Timeline for What is the policy on self-links and commercial links in answers?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
14 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 13, 2017 at 13:00 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://law.stackexchange.com/ with https://law.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Mar 20, 2017 at 10:32 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://meta.stackexchange.com/ with https://meta.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Feb 15, 2017 at 23:27 | comment | added | feetwet Mod | @Zizouz212 Yes, it's a cynical assumption. But if (hypothetically ;) a user includes a link to their site in every post, and half of their posts are "late answers" that are voted unhelpful, it doesn't seem to me like an unreasonable assumption. | |
| Feb 15, 2017 at 23:18 | comment | added | Zizouz212 | @BlueDogRanch Why are you assuming that the user is including links solely for the purpose of SEO? Did they tell you? Otherwise, I believe that you are being unfairly aggressive, in the sense that you are assuming their position, and not listening to their perspective. Typical or not, you're making an accusation. | |
| Feb 15, 2017 at 20:26 | history | edited | feetwetMod | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Oh good, the comment is back!
|
| Feb 15, 2017 at 20:22 | comment | added | feetwet Mod | @BlueDogRanch: looks like jimsug deleted it after at least one other person flagged it as hostile. I was hoping we could find some sort of "nice" way of communicating that, but I thought your comment was better than nothing, and to me your new one is even more collegial. | |
| Feb 15, 2017 at 20:20 | comment | added | BlueDogRanch | @feetwet: why did you delete my "self-links don't help SEO" comment? I replaced it. The user is low rep, is adding answers to old questions already answered, and adding her promo link inline; this is very typical of someone farming for SEO, and they need to know it. I have flagged these answers/links in the past and nothing was done. BTW, I know the SE territory and how to comment and moderate and flag; I have a rep of 25K+ on SE under another account. | |
| Feb 15, 2017 at 13:50 | history | edited | feetwetMod | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 163 characters in body
|
| Feb 15, 2017 at 13:49 | comment | added | feetwet Mod | @Zizouz212 – I agree that the "links here don't help SEO" comment I linked to (since deleted) seemed aggressive. Maybe it's not possible to use comments to caution people against self-promotion without appearing hostile or accusatory. One problem is that if the post seems self-promotional and it's not addressed nicely by one person in the comments, then other users are going to post comments, suggest edits, and flag the question (... repeatedly). | |
| Feb 15, 2017 at 3:44 | comment | added | Zizouz212 | You know what... Maybe I'll just write an answer of my own :) | |
| Feb 15, 2017 at 3:43 | comment | added | Zizouz212 | Otherwise, I think that we need to take advantage of moderation powers and edit them out, and if there is opposition or it continues, send a moderator message that clearly outlines why self-promotion doesn't work using the no-follow argument. Placing comments on posts means that we're making people guilty before innocent without knowing what's going on, and we as a community will come across as harsh and aggressive, contributing to a culture that none of us will want in the long-term. | |
| Feb 15, 2017 at 3:41 | comment | added | Zizouz212 | sources in our answers. Of course, links also need to be seen in context. Is it a signature? Are the sentenced structured just so that the author of the answer can sneak a link in to their law firm? Those situations would break the rules. But for websites that are being linked in answers to provide credibility to the information, or provide gateways to learn more show us that the answer wasn't made for personal promotion. That's the primary reason why I take issue with comment - unless it is excessive, and we have reason to believe that self promotion is taking place, it's not an issue. | |
| Feb 15, 2017 at 3:39 | comment | added | Zizouz212 | I feel like we're approaching links from the wrong direction. Links are meant to cite information - providing gateways to learn more, while affirming the credibility of an answer. People may link to their own sources because 1) They are part of a credible organization which provides information relevant to the question 2) They may have already written about the topic before, and their writing may include other relevant information. I don't think it is right to assume that the majority influence behind including links is solely for self-promotion. If this is our attitude, we discourage citing.. | |
| Feb 13, 2017 at 19:08 | history | answered | feetwetMod | CC BY-SA 3.0 |