Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Trillium

Getting sick of the .... blog spammers here !!!

Recommended Posts

Well since there is a lot of vitriol about this issue here I have decided to never post a link to my blog here ever again after today.

And yes El Hombre I am indeed a proud Voyageur as all of us here should be! I enjoyed hoisting a pint with you at the Peru game as well. The first Canadian game I ever saw by the way was the World Cup qualification clincher back in 1985 in St. John's in my first year of University and I have been a loyal fan ever since. I remember buying 20 tickets for the World Cup qualifier versus Jamaica at BMO Field and getting tickets into the hands of 19 friends who had never been to a game before with only one catch.... support Canada. Does that not qualify me as a Voyageur?

I do a blog about TFC. It is called "View From The South Stands" The URL is http://viewfromthesouthstands.com. If you like it please feel free to bookmark it or subscribe to my RSS feed.

If it is not your cup of tea then it is not your cup of tea.

Thank you.

Edited by bgnewf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The problem with this is "How do you define who is a Vee?"

BGNewf was at the Peru game and I believe he was at the pre-game and I hung out with him and had a couple pints post-game along with a number of other Vees. Does this not make him a Voyageur?

This is why I said earlier that you have to be careful when complaining about something like this because if you want a rule in place and you want the moderators to remove postings and reprimand people, then it has to be cut and dried with no gray area. It has to be clearly defined what is allowed and what isn't. It can't be subjective.

I completely agree. Since we are a loosely defined collection of individuals that support Canadian Soccer, and signing up to the board is a 3 minute process almost anyone can be a Voyageur.

So we need to look at this from a definition of how bloggers can start a new thread to promote their article. I feel they need to copy at least the first 1-2 paragraphs in the first post to give people a taste of what they are writing about. This can be followed by the link to read more and will at least give people an insight of what they are writing about before having to decide whether they want to leave the forum or not. Remember when bloggers take traffic away, there is a chance that less will be posted on the V's board as everyone's time is limited.

Another option is as Paul Collins suggested that blog links are not to be post on first post, meaning the topic must already have been created and you are contributing to in afterwords. I don't know how realistic that is, but it would make things flow better IMO.

Another option is for a blog section to be created for all things canadian soccer and let everyone blog dump in there so most of us can just ignore it. (I would not suggest this)

I personally just want to read the first bit of the blog before deciding whether I am going to spend my time over there, so I am in favour of idea 1.

Edited by Razcle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is why I posted earlier about the post content itself. One should never judge the post based on whether the poster is a member in good standing, but rather on the content.

The rule I laid out in my earlier post from my own boards about the OP of a thread not being the author of the blog post - that rule was a result of competing bloggers, some with great animosity directed at the forum owners as much as their blogging competition. It was more restrictive than would be strictly necessary here, I think - I'm not getting the "self promotion" biz vibe from the bloggers who post / posters who blog here. In this I agree with Razcle.

If this were my call, I probably would implement the OP rule strictly for the CSN bloggers given the need for the appearance of separation (especially given the integration of the sites - vBulletin's pointers are not always consistent in how they load up one "site" from the other). But I'd allow others to start their own threads based on the blog posts so long as there is enough of a quote in the post to properly start the discussion. This is a discussion forum and everything done here should be to advance discussion first and foremost, not drive traffic elsewhere.

Web-found news and opinion is an important part of those discussions. They will always have a part in the threads (especially as reference material). Just remember that the blogs support the board, not the other way around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well since there is a lot of vitriol about this issue here I have decided to never post a link to my blog here ever again after today.

And yes El Hombre I am indeed a proud Voyageur as all of us here should be! I enjoyed hoisting a pint with you at the Peru game as well. The first Canadian game I ever saw by the way was the World Cup qualification clincher back in 1985 in St. John's in my first year of University and I have been a loyal fan ever since. I remember buying 20 tickets for the World Cup qualifier versus Jamaica at BMO Field and getting tickets into the hands of 19 friends who had never been to a game before with only one catch.... support Canada. Does that not qualify me as a Voyageur?

I do a blog about TFC. It is called "View From The South Stands" The URL is http://viewfromthesouthstands.com. If you like it please feel free to bookmark it or subscribe to my RSS feed.

If it is not your cup of tea then it is not your cup of tea.

Thank you.

I will bookmark it, as I do in fact read it. And yes it is good and so are most of the youtube vlogs.

Nearly all of the threads you started in the TFC/MLS forum were already discussions, where your blog link would have been a great addition. Don't not give links just because of this thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I probably should add my perspective here. I've never understood why some people get worked up by someone taking the time to point to a blog they wrote. If it's about Canadian soccer, then, really, what's the problem? There are few ways to grow a blog audience. Promoting on relevant discussion boards is one.

Personally I very rarely post a link now because I'm aware that most here know how to find me. I only do so when I feel what I've written will be of interest and is newsworthy (i.e. Edgar to Norwich - I checked to make sure that there wasn't a thread already).

I can tell you that linking does increase traffic. I've actually been asked to post my links *more* on the U-Sector board because many there only have time to read the blogs on occasion and are interested in knowing when something is there that might be worthwhile to them. I'm not comfortable with that, but I have tried to post the odd link there lately.

All that said my biggest referrer by far is Twitter. I highly recommend new bloggers to get on Twitter and to use it as your main promotion vehicle. I post a link to 95% of what I do off of Twitter and 95% of the links I follow come from my Twitter feed.

@24thminute for those that don't know. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I'd like to see is everything in one thread. For example, I wish that the guy who does those good interviews with NT players would create a thread and keep updating it instead of starting a new thread every time he interviews somebody.

I don't think he gets the advantages. One stop shopping, if we want to find an interview they will all be in the same place, likely on the first page, because of the frequency of new interviews.

When he creates a new thread for every new interview they just slip off the first page to be long forgotten.

For example, the open source software thread I started in 2005 is still going strong because the people who are interested in the topic know where to find the information they want (one stop shopping). It also has (I believe) the most views of any thread at this website, mainly because of its access.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What I'd like to see is everything in one thread. For example, I wish that the guy who does those good interviews with NT players would create a thread and keep updating it instead of starting a new thread every time he interviews somebody.

I don't think he gets the advantages. One stop shopping, if we want to find an interview they will all be in the same place, likely on the first page, because of the frequency of new interviews.

When he creates a new thread for every new interview they just slip off the first page to be long forgotten.

For example, the open source software thread I started in 2005 is still going strong because the people who are interested in the topic know where to find the information they want (one stop shopping). It also has (I believe) the most views of any thread at this website, mainly because of its access.

Yikes. That's me. Sorry.

Got it. My apologies everyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't apologize, I'm just trying to see that the good work that you do is more visible. This might give you an idea or whatever you think.

I thought we had that thread here but it might have been during one of my exiles from the Vs. :)

What might work for you is to edit one post into a continuous list of guests (like the above link) and then create new posts (in the same thread) about a new guest, because updating/editing the main list post won't drive the thread up the page anymore. Clear as mud?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Don't apologize, I'm just trying to see that the good work that you do is more visible. This might give you an idea or whatever you think.

I thought we had that thread here but it might have been during one of my exiles from the Vs. :)

What might work for you is to edit one post into a continuous list of guests (like the above link) and then create new posts (in the same thread) about a new guest, because updating/editing the main list post won't drive the thread up the page anymore. Clear as mud?

Got it! :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
People need to learn what the definition of "spam" is.

Spammers don't go to the trouble of personally posting links in RELEVANT discussion forums.

Blog, wiki, and guestbook

Main article: Spam in blogs

Blog spam, or "blam" for short, is spamming on weblogs. In 2003, this type of spam took advantage of the open nature of comments in the blogging software Movable Type byrepeatedly placing comments to various blog posts that provided nothing more than a link to the spammer's commercial web site .[6] Similar attacks are often performed against wikis and guestbooks, both of which accept user contributions

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Blog, wiki, and guestbook

Main article: Spam in blogs

Blog spam, or "blam" for short, is spamming on weblogs. In 2003, this type of spam took advantage of the open nature of comments in the blogging software Movable Type byrepeatedly placing comments to various blog posts that provided nothing more than a link to the spammer's commercial web site .[6] Similar attacks are often performed against wikis and guestbooks, both of which accept user contributions

You've proven that there is such a thing as blog spamming but not actually provided a definition of spam. Here's a hint: spammers don't go to the trouble of either doing things personally or making sure that they only post links in relevant forums.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm...interesting discussion, lots of good points made thus far.

What about the following criteria as an additional distinction.

If you are going to post a link to your blog or news site to the forum, might we able to suggest that it has some ACTUAL news content involved. For example:

- a direct quote (that you personally obtained) from a national team/professional club team player or member of staff

- a breaking story that you are delivering ahead of anybody else to the community

- information that you have obtained from a press conference, training session, match-day, etc...

I'm sure you see what I am getting at. I think we all mutually appreciate the genuine information that has been disseminated by the growing network of bloggers/reporters in the Canadian soccer community.

I trust that you guys appreciate the humble contributions I've been able to make by actually being at the away matches, training sessions and press conferences - and by actually interviewing our professional players. I certainly appreciate the support I've received from the Vee's, as well as the similar work done by some of the CSN guys and my fellow colleagues at RNO and beyond.

But what I, personally, am tired of seeing, is the endless opinion pieces which provide nothing to break down the barrier of information. If you are just feeding off of information you are collecting from the mass media, which we can all similarly access, what is the point of bringing that info onto the boards? It is nothing we can't find already, and the appropriate action would be to post a link to that information from the direct source.

If you want to share your opinion, please do! But please do it on the boards and do it in the appropriate threads to allow all of us to keep proper tabs on the organization of information.

I hope this doesn't come across as too elitist, but it can be frustrating to be lumped in with bloggers who provide no first hand information. Especially if this might result in limiting my potential access to sharing information from CMNT camps in the future.

Would be pleased to discuss further.

Sincerely,

MB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Excluding opinion is an impossibly high bar, IMO. I think the problem isn't so much with blogs in general as having Max's work classified as a blog. His is so much more than that - it's a true news site, IMO.

I think there has to be room on a forum to allow posts about blogs that are analysis/synthesis based on others' investigative work. The caveat, as always, is that the post must stand on its own and not require the forum reader to to read the blog in its entirety to get the gist of why it was posted in the first place.

That said, I think mid-thread posts linking blogs ought not be posted by the blog owner if they are not fact-driven blog entries. The opinion that is expressed as part of the conversation should be found within the conversation. In that regard I think Max is correct.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That said, I think mid-thread posts linking blogs ought not be posted by the blog owner if they are not fact-driven blog entries. The opinion that is expressed as part of the conversation should be found within the conversation. In that regard I think Max is correct.

Not sure I agree. Forums and blogs are inherently different media with different strengths.

If I have 1,500 words worth of stuff to say about Kara Lang retiring, should I post all that in the middle of the Kara Lang thread? Or should I post the short version, kinda like any other board post would be, and say "if you want to read 'War and Peace: Kara Lang edition', go to www.whatever"? I know which I'd prefer.

Just saying "in today's blog I burble-dee-burble whatever" is totally tasteless self-promotion which I hate, but that's true for news or editorial.

Edited by Lord Bob
said "blog" at one point when I meant "board"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope to have a couple polls up regarding what action should be taken for blogs. It will be done in a multi step process in order to create a true concensus. Majority rules (until that majority changes its mind).

It'll take me a little while to put this together though. I need to find some time to put everything down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If I have 1,500 words worth of stuff to say about Kara Lang retiring, should I post all that in the middle of the Kara Lang thread? Or should I post the short version, kinda like any other board post would be, and say "if you want to read 'War and Peace: Kara Lang edition', go to www.whatever"? I know which I'd prefer.

Just saying "in today's blog I burble-dee-burble whatever" is totally tasteless self-promotion which I hate, but that's true for news or editorial.

I don't think you're far off what I'm talking about, though, LB. My point is that the posts should stand on their own. Your "short version" differs from "in today's blog I..." in that "short version" implies that it can be read and understood on its own (and contributes to the conversation).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...