Why is the moderation team deleting every other post? kind of annoying..

The moderation team is doing more bad than good...

If your posts are being deleted then you probably aren't following the site rules.

not my posts, just posts on my threads by other people trying to help me but the moderation team deletes half of them for no reason...

Unfortunately the pursuit of thread topic perfection gets a bit out of hand around here when the OCD meds jar gets low in the break room.

hi
Which Threads and Posts are you referring too.??

Eric

meming said:

not my posts, just posts on my threads by other people trying to help me but the moderation team deletes half of them for no reason...

Click to expand...

hi meming,

I have checked Threads with your Posts, a reason has been posted on ALL the edits/deletions which have occurred in the last 2 days.

The Moderation team does not 'delete half of them with no reason', please state facts if you feel the need to complain.

I see the reasons for deletion, but I don't see why someone posting a link to their site in order to help someone should have their post deleted

meming said:

I see the reasons for deletion, but I don't see why someone posting a link to their site in order to help someone should have their post deleted

Click to expand...

I am pleased that you have now managed to see the reasons given for the deletions.

Regarding the links to the other site, this matter is being resolved by private messages to the member involved and is not your concern.

E.

its a good job the mods are so well paid!!! i sure as hell wouldnt do the job for any less on a personal note i wouldnt let my boy near the site if the moderation wasnt as tight as it is. besides its never personal so rarely worth getting in a stew about

It is easy to see the rationale for not allowing blatant self-endorsement in the text of a response, as the line between that and spam becomes blurred.

However, in every scientific, technical, and other scholarly publication/journal with which I am familiar, self-citation is not only allowed, but in most cases it is quite common. Obviously, there are multiple reasons for that, one of which is to put the current work into context.

In the matter alluded to above, the initial post asked a question about a circuit published on Colin55's site. As the ETO rule seems to be applied here, any member except Colin55 could have referenced the description given on that site. Why should the author of that site not be allowed to reference it?

Most important, Mr RB and Nigel (and perhaps others) have both referenced their excellent sites in the text of replies. Frankly, I see nothing wrong with that so long as it is not abused and made into spam. In fact, I think there are advantages to it and certainly good precedence for it.

The moderation team here has proved itself to be thoughtful. I don't think it should be hamstrung by a set of rigid rules that can end up being counterproductive for finding the solution to a problem.

Regards, John

I agree 100% with jpanhalt.

JimB

Talking Electronics is an excellent site and anybody should be able to link to it includung its author, Colin55.

tcmtech's response is right on the money.

OCD meds need adjusting.

I just posted that to see if it would get deleted and prove the OP's point.

I will try harder next time.

Since a certain member got booted a while back its almost impossible to get to anyone to feel that I am rubbing them the wrong way with any type of off beat comments about mental stability or medications.

(Did that do it?)

jpanhalt said:

Most important, Mr RB and Nigel (and perhaps others) have both referenced their excellent sites in the text of replies. Frankly, I see nothing wrong with that so long as it is not abused and made into spam. In fact, I think there are advantages to it and certainly good precedence for it.

Click to expand...

You appear to be ignoring the obvious differences - blatant advertising of a commercial site as opposed to links to entirely non-commercial sites (mine don't even have hit counters, never mind advertising).

hi,

This is ETO Admin's policy on personal web links.

Its required to have at least some of the information in the post text, by either writing it or quoting it from the link.
Links should be used as secondary sources or if the information is large summarise what part will be beneficial to the OP.
We prefer the thread to hold the answer to the initial question, instead of it within 3rd party links that may break in the future.

Members with more than 25 Posts have access to a Signature option as part of their 'My Account' settings.
Any links to your personal website can be included in a Post as part of your Signature text, not in the main body of the text.



Eric

Nigel Goodwin said:

You appear to be ignoring the obvious differences - blatant advertising of a commercial site as opposed to links to entirely non-commercial sites (mine don't even have hit counters, never mind advertising).

Click to expand...

From the first page of your link:

<snip> You can order it [the programmer] as a complete kit from Dontronics. I've been sent PCB layouts for a couple of modified versions of the P16PRO40, you can download details on how to build them, Ozipic by Martin Sniedze and P16PRO by Carlier Patrick, Carlier has offered to make small quantities of boards available, you can contact him on metacar@pi.be.

At one time there were plenty of P16PRO40 (and other) kits available, but these seem to have all but disappeared. Happily, I received an email from a gentleman called "Gajjar Dinesh" in India, who's now selling a parallel port ICSP programmer, and he kindly sent me a sample to evaluate. He dispatched the kit on 25th August, and I received it on 30th August, which I thought was pretty good considering it spanned a weekend and a bank holiday Monday! The kit includes a very high quality PCB (which you can order separately), and all the required components, and only took about half an hour to put together.

You can order the kit from his website at , it's the FD-ICP, and he also sent me the optional "Programming Adaptor Board" which allows you to use it as a normal (non-ICSP) programmer - I would suggest you order that as well.

Click to expand...

Those links are to products that are for sale. Your testimonial for Gajjar Dinesh business is a form of advertising. It really doesn't matter what arrangements you may have with those entities or what good consideration you might be getting. You say you get none, but remember that "consideration" does not need to involve money per se. The availability of support materials for your site is an enabler for whatever purposes you have that site.

Roman Black's site more clearly offers products for sale. I am sure I could find other examples on ETO, if that point were important.

Your assertion that I am ignoring the obvious differences does not make it so. Anyone can draw distinctions -- no two human efforts are exactly alike. That does not mean that such distinctions make important differences. If Colin55's site is so objectionable to you, why was the link in the original post allowed? Why is only Colin55 not allowed to link to his site in the context of responding to the question, while anyone else could do that?

Let me emphasize that I see absolutely nothing wrong with any links, including self-links to Roman Black's or Nigel Goodwins's sites. Even if they happen to make a profit or just get an ego boost, it is no business of ours. The same should apply to Collin55. None of this is to imply that blatant spammers, such as those selling knock-off handbags and shoes, shouldn't be summarily drawn and quartered.

John

What we are trying to avoid is people getting in the habit of posting 'go here for information: <insert link>' as the links eventually get changed (please note, I'm only referring to external links as these are the ones we can't control) and end up just directing the user to a broken URL. Down the track you end up with threads that relate to that information which becomes missing and in turn destroys the usefulness of that thread. This is the same problem that we had with linking to images hosted on other sites, when they were moved or deleted by whoever owns the third party site the post which links to it is destroyed as well as the thread in most cases.

We're not trying to block anyone from linking to any site, we're just trying to preserve the integrity of ETO. This issue only comes up on the rare occasion, most people are great at writing out valuable answers but when a user starts to knowing or unknowingly link to third party content we like to discuss it with them (privately) to resolve the issue.

Regards,
EM