What happened to discrepancy?, the posting of links Options

[Spirited Away]

Why I'm here.

The Community Guideline states:
ADVERTISING
Starting a topic for the sole purpose of advertising is not allowed. You may not solicit via Private Message. Signatures may only contain references and links to personal pages, such as your blogs and profiles; references and links to anything that is not personal, such as websites and forums are not allowed.

"Strictly" following the rules would mean any link posted in debate or news means spam/advertising. Yet it is argued by another member, E-Man, that such links are "allowed because it is [a] source [that] is not advertising or promoting a certain cause or company. You are simply citing where you got your facts or story from." However, that is deviating from the community guideline rule itself, and not "strictly" following.

According the definition agreed by iRock cB, if a link is posted so that it would provide information for a cause, it would be okay. So why is the topic "save the la mesa" censored even after I explained that it could be means for providing information?

I remember clearly that Jusun meant for staff to be lenient in the lounge, but what happened to that proposed leniency by the leader of this community?

[*Libertie*]

Fae, I'm really glad you brought this up. This is definitely something that needs to be taken into consideration, because right now I DO think the no advertising rule is enforced a little too strictly.

Right now, it'd be advertising if I posted something like, "Hey, looking for a good laugh every couple of days? Check out Penny Arcade, it's really funny," or something like that. But if no one had ever posted a link to Penny Arcade anywhere, I probably never would've found it. So it's kind of ridiculous to remove any links to websites other people think are cool.

I completely agree with this. Is it honestly advertising if you just think a website is cool and want others to look at it? In Entertainment, I once posted a link to a flash video. Was that advertising?

So where do we draw the line? What is considered advertising? This needs to be more clearly defined.

edit; Case A:
http://www.createblog.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=153224
Obviously advertising. Member has one post, might not even be a real person, comes just to post a link and then leave.

Case B:
http://www.createblog.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=153271
Just a random topic that was made recently. Nothing wrong with sharing something you think others might enjoy, right?

Case C:
http://www.createblog.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=14636
Big Book of Resources. Enough said. This is a collection of helpful links OUTSIDE of CB, but are we really going to flip out and delete the topic because it's advertising? Well, obviously not, because it's still there. It's a pretty old topic.

The word Fae used, discrepancy. Same thing we went through with the "createspam" issue, we shouldn't be adhering strictly to a rule that obviously leaves some room for flexibility. By flexibility, I mean that when we were put on staff, it was assumed that we have brains and can think for ourselves.

One thing, if you aren't sure about something, do keep a copy of the link you're removing.

[smoke]

Fae, I'm really glad you brought this up. This is definitely something that needs to be taken into consideration, because right now I DO think the no advertising rule is enforced a little too strictly.
I completely agree with this. Is it honestly advertising if you just think a website is cool and want others to look at it? In Entertainment, I once posted a link to a flash video. Was that advertising?

So where do we draw the line? What is considered advertising? This needs to be more clearly defined.

edit; Case A:
http://www.createblog.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=153224
Obviously advertising. Member has one post, might not even be a real person, comes just to post a link and then leave.

Case B:
http://www.createblog.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=153271
Just a random topic that was made recently. Nothing wrong with sharing something you think others might enjoy, right?

Case C:
http://www.createblog.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=14636
Big Book of Resources. Enough said. This is a collection of helpful links OUTSIDE of CB, but are we really going to flip out and delete the topic because it's advertising? Well, obviously not, because it's still there. It's a pretty old topic.

The word Fae used, discrepancy. Same thing we went through with the "createspam" issue, we shouldn't be adhering strictly to a rule that obviously leaves some room for flexibility. By flexibility, I mean that when we were put on staff, it was assumed that we have brains and can think for ourselves.

One thing, if you aren't sure about something, do keep a copy of the link you're removing.

Yes! I agree 100%! haha. I've been saying that all along. But guess what? It hasn't been revised YET so we should follow the rule as it stands. Yeah Holly, I posted that advertisement topic up backstage a while back and we haven't really gone over it well, which is why I removed that link for now.

I honestly do think it needs to be looked at! We're arguing the same point here Fae, haha. But like I said, a rule is a rule and until it is revised or what not, I will follow it but I am all for revising it and the leniency issue. Thanks for bringing this up though! I really appreciate your input! I guess you could say the debate and news topics are more of an "unwritten rule" if you will, haha. We should add that in there so that there's no further confusion. Thanks again. You remind me of myself. Always trying to think of ways to make the community better!