Timeline for answer to Consensus on self-promotion and spam by Petter Friberg
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
Post Revisions
12 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 2, 2024 at 16:57 | comment | added | user128511 | Jon Skeet links to google (his current employer) all the time without disclosing. He also links to github projects he's a major contributor to without disclosing. Why does he seem to get a pass? | |
| Jun 3, 2020 at 15:29 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
Commonmark migration
|
|
| Jan 24, 2018 at 3:11 | comment | added | Robert Columbia | @Petter a few years ago in another community, I met this one guy who was pretty adamant about making sure the people he was collaborating with knew his legal name, but didn't explain why. I didn't think much of it (thought it was a quirk or just weird). It turns out that if I had pasted the name into Google, I would have found out about some of the bad stuff he had done in the 1990's and the fairly long prison sentence he had gotten for it. He apparently thought that counted as "disclosing" his past to people. Fortunately, he seemed to have reformed and he was (and is) a great contributor. | |
| Apr 28, 2017 at 13:36 | comment | added | Petter Friberg | Exactly so it's not correctly disclosed according to SO policy (hence it's not really undisclosed) a new user may be in good faith and provide a good answer, link to his blog, where the link and name is the same as user profile. Do we like to spam flag that?, no we like to help'em out!. A stupid spammer can use the same name in user profile, so it gets easier for us to understand that it is spam. Conclusion the content of the question and the answer makes the difference, incorrect disclosure is not an automatic spam flag according to me. | |
| Apr 28, 2017 at 13:27 | comment | added | Nic | @PetterFriberg If this post contained a link to PetterFriberg.org, or to the website for Foo Bar Magazine and your profile said you were an editor there, or any number of other things that make it clear there's an affiliation without explicit disclosure in the post itself. | |
| Apr 28, 2017 at 11:31 | comment | added | Petter Friberg | @Adriaan 1. If link only, it's VLQ and should be deleted (the answer needs to work without the blog post), 2. If you pass identical answer on multiple questions, it should be deleted, since you should close vote as duplicate (hence comment). But if you answer an on-topic question adding a link to a blog post (for additional info) and if it is yours also provide disclosure, you are ok. To external blog, Personal blog | |
| Apr 28, 2017 at 8:08 | comment | added | Adriaan | Say I write a blog on AngularJS and that blog does not contain ads, or other paid product-links. If I come across SO at some point, I'll start to link to my blog, obviously. Even if I write a proper answer containing all information and reference the link, will it be spam if I do that on all my answers? I vaguely remember a lad (I think in python) who posted lots of answers with purely a link to their non-commercial blog saying "that's easier to maintain for me than hundreds of separate SO answers". | |
| Apr 28, 2017 at 7:43 | history | edited | Jean-François Corbett | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
fixed spelling
|
| Apr 28, 2017 at 6:15 | comment | added | Petter Friberg | @QPaysTaxes but that's a catch 22 hence if not disclosed, how do you know it is to disclose?. So the issue becomes, not correctly disclosed, where actions can be all from comment to help user, moderator flag answer etc. all depending on what type of question and answer it is. | |
| Apr 28, 2017 at 2:00 | comment | added | Nic | Undisclosed self-promotion is spam. Read Promotion. Specifically, "However, you must disclose your affiliation in your answers." | |
| Apr 27, 2017 at 15:57 | history | edited | Floern | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 6 characters in body
|
| Apr 27, 2017 at 15:50 | history | answered | Petter Friberg | CC BY-SA 3.0 |