Timeline for Defining the limits of self-promotion on Server Fault
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
11 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:14 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://serverfault.com/ with https://serverfault.com/
|
|
| Mar 17, 2017 at 10:13 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://meta.serverfault.com/ with https://meta.serverfault.com/
|
|
| May 8, 2011 at 21:49 | comment | added | Jeff Atwood | @chris well my point is, the user got incorrectly destroyed (and 7 questions with +13 votes and all their answers) which points to your false-positive prediction being.. sort of untrue. Or true, depending on how you look at it. | |
| May 8, 2011 at 14:26 | comment | added | Chris S | @Jeff, what are you doing on SF at 6 AM on Sunday?! | |
| May 8, 2011 at 10:09 | comment | added | Jeff Atwood | @chris this user now maps to serverfault.com/users/80749/davidm | |
| May 8, 2011 at 9:24 | history | undeleted | Jeff Atwood | ||
| Apr 15, 2011 at 18:04 | comment | added | Chris S | 4. Chopper is a bit aggressive, but he only gets false-positives about once every two or three months. In this case you're somewhere in the gray area on account your answers being obviously advertising motivated; but questions being completely valid. He does a lot of garbage collection every day, so mistakes are inevitable; I'd rather he err to collecting the gray with the black; but it's just my opinion. | |
| Apr 15, 2011 at 17:59 | comment | added | Chris S | Thoughts: 1. If you're going to mention one of your products the Answer posted here must be a full answer (eg How product solves problem). Disclosure of affiliation is absolutely required, no "should" about it. 2. It does matter if it's open source, if your proposed solution has no chance of benefiting you in any meaningful way, you're obviously not posting from a self-interest prospective. 3. The fourth example ("unfair" delete) could be edited to be less advertisey and it would be acceptable if affiliation is disclosed IMHO. | |
| Apr 14, 2011 at 10:04 | comment | added | DavidM | Agreed. The balance between the number of answers posted which is considered promotional (even within the rules I suggested above) and genuine non-promotional contributions should be considered before suspending. I shall now make sure I'm contibuting much more and I think this supports the case for warning "real" users first. | |
| Apr 14, 2011 at 9:30 | comment | added | Jeff Atwood | I give you lots of credit for asking a number of good questions that are unrelated to your product, but your answer activity needs more .. balance .. IMHO. Not every answer should be an excuse to cherry pick a place to put text that mentions your product. This is not genuinely contributing. | |
| Apr 14, 2011 at 9:22 | history | answered | DavidM | CC BY-SA 3.0 |