.

Originally Posted by Shift

When I first arrived on this forum in 2009 (this isn't my first account), there wasn't really any self-promotion. The furthest it went was signatures.

Fast-forward to now. There's a big difference in the level of self-promotion. Threads are being created that center around someone's blog post. I've seen a couple of members who are posting in a style that I can only describe as branding. I don't believe this is what the forums are here for, and I think the forums are suffering as a result.

What are your thoughts? Any old-timers notice the difference?

[ButterflyWoman]

Originally Posted by Orionjoel

I saw a thread started while in the context of the forum that it was in, had an affiliate link in the post. With the member placing the post saying they know it is an affiliate link, but why not.

When you see something questionable like that, please feel free to report the post (left hand side of every post, the little triangle-sign symbol thingame). That will call it to the attention of the mod team (who can't read every post, for obviously reasons), and we'll review it. We do appreciate it when members take the time to give us a heads-up on things like this.

[MagicalRealist]

Originally Posted by Shift

I guess my thing is... where do you draw the line?

[...]

Put it this way: does everyone have the right to promote their PD sites on this forum, however they see fit?

As long as Steve Pavlina allows it, I guess they do. It's his forum, and ultimately he's the one who makes the rules.

Should there be some ground rules clarified for self-promotion? I'd hate to see the day that dozens of people are doing this.

I'm pretty good at ignoring self-promotion, but I'd still prefer to see less of it. A blog/site link in one's sig doesn't bother me, but a post that requires you to follow a link to the poster's blog and read the entry does (I don't bother reading or responding in those cases). And I have several people on my ignore list who participate in discussions here, but have tried to sell their services as life coaches, spiritual advisors, and what-have-you in the process.

I have read a few blogs by forum members here, but for me to finally get to them requires that they have plenty of intelligent things to say on this forum. Otherwise, forget it.

[moonrambler]

Originally Posted by Shift

Put it this way: does everyone have the right to promote their PD sites on this forum, however they see fit? Should there be some ground rules clarified for self-promotion? I'd hate to see the day that dozens of people are doing this.

There are some ground rules. Such as -- signature links and in-post links are supposed to provide free content, not go to sales pages or pages that only collect e-mail addresses. People can link to their blog or article or a relevant site if it fits well with the thread. We generally think it's okay for long-term members occasionally to start a thread with a link to their blog, as long as it's intended to create some discussion and as long as they are active otherwise. Modding this stuff involves a sort of casual assessment of how much of a percentage of the time a community member is linking off-site, and that percentage should be pretty low.

[moonrambler]

Originally Posted by Orionjoel

The primary one i did not entirely agree with recently I saw a thread started while in the context of the forum that it was in, had an affiliate link in the post. With the member placing the post saying they know it is an affiliate link, but why not.

If we're thinking of the same one, the mods would let that go by because the individual is a long-term member with a high post count who has contributed a lot to the forum. And if we're thinking of the same one, I actually did delete a post by this person when the whole thing started to edge toward only posting to get some affiliate links up.

[James81]

Originally Posted by moonrambler

If we're thinking of the same one, the mods would let that go by because the individual is a long-term member with a high post count who has contributed a lot to the forum. And if we're thinking of the same one, I actually did delete a post by this person when the whole thing started to edge toward only posting to get some affiliate links up.

And that's why you create issues for yourself here. I've been telling you all for a while now that the moderating here is very inconsistent and that its actually working against the environment you want to create here. You can't let an affiliate link slide for one poster because you "like" (and that's what it boils down to) and then turn around and delete it from somebody else because they haven't been here as long.

Well, technically you can do anything you want, of course, but you know what I mean. You all do this sort of thing a lot around here...letting certain thinga alide for one person while coming down on it on other people.

[moonrambler]

Originally Posted by James81

And that's why you create issues for yourself here. I've been telling you all for a while now that the moderating here is very inconsistent and that its actually working against the environment you want to create here. You can't let an affiliate link slide for one poster because you "like" (and that's what it boils down to) and then turn around and delete it from somebody else because they haven't been here as long.

Well, technically you can do anything you want, of course, but you know what I mean. You all do this sort of thing a lot around here...letting certain thinga alide for one person while coming down on it on other people.

Moderating can be inconsistent here, but I don't think it's inconsistent to say if somebody has been here a long time and provided a lot of value to the forum, we'll allow the person to post an affiliate link once every year or two, compared to someone who showed up last week and now wants to post affiliate links. I don't think we make these decisions based on who we like best.

I don't even understand why it comes across that certain decisions are based on who we like best. Case in point. Once upon a time Person A got banned for a number of reasons, but the final reason was continually giving Person B a hard time. I finally sent a PM to Person A that said something like, "Don't talk to Person B, don't quote Person B and don't even mention Person B's name." A few days later, Person A apparently couldn't stand it anymore and posted a comment about Person B, and Person A got banned.

A very long time later I ran across a blog post by Person A talking about how bad Person A felt because we liked Person B better. Yet the situation had absolutely nothing to do with likability.

Ironically enough, once upon a time Person B had gotten nearly the exact same warning for nearly the exact same behavior toward someone else. I suppose to people observing all this going down on the forum, it could look like Person B got preferential treatment compared to Person A. However, the difference was that Person B stopped doing it after the warning.

[James81]

Originally Posted by moonrambler

Moderating can be inconsistent here, but I don't think it's inconsistent to say if somebody has been here a long time and provided a lot of value to the forum, we'll allow the person to post an affiliate link once every year or two, compared to someone who showed up last week and now wants to post affiliate links. I don't think we make these decisions based on who we like best.

I don't even understand why it comes across that certain decisions are based on who we like best. Case in point. Once upon a time Person A got banned for a number of reasons, but the final reason was continually giving Person B a hard time. I finally sent a PM to Person A that said something like, "Don't talk to Person B, don't quote Person B and don't even mention Person B's name." A few days later, Person A apparently couldn't stand it anymore and posted a comment about Person B, and Person A got banned.

A very long time later I ran across a blog post by Person A talking about how bad Person A felt because we liked Person B better. Yet the situation had absolutely nothing to do with likability.

Ironically enough, once upon a time Person B had gotten nearly the exact same warning for nearly the exact same behavior toward someone else. I suppose to people observing all this going down on the forum, it could look like Person B got preferential treatment compared to Person A. However, the difference was that Person B stopped doing it after the warning.

But that's my point. Its not about the logic behind your decisions, its the way its perceived. I remember one time I had a post deleted because it talked about a person in the third person, but then I watched several threads go off on complete tangents talking about people in the third person. Say waht you want, defend that how you want, but that will never be perceived as persistent or fair. And it doesn't just happen with me, I watch similar things happen quite a bit. I watch Person A get banned for pity partying and then watch Person B not only pity party but derail whole threads with their pity partying and I just sorta scratch my head.

[Brutha]

And that's why you create issues for yourself here. I've been telling you all for a while now that the moderating here is very inconsistent and that its actually working against the environment you want to create here. You can't let an affiliate link slide for one poster because you "like" (and that's what it boils down to) and then turn around and delete it from somebody else because they haven't been here as long.

I don't think any member reported the post that includes that affiliate link.

Well, technically you can do anything you want, of course, but you know what I mean. You all do this sort of thing a lot around here...letting certain thinga alide for one person while coming down on it on other people.

Someone posting an affiliate link in a way that annoys other people on this forum is different from someone posting an affiliate link which whom nobody has a problem.

There no reason to treat both cases the same way.

We don't want to delegate the responsibility for good decisions to some rule but think that it makes more sense to handle things case by case.
As moderators we talk about the reported posts to find a common way to deal with issues.

Having burocratic rules that define things very precisely is a different mindset from the one that Steve presented in Personal Development for Smart People and in his blog.

As far as allowing peopel to advertise because we like them, neither myself nor most of the other moderators were very fond of Gingko. We still allowed him to link freely to his blog.
At the end he got banned for personal attacks but as a long term member his promotional posts were never something for which we gave him a warning.

[moonrambler]

Originally Posted by James81

But that's my point. Its not about the logic behind your decisions, its the way its perceived. I remember one time I had a post deleted because it talked about a person in the third person, but then I watched several threads go off on complete tangents talking about people in the third person. Say waht you want, defend that how you want, but that will never be perceived as persistent or fair. And it doesn't just happen with me, I watch similar things happen quite a bit. I watch Person A get banned for pity partying and then watch Person B not only pity party but derail whole threads with their pity partying and I just sorta scratch my head.

This is all off-topic from the concerns about promotional stuff, but I hope you are seeing improvement in this area. We are definitely listening to what you all say, and working as a team to help evolve the forum more as the community wants it to be while keeping with Steve's vision for this place.

Banning for pity partying is extremely rare. I only vaguely remember the episode with the third-person hoopla, but it seems like a long time ago. Tell me if you have noticed a lot of inconsistency in these types of areas lately. We've been letting conversations run with a lot less post-deleting and editing than we used to, and banning is getting more uncommon also.