Why does this forum not have a policy against self-promotion

[Lamp]

I think we all know who Im talking about. Every @&!?;&" time i see one of his posts it talks about blah blah blah, my work is superior to everything else in existence.

So many threads ruined and derailed by this obnoxious behavior. Why cant we just institute a blanket policy forbidding this type of garbage? If he wants to comment about it in his sig then fine, but this trash has no place in legitimate discussion threads.

Judging by the fact that every single time it happens it's followed up by multiple people expressing displeasure with it, it doesnt seem like im the only one who feels this way.

This forum should not be one's own personal billboard for self-promotion.

[Boidhre]

I think people should be allowed to start a thread to advertise their new wares. I know I welcome John F's threads on his new material. What I think needs to be clamped down on is the derailing of threads by people suggesting their own books in answer to people's requests for books. If your books are good other people will suggest them for you.

So I think the people who do this should be allowed to start a new thread to advertise a new book he's publishing and this should be welcomed but I don't think they should be allowed to respond to every post about how to study shape or whatever with "Buy my books/teaching/whatever."

I know this might sound draconian to some of you but this is how I like to see forums run.

[Lamp]

I know this might sound draconian to some of you but this is how I like to see forums run.

Under normal circumstances, people would be able to use their own judgement and decide what is appropriate. And if their initial judgement was wrong then usually people would get the message after being told to stop so many times.

But when all else fails, what choice is left? Its at the point where I can barely read a single freaking advice thread without seeing "buy my book". I dont even care if its actually good advice given the question, i just dont want to see it from someone who OBVIOUSLY has an alterior motive. Put one line in the sig that says "Author of books on Shape, Joseki, and Fundamentals" with a link to the website, and maybe a new post for book releases, but then never mention it again.

Thats how it should be

[speedchase]

I have too disagree. If someone asks about the best book for XYZ, and you think your book is best, I don't see any reason why you shouldn't mention it. That being said, if your book is not within the restriction of the thread, then posting it is spam. I do agree that certain posts were complete spam

[Lamp]

I have too disagree. If someone asks about the best book for XYZ, and you think your book is best, I don't see any reason why you shouldn't mention it. That being said, if your book is not within the restriction of the thread, then posting it is spam. I do agree that certain posts were complete spam.

Of course you will think your own book is the best, after all you wrote it. And even if you don't think it's the best, you will still mention it because you have an alterior motive (money) by convincing someone to buy it. That is the problem - it is not an objective opinion. It is also generally considered highly unprofessional.

As I mentioned, normally you would expect people to be able to control their behavior enough to where this didn't become an issue. In moderation, I'm sure I would actually be fine with someone coming in and answering a question with a comment about their own self-written book. If John F came in and answered some question with a recommendation for his book, I don't think anyone would mind.

Furthermore, every time this happens, not just in the Japanese book thread, it turns into at least a page of back and forth mindless arguing about the advertisement.

A line in your signature indicating you have written books, and what they are about is more than sufficient. If someone else feels your book is a worthy anser to a question, they can mention it.

As an analogue, how often do you go see book authors on Amazon writing 5 star reviews of their own books and/or commenting negatively about competitors books?

[Joaz Banbeck]

[admin]

I ask that all participants in this thread remember that the TOS forbids attacking another member. It is possible to discuss the issue of self-promotion without expressly naming any particular member who is alleged to have done it.

Thanks,
JB

[/admin]

[Lamp]

[admin]

I ask that all participants in this thread remember that the TOS forbids attacking another member. It is possible to discuss the issue of self-promotion without expressly naming any particular member who is alleged to have done it.

Thanks,
JB

[/admin]

I was actually looking for the TOS earlier before I made this post. Can you post a link to it?

Edit: Actually, I found it. This was the part I was looking for.

5. Advertising
Posting or private messaging advertisement is not allowed. However, if the advertisement is for your own product, it is Go-related, and it's not intrusive to the forums, then it is allowable to have it in your signature and brought up in threads only when appropriate (e.g: someone asks for places to buy Go bowls, and you have a site that sells Go bowls. In this case, it's allowable to post a link to your site).

I guess it comes down to a disagreement (or perhaps even an agreement) on what's considered appropriate, and whether or not it's intrusive to the forum.

[speedchase]

[admin]

I ask that all participants in this thread remember that the TOS forbids attacking another member. It is possible to discuss the issue of self-promotion without expressly naming any particular member who is alleged to have done it.

Thanks,
JB

[/admin]

There is a difference between disagree with someones actions and a personal attack.

[RobertJasiek]

Lamp, have you noticed that in viewtopic.php?p=109442#p109442 someone else(!) starts "I suspect very strongly that none your theory is useful. [...] it may actually be harmful." and that, as a consequence, I am defending all my theory? Do you think that it should be allowed to make factual attacks (I do not consider that one as a personal attack) on somebody's entire work and that that somebody may not even reply?

(It is very appropriate that somebody may refer to also his own work to suggest study material so that the reader of related messages can know about their existence as much as he can know about other study material's existence and thus can compare. It is very appropriate that everybody, e.g. you, can criticise or praise such study material. Discussing its author is meta-discussion - why don't you discuss its contents? Don't you have convincing arguments about the contents? If you don't, then maybe the contents is better than you think initially?)

[SoDesuNe]

All I ever see is a lot of people arguing about the advertised books' contents but very few have really read it or have the intention to read it in the future (and THIS is actually what derails most topics). As far as I recall every real review or even first impression of RobertJasiek's books was quite favourable, in this forum. So, for those who actually read the books, they were good (not to derail in the "brilliant"-discussion now) and helpful.

So, for me, it's not the self-advertisment, that bugs me, but people constantly trying to "prove" those books and their proposed methods are all wrong, without committing the coin to really back this up.

[Ortho]

It's maybe unfair to single out that particular poster if you want to talk about this. There are at least 3 other posters off the top of my head for whom nearly every comment is a reference to how great a single product is, such that you know what they're going to say as soon as you see their username but they do it less often. Maybe your specific objection is really to the volume and repetition instead?

[daal]

I think people shouldn't be allowed to write posts suggesting that other people not write posts. Oops. I've just disallowed my own post. This is a good indication of where this thread is going.

[Lamp]

Lamp, have you noticed that in viewtopic.php?p=109442#p109442 someone else(!) starts "I suspect very strongly that none your theory is useful. [...] it may actually be harmful." and that, as a consequence, I am defending all my theory? Do you think that it should be allowed to make factual attacks (I do not consider that one as a personal attack) on somebody's entire work and that that somebody may not even reply?

For the record, i do not think it is appropriate to attack your book in that matter, and you were justified in defending it. But that is one of many threads.

That being said, its hard to ignore the fact that you DID mention your books in that thread, although you were not advertising a specific one. I suspect everyone is so sick of hearing about them that someone finally snapped snd themselves went out of line.

This is exactly why it needs to stop. Its damaging unrelated discourse because are becoming hostile to the mere mention of your books, even when its harmless

(It is very appropriate that somebody may refer to also his own work to suggest study material so that the reader of related messages can know about their existence as much as he can know about other study material's existence and thus can compare.

Here, put this line in your sig.

"Author of one of the most complete works on Joseki available in English, as well as books on capturing races and fundamentals. See http://home.snafu.de/jasiek for more info."

Thats literally all you have to do. If you must mention the book in a thread for someone asking about a book, then limit it to "you can read about other people's thoughts of my books here and here", with links to the various review threads. And clearly only when the question is SPECIFICALLY relevant, such as a question about joseki books, shape, etc

[RobertJasiek]

That being said, its hard to ignore the fact that you DID mention your books in that thread, although you were not advertising a specific one.

In that thread, BEFORE palapiku's questioning of all theory in my books, I mentioned "it is such a nice concept that I will write at least one book about it", but did NOT mention my existing books (or even advertise them).

Stay to the facts! Then reconsider whether you want me to disallow a proper reply to palapiku's message and whether you want to disallow everybody else in a similar position to defend himself.

I suspect

What about preferring facts to rumours?

This is exactly why it needs to stop.

Why don't you tolerate that other users have other preferences different from yours?

Its damaging unrelated discourse because are becoming hostile to the mere mention of your books, even when its harmless

I think "hostility" is a too strong word. It is more "intolerance". Think about it who is being intolerant.

Here, put this line in your sig.

I dislike sigs significantly longer than a name.

I do not write in my sig what you suggest; a sig's contents would be my choice.

I do not censor myself, regardless of whether you wish that. Not replying to messages because contents is in my sig would be self-censorship.

Thats literally all you have to do.

It would be much more: self-censorship.

If you must mention the book in a thread for someone asking about a book, then limit it to

I do not apply self-censorship according to your wishes because I do not apply self-censorship (other than TOS compliance etc.) at all.

And clearly only when the question is SPECIFICALLY relevant, such as a question about joseki books, shape, etc

Not you decide about relevance of contents in my messages, but I decide. When I think that some of my books are relevant, then I might choose to mention them (and possibly the relevant chapters).

Apparently it surprises you that I come to such a conclusion of relevance relatively often. Why? Because my books have a lot of contents and discuss many topics. I have written them also for the sake of answering many questions.

[topazg]

I think people should be allowed to start a thread to advertise their new wares. I know I welcome John F's threads on his new material. What I think needs to be clamped down on is the derailing of threads (emphasis mine) by people suggesting their own books in answer to people's requests for books. If your books are good other people will suggest them for you.

^^ This (particularly the bolded bit).

Sadly, I think in most cases the individual in question doesn't see it as thread derailment, which makes it hard to enforce in a way that I'd consider fair.

There is a grey area around TOS breach on self advertising, and we are very aware of the issue.

Robert, I'm not directly advocating changes in your behaviour at the moment, but do at least be aware that a number of people have made complaints, and it is our job to maintain a forum environment in which as many people as possible are happy contributors. Listening to other people's wishes even if you think they're wrong doesn't do you any harm from time to time