Linking in threads

I put a link in a thread to another forum that was on topic and

about a half minute after it was edited and deleted. What is the

rule that I broke?

In general, photo.net has no problems with links to other web sites, including sites with missions that overlap ours, and which are competing to some extent for the same audience. You will see such links all over the site, and there are even a few pages that are basically dedicated to such links.

 

However, sometimes people post links that don't seem to be in the interests of the site. For example, we sometimes have to delete links to pornography web sites, etc.

 

Today in the Leica forum, people are posting links to a new web site founded by disgruntled members of the forum, some of whom have been recently banned. Perhaps you are referring to that. I deleted those because this new forum seems to have been set up specifically to entice people to abandon the Leica Forum, and I don't see that hosting posts that advertise or link to such a site are in the interests of photo.net or the Leica forum, and I choose not to give space or bandwidth to those posts. I hope this answers your question. If it doesn't, then perhaps you can provide more information about what site you were linking to.

Brian,

 

I appreciate the answer, and this "other forum" was the link that I posted. This new forum is set up for people who do not want the heavy moderation that the leica forum here at photo.net seems to have newly acquired. This kind of moderation was not here in the past and in the last two or three days it has gotten out of hand, with new moderators threatening to do some axe chopping. It seems to me that a link to another forum, about leica, containing the same members of the leica forum members here, is very on topic and would be a wealth of information to any member of photo.net.

 

I was and am quite upset that a thread that I posted to last night was snipped till it became very difficult to read, my posts that were on topic and actually answered the question were deleted. Three days ago this thread would have remained intact. Since you cannot give me an actual rule I broke and your only explanation is that the other forum has been created by leica forum members here and the fact that they are mad about the enforcement of a moderation policy that has never been enforced before, it seems to me a personal vendetta. I don't think that is right and it goes against what photo.net was, for me, which is a wealth of information. I am afraid I will not be renewing my membership contribution and I will no longer participate in a forum that is moderated with an unfair bias.

 

Thank you.

As I said, I deleted your post because we aren't under any obligation to retain advertisements. We leave most one-off links in posts because they seem to be in the interests of photo.net members, but photo.net members don't have the absolute right to post links and ads. That is what paid advertising is for.

 

If you want to set up an "free expression alternative" to the photo.net Leica Forum, don't you think it is a bit cheeky to use the resources of photo.net to advertise it? I notice that the moderator of the new forum is exhorting the new "members", all 5 of them, to spam photo.net with posts advertising the new site and linking to it. I'm afraid that is not going to work. I notice also that somebody has already raised the question of whether photo.net is likely to sue anyone over this and is asking for legal input. There is no reason to fear that, but if you start organizing efforts to spam this site with unpaid links, or try harvesting email addresses from here to advertise the site, I might reconsider. Theft of computer resources is a federal crime by the way, not just a civil offense.

<i> somebody has already raised the question of whether photo.net is likely to sue anyone

over this and is asking for legal input. There is no reason to fear that, but if you start

organizing efforts to spam this site with unpaid links, or try harvesting email addresses

from here to advertise the site, I might reconsider. </i><p>

 

I already received a soliciation from Frank, apparently sent to lots of participants in this

site's Leica forum. I forwarded it to Jeremy a few minutes ago.

I have been recently spammed 3 times (and this is unusual 4 me) but never bother to look at them, I'll bet it was in relation to this topic...;)...J

Oh my, Jay B. You just this month joined the photo.net community, and here you are on the verge of accusing others of what has been described (by Mr. Mottershead above) as a federal offense. Please allow this old litigator to urge a little more caution.

 

Very good photo of the child against the painted wall, by the way. Liked it.

M Sandberg,

"Verge of"..."may"...."could be"...;)...Don't mistake the blurb autobio as definitive or the "quintessential bourgeois american" ...;)...and thank you for your warm comments and e-mail...;)...J