Commercial links

[Black Comb]

It's a shame that only 3.18% of members have voted on this.

 

[jenkinsbrynmair]

It's a shame that only 3.18% of members have voted on this.

That's democracy for you - the right to vote; or not as the case may be

 

[oliver90owner]

i think the members of the forum have decided, according to the poll figures.

They most certainly have! A resounding 'no' vote. Still well over half, even if ther undecide votes were included in the yes (and I would guess that several would vote 'no' if 'pushed off the fence').

The silly comment (IMO) re the turnout is just another diversionary tactic. We should be looking at active members (as there are many who are no longer using the forum) and not the total registered.

 

[jezd]

Erm - what's this thread I've been following then? I followed the thread for a while before voting - simples

Erm no, this thread was a response to admin's poll - the idea behind an open discussion would have been to review how a poll would be positioned - the poll question and the options, just my take on seeing the discussion unfold.

It's clear from recent activity that there are individuals (and I name nobody) with agendas and interests on here that go far beyond a hobbyist forum, in addition at least one moderator has a clear interest in keeping links off the system which seems bizarre to me.

It's all very complicated and messy, I think we agree on that one

 

[The Cumbrian]

one moderator has a clear interest in keeping links off the system

I am sorry but I think that is out of order. It implies that a moderator by keeping links off the system gains some sort of personal advantage.

This is patently not true. If we are talking about the moderator I think we are (and we have to be because as far as I know we have one admin and one moderator) I had been active on the forum for quite some time before I realised that he was in any way commercial. Not only that but I still do not know what his business is. I know what it does but not which one it is.

So to say they have an interest in keeping links off the system is plainly wrong and I feel more than a little insulting to the person in question.

 

[jenkinsbrynmair]

 

[jezd]

I am sorry but I think that is out of order. It implies that a moderator by keeping links off the system gains some sort of personal advantage.

This is patently not true. If we are talking about the moderator I think we are (and we have to be because as far as I know we have one admin and one moderator) I had been active on the forum for quite some time before I realised that he was in any way commercial. Not only that but I still do not know what his business is. I know what it does but not which one it is.

So to say they have an interest in keeping links off the system is plainly wrong and I feel more than a little insulting to the person in question.

Bite me!

I have named nobody and it's my take on things.

If a moderator clearly trades or takes business in a sector and is then responsible for the removal and checking of links to third party suppliers then dont you think thats an odd setup?

You should do you background checks first, try reading the last 3 years posts first.

I personally dont care either way, if admin asks me to qualify my comment I am more than happy too.

Another approach 'perhaps' is to have a commercial trading area of the forum, anything commercial gets posted to that section.


JD

 

[Dusty Rhodes]

.
If a moderator clearly trades or takes business in a sector and is then responsible for the removal and checking of links to third party suppliers then dont you think thats an odd setup?JD

I'd like to see any evidence that moderator in question has ever misused his position.


Personally, I have nothing but respect for his integrity, his experience and wisdom, and indeed his patience.

Dusty.

 

[region2]

You're forgetting the enormous amount if time and effort that would be required of the moderating team to implement it - pause and contemplate just what would be involved in verifying just one link as kosher........ A blanket "no" is far easier and safer all round....

Not so - all they do is read the posts like a normal person (I'm not saying moderators aren't normal!) and decide there and then if what's posted is acceptable. They don't need to follow every link (unless they want to) as it should be obvious if it's a commercial link eg.
Buy my hive cleaner here http://hivecleaner.com
versus
In answer to your question this is what a National looks like: http://tharnes.co.uk/nationalhive.htm
And that's what this should be about!

The first is an example of a commercial link (to which the majority said NO) and the second is an acceptable link which is both helpful and non-commercial.
Simples!!!

R2

 

[The Cumbrian]

I have named nobody

With a single moderator you have in effect named them.

To me you are playing the man not the ball.

 

[Monsieur Abeille]

Hi Mark

I am trying to be helpful, and thought I'd seen the names (not links) of commercial companies posted successfully earlier.

Gavin, my fault - there are ways to post the full name if you can be bothered, and I guess I was just making a point. Sorry for any confusion.

 

[gavin]

No worries!

 

[Headnavigator]

I'd like to see any evidence that moderator in question has ever misused his position.


Personally, I have nothing but respect for his integrity, his experience and wisdom, and indeed his patience.

Dusty.

Seconded. Very firmly. Well said, Dusty.
I have an extreme allergy to anything being pushed towards me, commercially speaking, and, like many, I suspect, I go in the opposite direction if I feel I am being targeted. No such sense here. I think that was a very cheap accusation.

 

[Monsieur Abeille]

I'd like to see any evidence that moderator in question has ever misused his position.


Personally, I have nothing but respect for his integrity, his experience and wisdom, and indeed his patience.

Dusty.

Seconded. Very firmly. Well said, Dusty.
I have an extreme allergy to anything being pushed towards me, commercially speaking, and, like many, I suspect, I go in the opposite direction if I feel I am being targeted. No such sense here. I think that was a very cheap accusation.

 

[Suzi Q]

too.

 

[jezd]

With a single moderator you have in effect named them.

To me you are playing the man not the ball.

Just my take on things, for those posts above that are jumping around I didn't suggest it had been abused (or make an accusation)- just that its an odd setup in my mind.

Go beyond moderators and on to members if you like:

If you sell nucs every season are you trading?
If you sell/buy honey then are you not trading?
If you make and sell hives/equipment are you not trading?

If you ignore everything above for a moment and just focus on say honey trading on the forum. Often at certain times of the year there are those wishing to offload bulk honey - ie trade. Then there are those that are willing to buy, this is clearly for the supply of their retail customers etc

Plenty of ppl making a buck (big or small) from the forum in lots of ways, and yet the focus is on links to those sites that are openly commercial.

I voted 'no' but no sure anymore.

I guess it comes down to a question of scale, or does it?

Its ok for me to recommend a member who sells X or builds Y, but yet I cant post a link to a website...

JD

 

[jezd]

I'd like to see any evidence that moderator in question has ever misused his position.

I never said he/she had.

Personally, I have nothing but respect for his integrity, his experience and wisdom, and indeed his patience.

Dusty.

I am sure you are right.

I don't see any reason for not raising the subject of those with interests - be they slight or great. Especially if those could have a say regards which link are allowed and which are not.

Its a discussion? moderators (without names, its not my fault there are few) of the forum should be mentioned given they would have the nightmare role of enforcing the end policy.

JD

 

[Dusty Rhodes]

I am sure you are right..

JD

I doubt it.

I'm married.

 

[The Cumbrian]

I guess it comes down to a question of scale, or does it?

Speaking as somebody who is tied into their wife's business who frequently has to trade against hobbyists it isn't (to me a question of scale) its a question of professionalism. I will try to explain. There is nothing worse than trying to sell your product ata price required to be commercial i.e. including rates, rent VAT, etc etc when the stand next to you tells every customer I only charge for materials and prices accordingly. Making no allowance for any other out of pocket expenses e.g. heating and lighting their home workshop.

Its ok for me to recommend a member who sells X or builds Y, but yet I cant post a link to a website...

JD

This to me is the root of the problem and I voted undecided because I can't see a way round the situation.

1. Yes it feels unfriendly for those new to the site and makes some of the helpful posts totally unhelpful and meaningless.

2. On the other hand I am greatly appreciative of the time and effort put in by Admin and the moderator. As a retired old F**t i have the time to try to read all posts ever day and am aware of how long this takes without any extra load of deciding what is and isn't acceptable. Currently we get a lot of good help and advice from some very experienced and I suspect commercial members. They are good enough to not mention their commercial situation. However I have seen a number of very blatantly commercial (advertising) posts by people who have obviously joined just to try to publicise their business. They undoubtedly detract from the forum.

I would not like to see those sort of posts increase and the moderator/admin collapse under the strain thus causing the forum to implode.

Just my personal opinion.

 

[jenkinsbrynmair]

It's clear from recent activity that there are individuals (and I name nobody) with agendas and interests on here that go far beyond a hobbyist forum, in addition at least one moderator has a clear interest in keeping links off the system which seems bizarre to me.

Originally Posted by Dusty Rhodes
I'd like to see any evidence that moderator in question has ever misused his position.

I never said he/she had. quoted by jezd - if that above wasn't a direct accusation, whith only one moderator what is?