Two Plus Two Newer Archives

Two Plus Two Newer Archives (http://archives1.twoplustwo.com/index.php)
-   MOD DISCUSSION (http://archives1.twoplustwo.com/forumdisplay.php?f=52)
-   -   explosion of coaching site spam and the fact? that mods are involved (http://archives1.twoplustwo.com/showthread.php?t=553377)

Schneids 11-24-2007 06:00 PM

Re: explosion of coaching site spam and the fact? that mods are involv
 
So like, is this whole setup with the logo/location legal?
http://img259.imageshack.us/img259/7048/dclegalkn3.jpg

I have mentioned to a few other CR owners that we should probably make CR logo-avatars to use on 2p2 and they tell me, "nah, we don't need to be spamming 2p2." Is this considered "spam" in the eyes of the admins?

Leader 11-24-2007 06:39 PM

Re: explosion of coaching site spam and the fact? that mods are involv
 
If you give people the opportunity to buy reasonably priced advertising, they will spend more time posting content and less time finding creative ways to insert their product into their posts. I suggest the following:

Anything that is currently allowed would continued to be allowed. Anything not allowed would be governed by:

$100/month: Any avatar you want that isn't obscene or clearly scamy
$50/month: Any location you want that isn't obscene or clearly scamy

No flashing or overly distracting avatars (at admin/mod discretion)

An admin then posts the names in a thread here or ATF, which can be easily searched by anyone that wants to check.

This way 2+2 taps a large market of users that would like to advertise on 2+2 but can not because it's too expensive. Such a strategy also gives incentive to posters to post high content material that would otherwise be posted on third party sites or not at all.

Avatars and locations are not clickable and, therefore, are not likely to cannibalize existing ad revenue. Some posters will not like ad avatars, but they have many options to block them including blocking them individually and turning off avatars.

Nick B. 11-24-2007 06:53 PM

Re: explosion of coaching site spam and the fact? that mods are involv
 
I think that leggopoker avatar is fine. it doesn't have a url in it which has always been the rule for removing stuff. Of all the things 2+2 could be making money on, charging users for avatars? That would be hilarious.

Lottery Larry 11-24-2007 07:18 PM

Re: explosion of coaching site spam and the fact? that mods are involved
 
Mat, what's a "free ad"?

Is it as simple as saying, in a thread about a topic that the person coaches, that "I can coach you on this game- PM me"?

If stox and DC stop advertising, will their forums be locked and hidden from the general 2+2 public?

ahnuld 11-24-2007 07:43 PM

Re: explosion of coaching site spam and the fact? that mods are involv
 
Ticker,

You are clearly biased on this issue and should not be acting as if you are not.

Agree with leader. if people want to use their avatars to promote sites then they should pay for it. I think we should just ban advertising avatars altogether rather than charge though.

Also the fact that some mods/people with access to this forum are doing it is gross. Pick a site to associate yourself with and stick with it, but you cant honestly represent each sites best interest without conflict.

Mat Sklansky 11-24-2007 09:45 PM

Re: explosion of coaching site spam and the fact? that mods are involved
 
sponsored forums very specific to a company are shut down completely if the sponsorship ends.

I'm pretty flexible. And I'm less concerned about avatars than posters who try and find every opportunity to link to other sites. That was the prompting for this thread.

the lego avatar is one that was being carried by a bunch of users. at that level it becomes an advertising campaign in my view. it reminds me of the ebay campaign where they advertised "IT".

The pm me example you give is also unacceptable.

durron597 11-25-2007 08:42 AM

Re: explosion of coaching site spam and the fact? that mods are involv
 
[ QUOTE ]
I think that leggopoker avatar is fine. it doesn't have a url in it which has always been the rule for removing stuff. Of all the things 2+2 could be making money on, charging users for avatars? That would be hilarious.

[/ QUOTE ]

yes, but the avatar is very obviously a website. so all i have to do is click on Tickner, or Ship Ship McGipp, or whoever's name, see the homepage field and know exactly what it is.

Jurollo 11-25-2007 03:38 PM

Re: explosion of coaching site spam and the fact? that mods are involv
 
most of the people with leggopoker avatars have blog links on leggopoker in their profiles. Is this not kosher?

iron81 11-25-2007 05:09 PM

Re: explosion of coaching site spam and the fact? that mods are involv
 
Spam in your profile is generally ok as long as it isn't mentioned in the location field or avatar (lol).

Lottery Larry 11-26-2007 10:56 PM

Re: explosion of coaching site spam and the fact? that mods are involved
 
Don't some forums have a sticky, pointing to a list of coaches?


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:50 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.