PDA

View Full Version : signatures with web links



dr_dave
03-30-2007, 05:52 PM
On and off, over the years, I have included the following signature in my forum profile:

Illustrated Principles of Pool and Billiards (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/pool)

As with anybody that has a signature, this link would appear beneath all of my postings. I thought this was useful so people could easily access my site whenever they wanted, with a click of the mouse.

Recently, I was asked by the CCB administrator to remove my signature. His reasoning was that since my products are offered for sale on my website, the signature could be perceived as advertising. Commercial advertising (e.g. product promotion) is not allowed on this forum. I happily complied, but then I started wondering why other users are allowed to keep web links in their signature. I know of several veteran posters that have always included web links in their signatures. Personally, I appreciate this because it makes it easy for me to navigate to their sites if I ever want to.

So here are my questions:

1.) Do you think it was appropriate for me to be asked to remove my signature, based on the content and "feel" of my website?

2.) Do you think it is appropriate for others (e.g., instructors, retailers, other resource providers) to continue to include web links in their signatures?

I'm not asking these questions because I am jealous or upset. Honestly, I could care less if I include a signature or not. I just want to know what people think about the commerical nature of my site vs. the commercial nature of links provided by others.

I take pride in the fact that I've kept my site as commercial-free as possible. I have refused many offers by people wanting to advertise on my site just for that reason ... I want the site to remain a non-commercial resource; although, it is true that I offer my book, DVD, and CD-ROM for sale on my site.

What do you guys think?

Thanks,
Dave

Bob_Jewett
03-30-2007, 06:28 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> ... His reasoning was that since my products are offered for sale on my website, the signature could be perceived as advertising. Commercial advertising (e.g. product promotion) is not allowed on this forum. ... <hr /></blockquote>

Well, I'm not entirely unbiased in this matter. The policy of non-commercial use has a long history on the internet. It is somewhat different when the forum is being paid for by a single party as compared to olden days when everybody was paying for the support of Usenet. The golden rule applies: the guy with the gold makes the rules. However, I would hope that those rules would be applied uniformly. They are not so easy to apply uniformly.

At one time there was a general understanding (on Usenet) that those who contributed a lot were entitled to more slack than others. People who hit and ran simply to pimp a new product were roundly denounced. Other long-time contributors who had a spare thingie to sell were tolerated or even encouraged. That's the policy I follow on some lists I manage. But I don't have to worry about meeting advertizing sales quotas.

Rich R.
03-30-2007, 07:17 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr>What do you guys think?<hr /></blockquote>
As someone with no web site of my own, I guess I can discuss this issue as an independent party. /ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif

As I see it, there are several issues here.

From the administrations standpoint, by putting your site link in your signature, you are getting free advertising. Should you be required to pay for advertising a site where you sell your products?

Also, because you are still allowed to put your site link in your personal information, it is a little bit redundant to have that link in your signature.

My personal opinion is, you should be allowed to include your link in your signature, regardless of the nature of your web site, as long as you are taking part in the discussions and not just here to pimp your product or service.

To be honest Dr. Dave, I find your constant referral to your site, for information on every discussion, to be much more irritating than your link in your signature. I would prefer if you just said your piece and let it go, like everyone else. JMHO.

Since you are a member of the BD community, why don't you go to the powers that be and obtain some clarification on this issue. Do they even know what the administrator is doing? After all, it is common knowledge that the administrator of this site has his own, competing, site. That alone can be considered a conflict of interests. It is possible, he is trying to restrict traffic in some way.

Morris183
03-30-2007, 08:34 PM
There is nothing wrong with a signature nor is there a problem with your site having a commercial link as well. Look I'm not a pool player just someone that's been reignited with the game but I know something about the Internet and the commercial world. Look at Golf, nothing gets shown, posted or placed in a magazine that doesn't have a commercial connotation. Don't be embarrassed, your link is refreshing and I hope you make a bundle and promote the game of pool. Moe

dr_dave
03-30-2007, 08:41 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bob_Jewett:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> ... His reasoning was that since my products are offered for sale on my website, the signature could be perceived as advertising. Commercial advertising (e.g. product promotion) is not allowed on this forum. ... <hr /></blockquote>

Well, I'm not entirely unbiased in this matter. The policy of non-commercial use has a long history on the internet. It is somewhat different when the forum is being paid for by a single party as compared to olden days when everybody was paying for the support of Usenet. The golden rule applies: the guy with the gold makes the rules. However, I would hope that those rules would be applied uniformly. They are not so easy to apply uniformly.

At one time there was a general understanding (on Usenet) that those who contributed a lot were entitled to more slack than others. People who hit and ran simply to pimp a new product were roundly denounced. Other long-time contributors who had a spare thingie to sell were tolerated or even encouraged. That's the policy I follow on some lists I manage. But I don't have to worry about meeting advertizing sales quotas.<hr /></blockquote>Bob,

As usual, very well stated! Thank you for your thoughts.

I see you are still proudly sporting your website signature (for the San Francisco Billiards Academy (http://www.sfbilliards.com/)). Good for you. I guess the BD signature police haven't hunted you down yet.

Catch you later,
Dave

dr_dave
03-30-2007, 08:50 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Rich R.:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr>What do you guys think?<hr /></blockquote>
As someone with no web site of my own, I guess I can discuss this issue as an independent party. /ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif

As I see it, there are several issues here.

From the administrations standpoint, by putting your site link in your signature, you are getting free advertising. Should you be required to pay for advertising a site where you sell your products?

Also, because you are still allowed to put your site link in your personal information, it is a little bit redundant to have that link in your signature.

My personal opinion is, you should be allowed to include your link in your signature, regardless of the nature of your web site, as long as you are taking part in the discussions and not just here to pimp your product or service.<hr /></blockquote>
Thank you for your thoughts. Sounds reasonable to me. I haven't been called a pimp by anybody yet, so I guess that's good.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Rich R.:</font><hr>To be honest Dr. Dave, I find your constant referral to your site, for information on every discussion, to be much more irritating than your link in your signature. I would prefer if you just said your piece and let it go, like everyone else. JMHO.<hr /></blockquote>Others have complained about this also, but often "my piece" is often already expressed in an article or in a video demonstration or in a past thread. That's why I just link to what I have already expressed, so I won't have to keep on expressing it over and over and over again. Thank you for you honest feedback though. I will try to be more sensitive to this by providing links only when I feel the resource is totally pertinent to the discussion.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Rich R.:</font><hr>Since you are a member of the BD community, why don't you go to the powers that be and obtain some clarification on this issue. Do they even know what the administrator is doing? After all, it is common knowledge that the administrator of this site has his own, competing, site. That alone can be considered a conflict of interests. It is possible, he is trying to restrict traffic in some way.<hr /></blockquote>I have already expressed my opinions and concerns to the administrator. I don't think the administrator has any negative intents ... he's just too busy to deal with all of the things that come up in his job.

Thanks again for your thoughts,
Dave

Paul_Mon
03-31-2007, 07:03 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr>
So here are my questions:

1.) Do you think it was appropriate for me to be asked to remove my signature, based on the content and "feel" of my website?

<font color="purple"> No I don't think it is appropriate. Looks more like sour grapes </font color>



2.) Do you think it is appropriate for others (e.g., instructors, retailers, other resource providers) to continue to include web links in their signatures?

<font color="red"> No, not if you can not have yours linked. </font color>

<hr /></blockquote>

BigRigTom
03-31-2007, 10:00 AM
I think your link should be allowed!
I have a link in my signature and no one has complained ...yet.
I occasionally link to a product on my site as a matter of reference or to help someone find and research a particular subject. I have also follow links provided by others and was thankful for them.
Sounds like there must be another issue behind this story that we haven't heard yet.
Good luck with getting it all out in the open.

Snapshot9
03-31-2007, 10:20 AM
I don't think there is anything wrong with it unless the forum has paid advertisers on the forum space.

Lets face it, getting traffic to your website is a chore, and most likely you would have to pay a search engine to get listed at the top of a search.

It also matters if it is a 1 thread link as opposed to ongoing, if ongoing then a small fee should be paid to the forum on a monthly basis.

DeadCrab
03-31-2007, 10:59 AM
FWIW, I found this forum from your website, not the other way around. If the administrator wants to eliminate the posting of signature links, they should also request that commercial sites not provide a link to Billiards Digest.

It is a two way street.

jjinfla
03-31-2007, 06:20 PM
Dr. Dave,

Be ever so thankful that his royal highness did not ban you.

I'll bet that he wanted to.

Jake

scaramouche
04-01-2007, 03:19 AM
It seems to me that anything being sold on your site can be downloaded for free from your site in bits and pieces.

All you seem to be doing is consolidating the information onto CDs and offering them for sale. This is just my assumption; I haven't ordered your CDs and so do not know what is on them.

I made up a CD from your clips to experiment with software that came with my computer, adding introductory music with the titles: Eartha Kitt singing Mack the Knife - Oh the shark has such teeth dear .... The running time is about what you advertise for one of your CDs.

My conclusion is that your site is not commercial because you are a rotten marketer who should study more porn sites - learn to offer just a free tease of what you are trying to sell.

You have a huge FREE information souce and the board should allow your signature.

MrLucky
04-01-2007, 07:09 AM
<font color="green">Contrary to many of the posters on these sites I always find your post and information helpful and accurate! I have used your links often to learn and improve my game which in my opinion is or should be at the heart of what these sites are for! Now to play devils advocate I partially understand their stance as a business not desiring competitors to advertise for free on the site <font color="red"> but !</font color> there should be a thought on there side as to what enhances this and other site and what detracts from it ! IMO! You are most definitely and ENHANCEMENT! </font color> /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif

dr_dave
04-01-2007, 08:43 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote scaramouche:</font><hr> It seems to me that anything being sold on your site can be downloaded for free from your site in bits and pieces.

All you seem to be doing is consolidating the information onto CDs and offering them for sale. This is just my assumption; I haven't ordered your CDs and so do not know what is on them.

I made up a CD from your clips to experiment with software that came with my computer, adding introductory music with the titles: Eartha Kitt singing Mack the Knife - Oh the shark has such teeth dear .... The running time is about what you advertise for one of your CDs.

My conclusion is that your site is not commercial because you are a rotten marketer who should study more porn sites - learn to offer just a free tease of what you are trying to sell.

You have a huge FREE information souce and the board should allow your signature. <hr /></blockquote>You are correct. My CD-ROM is nothing more than the portion of my website that directly supports my book. I offer the CD-ROM mostly for people who don't have a high-speed or convenient Internet connection, or if they want to bring a laptop to a pool table where Internet access might not be available. Also, some people just like to have their own copy that they can hold in their hands. Also, some of my instructional articles summarize (and sometimes directly quote) stuff from my book. Also, my DVD is really just a higher quality production of the website info with added illustrations from the book with narrated explanations.

However, this material is for sale; so the website can therefore be considered "commercial." Although, my website does provide lots and lots of free resources that I encourage instructors and students to use. I guess if I wanted to make more money, I would take your suggestion and use the porn marketing model, and offer advertising space, and start endorsing crappy products.

Thank you for your input,
Dave

dr_dave
04-01-2007, 08:44 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote MrLucky:</font><hr> <font color="green">Contrary to many of the posters on these sites I always find your post and information helpful and accurate! I have used your links often to learn and improve my game which in my opinion is or should be at the heart of what these sites are for! Now to play devils advocate I partially understand their stance as a business not desiring competitors to advertise for free on the site <font color="red"> but !</font color> there should be a thought on there side as to what enhances this and other site and what detracts from it ! IMO! You are most definitely and ENHANCEMENT! </font color> /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif <hr /></blockquote>Thank you for your kind and supportive words.

Regards,
Dave

wolfdancer
04-01-2007, 12:03 PM
There are "signatures" here, that are directly involved in sales. Since the bulk of your "products" can be downloaded freely.....it's a stretch to consider it as an EBay rival.
I'm not sure why a reference to a video, or "proof" on your site, would be irritating...I seldom feel the need to "double-check"..and since i skipped school the day they taught physics....it would be Greek to me.
However while I can see that knowing stuff like "modulus of elasticity" could add to my hi-run of 14 in straight pool....how come I never see Bernoulli's Principle summarized?....as the match pressure increases, it affects the flow of the game
I believe you were asked to remove your signature at the behest of one, or maybe two, of the members here

dr_dave
04-01-2007, 12:40 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote wolfdancer:</font><hr> There are "signatures" here, that are directly involved in sales. Since the bulk of your "products" can be downloaded freely.....it's a stretch to consider it as an EBay rival.
I'm not sure why a reference to a video, or "proof" on your site, would be irritating...I seldom feel the need to "double-check"..and since i skipped school the day they taught physics....it would be Greek to me.
However while I can see that knowing stuff like "modulus of elasticity" could add to my hi-run of 14 in straight pool....how come I never see Bernoulli's Principle summarized?....as the match pressure increases, it affects the flow of the game
I believe you were asked to remove your signature at the behest of one, or maybe two, of the members here<hr /></blockquote>That was my sense also, but I just wanted to see what others thought.

Thanks,
Dave

<font color="blue">www.bogus.org - fake link formerly known as a signature</font color>

PS: Cute Bernoulli reference. I think you've been reading too much lately, and trying to learn. You better stop ... somebody might try to beat you up after class. /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif

Cornerman
04-01-2007, 03:01 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr>
What do you guys think?

<hr /></blockquote>I think it's simple. The use of signatures to point to commercial sites has been very generously allowed by the CCB moderators. It's normally looked down on. I don't think it's unreasonable for the moderator to look at each poster separately. It's the moderator's discretion to judge if the poster is pushing the boundaries of generosity.

Fred

dr_dave
04-01-2007, 06:12 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Cornerman:</font><hr>I think it's simple. The use of signatures to point to commercial sites has been very generously allowed by the CCB moderators. It's normally looked down on. I don't think it's unreasonable for the moderator to look at each poster separately. It's the moderator's discretion to judge if the poster is pushing the boundaries of generosity.<hr /></blockquote>I don't disagree with you. However, I do wonder if you think I was somehow "pushing the boundaries of generosity" by including a signature link to my site (which is mostly resources). I know it really doesn't matter what you think in this situation. I'm just curious what you do think because I respect your opinion.

Thanks,
Dave

Tom_In_Cincy
04-01-2007, 11:15 PM
It figures... I thought this was an April Fools joke.. I came home from the pool tournament tonight to get to your site and order your Book, CD and DVD and NO Web Link in your post's signature.

I was miffed for about 10 minutes thinking how am I going to find your link... then while reading the responses.. I saw that you had it in your profile... thanks.

Lots of players do not have internet access and I usually have my laptop at the pool hall or at least during some of my visits.

Most of what your short videos show, are items of discussion in our pool hall and I thought it would be nice to have a resource that could be seen there.

Maybe later this year we can get the pool hall to have WiFi for laptop internet access so this won't be necessary, but until then... your book, cd and dvd will have to do.

By the way, I took a collection and there are 5 of us going in on this purchase and I am the lucky one that is the keeper of the goods.

To stay on topic my opinion, if you are selling something and want people to purchase you advertise, it costs to advertise. While there has been a lot of posters that provide websites for services (sales or education/training), it never bothered me. But, I don't care for outright SPAM.

If you want people to visit you website and see or read something that you want to comment on in a reply to a post, I don't have a problem with that. Just make the link exclusive of any 'sales' reference.

Cornerman
04-02-2007, 02:20 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Cornerman:</font><hr>I think it's simple. The use of signatures to point to commercial sites has been very generously allowed by the CCB moderators. It's normally looked down on. I don't think it's unreasonable for the moderator to look at each poster separately. It's the moderator's discretion to judge if the poster is pushing the boundaries of generosity.<hr /></blockquote>I don't disagree with you. However, I do wonder if you think I was somehow "pushing the boundaries of generosity" by including a signature link to my site (which is mostly resources). I know it really doesn't matter what you think in this situation. I'm just curious what you do think because I respect your opinion.

Thanks,
Dave <hr /></blockquote>It's not the signature in of itself. So, it's not as simple as saying that. Other people put their signature and rarely ever mention their site. Bob Jewett only puts links to documents in his site. You push your site. And your site is commercial. Surely you see the difference.

Fred &lt;~~~ doesn't care one way or the other, but the moderators rule the roost.

Gayle in MD
04-02-2007, 08:57 AM
Dr Dave,
I often find a lack of consistancy regarding such issues, here, on the CCB. If they're asking you to do this, then every single one of the other people who use signatures to advertise their teaching credentials, or products, in their signatures, etc., should also be asked to remove their signatures.

Also, I find it puzzling that anyone would be irritated by a reference to your sight, and particularly anyone interested in the general promotion of, and love for the game of pool, to which so many here claim devotion. Seems to me, whether for your intellect, or the interest many have shown in the results of your experimentations, some have been occupied by the little green man! Politics is a nasty business... /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif

Gayle in Md.

dr_dave
04-02-2007, 09:11 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Tom_In_Cincy:</font><hr> It figures... I thought this was an April Fools joke.. I came home from the pool tournament tonight to get to your site and order your Book, CD and DVD and NO Web Link in your post's signature.

I was miffed for about 10 minutes thinking how am I going to find your link... then while reading the responses.. I saw that you had it in your profile... thanks.

Lots of players do not have internet access and I usually have my laptop at the pool hall or at least during some of my visits.

Most of what your short videos show, are items of discussion in our pool hall and I thought it would be nice to have a resource that could be seen there.

Maybe later this year we can get the pool hall to have WiFi for laptop internet access so this won't be necessary, but until then... your book, cd and dvd will have to do.

By the way, I took a collection and there are 5 of us going in on this purchase and I am the lucky one that is the keeper of the goods.<hr /></blockquote>Thank you for your story. It is nice to hear that my stuff is being put to good use.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Tom_In_Cincy:</font><hr>To stay on topic my opinion, if you are selling something and want people to purchase you advertise, it costs to advertise. While there has been a lot of posters that provide websites for services (sales or education/training), it never bothered me. But, I don't care for outright SPAM.

If you want people to visit you website and see or read something that you want to comment on in a reply to a post, I don't have a problem with that. Just make the link exclusive of any 'sales' reference.<hr /></blockquote>That's a good point. As long as people link directly to free resources (videos, articles, links, thread summaries), and don't link to pages with product and/or purchase info, maybe the link-haters won't be annoyed as much. I always try to do this, but I will try harder.

Regards,
Dave

dr_dave
04-02-2007, 09:27 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Cornerman:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Cornerman:</font><hr>I think it's simple. The use of signatures to point to commercial sites has been very generously allowed by the CCB moderators. It's normally looked down on. I don't think it's unreasonable for the moderator to look at each poster separately. It's the moderator's discretion to judge if the poster is pushing the boundaries of generosity.<hr /></blockquote>I don't disagree with you. However, I do wonder if you think I was somehow "pushing the boundaries of generosity" by including a signature link to my site (which is mostly resources). I know it really doesn't matter what you think in this situation. I'm just curious what you do think because I respect your opinion.

Thanks,
Dave <hr /></blockquote>It's not the signature in of itself. So, it's not as simple as saying that. Other people put their signature and rarely ever mention their site. Bob Jewett only puts links to documents in his site. You push your site. And your site is commercial. Surely you see the difference.<hr /></blockquote>Fred,

Thank you for the clarification. I do post many more links than Bob does; but, as with Bob's links, they point directly to resources (videos, articles, glossary, drills, rules, threads, etc.). I do this only when I think the resources address directly the topic being discussed. You apparently see this as "pushing my site." I (and I think many others) don't see it this way. I see it as being excited about sharing something I worked hard to create.

Concerning Bob's site, I think it is just as (if not more) "commercial" as mine, because his site (http://www.sfbilliards.com/) offers courses and instruction for hire (although, his rates are very reasonable). This doesn't bother me one bit, and I hope it doesn't bother others too much, because Bob also has lots of great free resources on his website, and Bob has been a long-time, high-impact contributor to this forum.

Regards,
Dave

BigRigTom
04-02-2007, 09:38 AM
Dr. Dave,
As much as you contribute to this board and as much info as you have compiled maybe you should look at this whole situation differently.

Apparently someone at the CCB does not appreciate your efforts as much as others of us do sooooooooooo....

Why don't you consider starting your own forum, host it on your site and then you don't have to endure the scutiny of those "Power that be" who think they know what is good for the rest of us.

I will be happy to be one of the 1st members to register at your forum if you choose to have one.

dr_dave
04-02-2007, 09:43 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr> Dr Dave,
I often find a lack of consistancy regarding such issues, here, on the CCB. If they're asking you to do this, then every single one of the other people who use signatures to advertise their teaching credentials, or products, in their signatures, etc., should also be asked to remove their signatures.

Also, I find it puzzling that anyone would be irritated by a reference to your sight, and particularly anyone interested in the general promotion of, and love for the game of pool, to which so many here claim devotion. Seems to me, whether for your intellect, or the interest many have shown in the results of your experimentations, some have been occupied by the little green man! Politics is a nasty business... /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif

Gayle in Md. <hr /></blockquote>Gayle,

Thank you for sharing your thoughts. I appreciate it.

I think if people are irritated by my links to resources, then they should just exercise their right to not click on the links.

Have a nice week,
Dave

dr_dave
04-02-2007, 09:49 AM
Tom,

I appreciate the encouragement, but I plan to remain loyal to Billiards Digest. They went out on a limb when they started publishing my monthly instructional column years ago, even though I was just some unknown mechanical engineering professor. I am grateful to them for that, and I plan to remain as an active member on this forum.

Regards,
Dave

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote BigRigTom:</font><hr> Dr. Dave,
As much as you contribute to this board and as much info as you have compiled maybe you should look at this whole situation differently.

Apparently someone at the CCB does not appreciate your efforts as much as others of us do sooooooooooo....

Why don't you consider starting your own forum, host it on your site and then you don't have to endure the scutiny of those "Power that be" who think they know what is good for the rest of us.

I will be happy to be one of the 1st members to register at your forum if you choose to have one. <hr /></blockquote>

Gayle in MD
04-02-2007, 09:52 AM
I agree. Some would rather whine, than take responsibility for what they choose to read. Funny, we're all pool shooters, yet the scrolling function seems to be beyond their ability. /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif


Gayle in Md.

BigRigTom
04-02-2007, 10:07 AM
That is a good point and I am glad to hear you will hang in there.
I read all your articles in BD and usually keep and re-read them several times...(still don't fully understand them some times) but I always learn something and I have come to believe that when I learn it with you as the source that it will be more accurate and reliable than most of the other sources I have come across over the years.

Keep the faith and I hope those "Powers that be" behind this forum are paying attention to this thread as well. /ccboard/images/graemlins/cool.gif

SpiderMan
04-02-2007, 11:51 AM
Dave,

My personal opinion (it's personal opinions you are seeking, right?) is that the balance of materials on your website runs far to the side of free and informative, not the commercial.

Let me go out on a limb here and suggest that the "advertising" concern may be a "red herring".

Perhaps what the BD staff really objects to is not the commercial content, which doesn't compete with them, but the free content, which does. You give away more data at your site than the sum total of their columnists publishes in a year.

So I can't blame them for wanting you to take out the link.

SpiderMan

dr_dave
04-02-2007, 12:03 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote SpiderMan:</font><hr> Dave,

My personal opinion (it's personal opinions you are seeking, right?) is that the balance of materials on your website runs far to the side of free and informative, not the commercial.

Let me go out on a limb here and suggest that the "advertising" concern may be a "red herring".

Perhaps what the BD staff really objects to is not the commercial content, which doesn't compete with them, but the free content, which does. You give away more data at your site than the sum total of their columnists publishes in a year.

So I can't blame them for wanting you to take out the link.<hr /></blockquote>Spiderman,

Interesting conspiracy theory. However, I think what probably happened is that one or two vocal users with clout just complained. Specific complaints are usually addressed. General policing is not practical or even possible.

I very much appreciate all of the support from you and others.

Thanks,
Dave

SpiderMan
04-02-2007, 12:08 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote SpiderMan:</font><hr> Dave,

My personal opinion (it's personal opinions you are seeking, right?) is that the balance of materials on your website runs far to the side of free and informative, not the commercial.

Let me go out on a limb here and suggest that the "advertising" concern may be a "red herring".

Perhaps what the BD staff really objects to is not the commercial content, which doesn't compete with them, but the free content, which does. You give away more data at your site than the sum total of their columnists publishes in a year.

So I can't blame them for wanting you to take out the link.<hr /></blockquote>Spiderman,

Interesting conspiracy theory. However, I think what probably happened is that one or two vocal users with clout just complained. Specific complaints are usually addressed. General policing is not practical or even possible.

I very much appreciate all of the support from you and others.

Thanks,
Dave <hr /></blockquote>

In that case, perhaps they'll relent so as not to appear conspiring /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

SpiderMan

dr_dave
04-02-2007, 01:07 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote SpiderMan:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote SpiderMan:</font><hr> Dave,

My personal opinion (it's personal opinions you are seeking, right?) is that the balance of materials on your website runs far to the side of free and informative, not the commercial.

Let me go out on a limb here and suggest that the "advertising" concern may be a "red herring".

Perhaps what the BD staff really objects to is not the commercial content, which doesn't compete with them, but the free content, which does. You give away more data at your site than the sum total of their columnists publishes in a year.

So I can't blame them for wanting you to take out the link.<hr /></blockquote>Spiderman,

Interesting conspiracy theory. However, I think what probably happened is that one or two vocal users with clout just complained. Specific complaints are usually addressed. General policing is not practical or even possible.

I very much appreciate all of the support from you and others.

Thanks,
Dave <hr /></blockquote>

In that case, perhaps they'll relent so as not to appear conspiring /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

SpiderMan <hr /></blockquote>
I like the way you think.

Thanks,
Dave

Cornerman
04-02-2007, 01:28 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> Fred,

Thank you for the clarification. I do post many more links than Bob does;<hr /></blockquote> I'm not sure what that has anything to do with anything.

[ QUOTE ]
but, as with Bob's links, they point directly to resources (videos, articles, glossary, drills, rules, threads, etc.). I do this only when I think the resources address directly the topic being discussed. You apparently see this as "pushing my site." I (and I think many others) don't see it this way. I see it as being excited about sharing something I worked hard to create.
<hr /></blockquote> It doesn't matter how I see it, nor does it matter how your supporters see it. It only matters how the moderators see it. If they would like to clarify with you, then they should. But, you must be open to the fact that there's a difference between your signature and site and other people's signature and site.

[ QUOTE ]
Concerning Bob's site, I think it is just as (if not more) "commercial" as mine, because <hr /></blockquote> It's not. You can't purchase anything from that site. And I'm sure Bob understands that his signature pointing to his site is a privilege that he's not going to push.

I think the moderators and you should have a private discussion on what they see as wrong, and what you can do to keep within their guidelines. Asking our opinions is only going to make things unruly. This isn't a democracy.

Fred

dr_dave
04-02-2007, 02:49 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Cornerman:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr>Thank you for the clarification. I do post many more links than Bob does;<hr /></blockquote> I'm not sure what that has anything to do with anything.<hr /></blockquote>It doesn't mean anything taken out of context like this; but I thought it made perfect sense in response to your earlier message, if taken in full context with my full reply. But I don't want to argue with you over this silly point, especially since I don't even know what point you are trying to make. /ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Cornerman:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr>but, as with Bob's links, they point directly to resources (videos, articles, glossary, drills, rules, threads, etc.). I do this only when I think the resources address directly the topic being discussed. You apparently see this as "pushing my site." I (and I think many others) don't see it this way. I see it as being excited about sharing something I worked hard to create.<hr /></blockquote> It doesn't matter how I see it<hr /></blockquote>Agreed, but I wanted to know what you thought. Now I know. Thank you.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Cornerman:</font><hr>nor does it matter how your supporters see it. It only matters how the moderators see it. If they would like to clarify with you, then they should.<hr /></blockquote>Again, agreed.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Cornerman:</font><hr>But, you must be open to the fact that there's a difference between your signature and site and other people's signature and site.<hr /></blockquote>There are lots of differences:
- some have mostly resources and some products (e.g., my website)
- some have only products (e.g., cues, instructional material, supplies, etc.)
- some have only courses, instruction, and/or exhibitions for sale
- some have courses, instruction, exhibitions, and products for sale
- some have courses and instruction for sale (or "for hire" if you prefer) along with lots of resources (e.g., Bob's site)

I don't think I have seen any signature lines that are totally "non-commercial," in the strictest sense of the word.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Cornerman:</font><hr><blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr>Concerning Bob's site, I think it is just as (if not more) "commercial" as mine, because <hr /></blockquote> It's not. You can't purchase anything from that site.<hr /></blockquote>Maybe I'm just dense, but when I look at the main page of Bob's signature site (www.sfbilliards.com (http://www.sfbilliards.com/)), it sure looks to me that they are offering services for a price. Now, you can't pay online with the click of a button, but you can certainly send an e-mail or make a phone call to make arrangements to pay. The page is there to offer services and find customers. Sounds "commercial" to me. Now, I don't want this to turn into a Dave vs. Bob (or anybody else) issue. That was never my intent. I consider the articles and drills posted on Bob's site to be a great resource, and I am glad his site is available. In fact, I have many links to Bob's stuff on my website. I just wanted to respond to what you wrote.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Cornerman:</font><hr>And I'm sure Bob understands that his signature pointing to his site is a privilege that he's not going to push.<hr /></blockquote>I agree he doesn't "push it," although the link does appear in every message he posts. Lately, he has also started linking to some of the numerous articles he has on his website (which I consider a great resource). I also see no harm in this. In fact, I appreciate it, because I don't remember every past article I have read. Also, Bob can find his articles for a given topic faster than I can, so I consider it a welcome service when he provides links.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Cornerman:</font><hr>I think the moderators and you should have a private discussion on what they see as wrong, and what you can do to keep within their guidelines. Asking our opinions is only going to make things unruly. This isn't a democracy.<hr /></blockquote>Thank you for the advice. I didn't see any reason to fight them. I just accepted and complied with their request, as I did with the change in my article-posting practice.

I just wanted to see what people thought about it, because the decision took me by surprise.

Thanks,
Dave

Rich R.
04-02-2007, 04:54 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> Now, I don't want this to turn into a Dave vs. Bob (or anybody else) issue. That was never my intent. <hr /></blockquote>
Now you have me totally confused. This entire thread has been about what you can't do as opposed to what others are allowed to do.
In your initial post you said:
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr>So here are my questions:

1.) Do you think it was appropriate for me to be asked to remove my signature, based on the content and "feel" of my website?

2.) Do you think it is appropriate for others (e.g., instructors, retailers, other resource providers) to continue to include web links in their signatures?
<hr /></blockquote>
If that didn't start things out with the idea of Dr. Dave vs. every member with a link in their signature line, I don't know what it is.

At this point, I'm not sure what your intentions are with this thread. Are you looking for some type of approval from us, the forum members? If so, I think you will find that 99% of us don't really give a damn about links in signature lines. Your beef is with the administrator and you should be discussing this with him. He is the one who seems to have a problem with your link. After all, we, the members, can't ask you to remove your link and we can't ban you, when you do use it. The administrator is the only one who can do anything about this situation.

dr_dave
04-02-2007, 05:06 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Rich R.:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> Now, I don't want this to turn into a Dave vs. Bob (or anybody else) issue. That was never my intent. <hr /></blockquote>
Now you have me totally confused. This entire thread has been about what you can't do as opposed to what others are allowed to do.
In your initial post you said:
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr>So here are my questions:

1.) Do you think it was appropriate for me to be asked to remove my signature, based on the content and "feel" of my website?

2.) Do you think it is appropriate for others (e.g., instructors, retailers, other resource providers) to continue to include web links in their signatures?
<hr /></blockquote>
If that didn't start things out with the idea of Dr. Dave vs. every member with a link in their signature line, I don't know what it is.

At this point, I'm not sure what your intentions are with this thread. Are you looking for some type of approval from us, the forum members? If so, I think you will find that 99% of us don't really give a damn about links in signature lines. Your beef is with the administrator and you should be discussing this with him. He is the one who seems to have a problem with your link. After all, we, the members, can't ask you to remove your link and we can't ban you, when you do use it. The administrator is the only one who can do anything about this situation. <hr /></blockquote>Rich,

I did not want to target specific users who have links in their signatures. I also don't want to argue with the administrator. However, I was confused about the apparent inequity of the demand placed on me. I just wanted people to be aware of what was being done, and I wanted to try to better understand why. I also wanted to know what different people thought about the situation. I think it is better if things like this are discussed out in the open because the debate helps establish expectations and unofficial rules for the forum.

Regards,
Dave

Rich R.
04-02-2007, 05:26 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr>Rich,

I did not want to target specific users who have links in their signatures. I also don't want to argue with the administrator. However, I was confused about the apparent inequity of the demand placed on me. I just wanted people to be aware of what was being done, and I wanted to try to better understand why. I also wanted to know what different people thought about the situation. I think it is better if things like this are discussed out in the open because the debate helps establish expectations and unofficial rules for the forum. <hr /></blockquote>
Dr. Dave, although you say you don't want to target others with signature links, you must realize that just starting this thread targets them.

If you don't want to argue with the administrator, why even bring this up. Members of the forum can't do anything to change the situation. We don't make the rules and we do not decide who is breaking them.

As far as the inequity of the way rules are applied, I think we all know it. It happens on all forums, not just this one. Actually, there is another major pool forum where it is much worse than it is here. However, as Fred said, "This isn't a democracy".

If you aren't willing to argue with the administrator or plead your case to the powers that be at BD, there isn't much we can do for you.

wolfdancer
04-02-2007, 05:32 PM
I don't think there is any "conspiracy" here. It's BD's site, and they have extended the courtesy/privilege of allowing us to publish our thoughts here, and they can set their own guidelines for that .....they banned me once for straying from pool related articles (this was before they allowed the anarchist NPR site)
I can see that by a strict interpretation of the "rules" both your pre-posting articles, and linking back to your own site, might be considered violations......
I doubt though that either one came up on the radar screen until someone(s) pointed it out, and made an issue of it.
It's pretty obvious that "links" have been, and are still allowed here.....but it's not like it's a flea market for cues....
Can you still reference a video on your site? If not, someone, somewhere, is gloating.....
They used to open, preview Musicals in Boston, before taking them to Broadway....problem was, we were so entertainment starved, everything went over big...and what "played" in Boston, might not "play" in NYC.
Apparently your site, and references to it, doesn't "play" in Fla......

Qtec
04-02-2007, 07:42 PM
[ QUOTE ]
If you don't want to argue with the administrator, why even bring this up. <hr /></blockquote>
Exactly!
Q

Qtec
04-02-2007, 07:49 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Interesting conspiracy theory. However, I think what probably happened is that one or two vocal users with clout just complained. <hr /></blockquote>

Or maybe the admin actually did get round to reading a couple of your posts! /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Q........couldn't care less about signatures.

wolfdancer
04-02-2007, 09:59 PM
I'd guess that after looking around at all the signature links here, that lead to a product, or service for sale, and comparing them to his site, where the priority is information, he's not only wondering why...but trying to take the pulse of the members here, on the issue.
First there was the passive/aggressive rants, then the ethics "violation" on pre-screening an article....(I'm beginning to see a pattern emerge....)
I'd venture to guess that the good doctor, rubs the "right" people in the wrong way....
Too much free info, perhaps?
When I finish my book which exposes the entire pool teaching industry, how the feed us just bits of info, to insure repeat business.... "What they don't want you to know about pool" I hope they'll let me link directly to my sales dept.

wolfdancer
04-02-2007, 10:01 PM
"Or maybe the admin actually did get round to reading a couple of your posts!"
You better hope they don't get around to reading yours!!!! /ccboard/images/graemlins/shocked.gif : /ccboard/images/graemlins/mad.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/mad.gif

MrLucky
04-02-2007, 10:15 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote wolfdancer:</font><hr> I don't think there is any "conspiracy" here. It's BD's site, and they have extended the courtesy/privilege of allowing us to publish our thoughts here, and they can set their own guidelines for that .....they banned me once for straying from pool related articles (this was before they allowed the anarchist NPR site)
I can see that by a strict interpretation of the "rules" both your pre-posting articles, and linking back to your own site, might be considered violations......
I doubt though that either one came up on the radar screen until someone(s) pointed it out, and made an issue of it.
It's pretty obvious that "links" have been, and are still allowed here.....but it's not like it's a flea market for cues....
Can you still reference a video on your site? If not, someone, somewhere, is gloating.....
They used to open, preview Musicals in Boston, before taking them to Broadway....problem was, we were so entertainment starved, everything went over big...and what "played" in Boston, might not "play" in NYC.
Apparently your site, and references to it, doesn't "play" in Fla......
<hr /></blockquote> <font color="green"> I think with this post having taken over the Forum that someone from BD would have entered this discussion by this point to explain or at least elaborate / clarify their position ! In the old days "Silence was Golden" but this is 2007 </font color> /ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif

dr_dave
04-03-2007, 10:11 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Rich R.:</font><hr>If you don't want to argue with the administrator, why even bring this up. Members of the forum can't do anything to change the situation. We don't make the rules and we do not decide who is breaking them.<hr /></blockquote>Actually, in effect, I think the members do make the rules. The administrator does not moderate these forums. He has too much other stuff to do. The administrator relies on the veteran posters to help enforce written and unwritten policies. This is pretty much a direct paraphrase from my discussion with the administrator.

When a user gets out of control, members contact the administrator and he addresses things if he thinks action is appropriate. For example, recently when Fast Larry re-appeared, many of us informed the administrator, and the administrator took action. Concerning my signature, a highly respected person complained and the administrator asked me to remove my signature. I immediately complied with the administrator's wishes. However, I did let him know that it might be considered unfair that others are allowed to keep links in their signatures, especially the ones that are blatantly commercial.

I'm done with this. I just wanted to make people aware of what was going on and find out what others thought. I think these discussions are important because we mostly self-moderate our forum.

Regards,
Dave

dr_dave
04-03-2007, 10:15 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote wolfdancer:</font><hr>Can you still reference a video on your site? If not, someone, somewhere, is gloating...<hr /></blockquote>Yes. Direct links to pertinent resources (videos, articles, past threads, drills, summary documents, etc.) are still appropriate and allowed, provided no advertising or product or service sales info appears on the linked material.

Regards,
Dave

Eric.
04-03-2007, 04:56 PM
As usual Rich, very well put.

The bottom line is that this post has very little value/Pool content and is basically, a well worded, long winded rant/whine.

This is off topic, but I find it sad when forums die a slow, twisting death typically because one person wants to make it their own personal pulpit. Unfortunately, it happens a lot.


Eric

BRussell
04-03-2007, 05:37 PM
I just want to take this brief moment to encourage everyone here to eat at McDonald's™ (http://mcdonalds.com/), drink Pepsi™ (http://pepsi.com/), and buy Nike (http://www.nike.com/). Now back to your regularly-scheduled pool programming.

Qtec
04-03-2007, 09:07 PM
Wolf, if I was directing people to my site where you could buy the sex tape of Rove and Coulter, the Truth abot 0/11 and how to become a brilliant player in 10 easy lessons, without ever seeing a pool table, then maybe, just maybe, you could compare me with Dr Dave. LMAO

Just kidding. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

dave frequently makes reference to his DVD, book etc. Its not allowed.

is it fair? Probably not.

Qtec

Qtec
04-03-2007, 09:41 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Too much free info, perhaps? <hr /></blockquote>

There is nothing on Dave's site that is new [ except maybe a few formulae].
This info has been available on the net for years. What Dave has done has brought it all together.

I will tell you a story.
One of my best friends and long time pupil- six times Dutch snooker Champ-is now playing pool.
We have been working together recently and I explained the major differences between pool and snooker. Anyway.
he is playing a good player capable of running 2/3 racks.
9ball. My guy gives 4 start in a race to 11. He shoots 7 racks in from winning the lag.
8Ball. he shoots 6 racks in a row!
Staight pool. He makes 29 and them 80! Last time against the guy he made a 100!
The guy basically sat in his chair and watched my guy play. He is also a friend and I actually felt for him.
My guy didn't miss a ball for an hour!
It was exquisite.
Two good players. One performs, the other doesn't. Thats what its all about. The details/physics are incidental.


Dave's website provides information, it doesn't tell you how to improve YOUR game. I,m not slamming Dave, just pointiong out a fact.
JMO of couse.



Qtec ............Qtec's 7 day Chump to Champ course.........www.chumptochamp.com /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Qtec
04-03-2007, 10:12 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> On and off, over the years, I have included the following signature in my forum profile:

Illustrated Principles of Pool and Billiards (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/pool)

As with anybody that has a signature, this link would appear beneath all of my postings. I thought this was useful so people could easily access my site whenever they wanted, with a click of the mouse.

Recently, I was asked by the CCB administrator to remove my signature. His reasoning was that since my products are offered for sale on my website, the signature could be perceived as advertising. Commercial advertising (e.g. product promotion) is not allowed on this forum. <hr /></blockquote>


Mmmmmmmmmmmmm...........

Earlier.



[ QUOTE ]
"I've always assumed they have known since I've done it from day one. I think I told them several times."

"BD has absolutely no problem with me posting my stuff early. In fact, they understand and appreciate the value of open posting. It's all about sharing the best and most accurate information possible.

Thanks,
Dave "


<font color="blue"> So just to recap, Fran was right and you were talking out your a$$? [ LOL] and if you had taken Fran's advice instead of being condecending, you wouldn't be in this mess. Is that a fair assumption?</font color>

eg,
<font color="red"> "Wolfie,
Thank you for explaining. Now I understand how Fran was giving me a huge compliment. I feel so embarrassed, because I had just assumed that something was bothering her. Now I see how Fran thought that my article might be a huge value-adding feature that will help BD sell through the roof. That would totally explain why she thought it was inappropriate for me post the article pre-print. I guess she thought that the editors at BD didn't know what they were doing by letting such a value be released before publication. Fran, thank you for the extreme flattery. I am so sorry I assumed negative intent in your postings. I feel so stupid now.

Live and learn,
Dave

PS: I hope everybody knows that I am kidding; although, I can see how some people might interpret this post as passive (or active) aggression. If so, I hope they don't take it too hard. I'm just trying to find some humor in this awkward situation.
<hr /></blockquote></font color>

Seems to me that BD had no idea what you were doing.

Qtec

/ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

wolfdancer
04-04-2007, 02:03 AM
yer friend is a quick study.......

Gayle in MD
04-04-2007, 06:51 AM
Q
Here's a question, for which you may have an answer. Why didn't Fran send Dr.Dave a private message regarding the pre-publication issue, in the first place? /ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif

Gayle in Md.

wolfdancer
04-04-2007, 09:58 AM
Why didn't Donald Trump send Rosie a pm?

Gayle in MD
04-04-2007, 10:02 AM
/ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif LOL...

eg8r
04-04-2007, 11:15 AM
You are proving that you are capable of screwing up anything you involve yourself in. You are mixing up two completely different subjects.

eg8r

DickLeonard
04-05-2007, 08:27 AM
Eg8r Qtec has all the requirements to Join the Bush Team.####

Qtec
04-05-2007, 11:23 AM
My impression is that this thread is directly linked to the run-in with Fran on the the pre-pub issue. Dave thinks he is being persecuted and this is another injustice. /ccboard/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

[ QUOTE ]
Spiderman,

Interesting conspiracy theory. However, I think what probably happened is that one or two vocal users with clout just complained."

Later he says,

"Concerning my signature, a highly respected person complained and the administrator asked me to remove my signature.
<hr /></blockquote>

Dave has been 'moderated' on and he can't accept it. /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif
he was wrong in the other thread and he is wrong on this one.

Qtec.......................


"BD has absolutely no problem with me posting my stuff early."

/ccboard/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

Qtec
04-05-2007, 11:25 AM
No Dick , I failed the ethics test [ turns out I actually have some /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif ]and the decency test. [ weighed in at just over an ounce! /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif]

Q