dpreview banning SmugMug - what can we do?

[onethumb]

[reposted from this thread (http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1018&message=18950846) on dpreview]

We just got an email from Phil Askey saying he was going to shut off and ban all links to SmugMug on dpreview. :(

We've tried hard (look at my dpreview post history) to provide relevant, informative posts about ourselves and our service without advertising in any way on the forums. But apparently we're getting in trouble because our *customers* are self-advertising themselves.

We'd like to see if we can find a way to make sure that doesn't happen. I'd love to hear any ideas you may have about how we can avoid catastrophe.

Here's all the gory details: http://blogs.smugmug.com/onethumb/

Thanks!

Don

[Mike Lane]

stupid stupid stupid. That phil guy sounds like a class a jerk to me. Maybe I'll use dcresource instead.

[dragon300zx]

The problem is the guys a jerk. There should be no reason why people can't post a link to their own websites. The only option he is leaving is that anyone who wants to post a link to their own website buy a top level domain and forward it with masking turned on so the smugmug.com address can't be easily traced. And since it's a free forum it would be hard for the users to force him to do otherwise. Sounds to me like he is trying to strong arm you into paying for advertising as if that site isn't full of ad's already. (No I have never been a fan of dpreview).

[DavidTO]

Well, just writing him off as a jerk isn't going to help at all, IMO.

Obviously, there's something going on that's not sitting well with him.

I tool around there some, but have never really cottoned to it, since the forums are mostly equipment oriented. I really have no interest in reading a forum only for the 20D, for instance.

But all that aside, I've never seen anything that I would consider SPAM on that site for smugmug. I don't think that smugmug's users are spamming--but they are petitioning hard. The problem is, smugmug can't be responsible for what its users post...and like Don says, there has to be some middle ground that can be reached to remedy the situation. Now if the guy's not returning emails, well, that's a different matter. You can't talk to someone who ain't listening...

[dragon300zx]

Now if the guy's not returning emails, well, that's a different matter. You can't talk to someone who ain't listening...
Thats the problem. It's not writing him off as a jerk. It's a discription of his attitude. I have never had any interested to talk with the guy but from what I have read from doing searches on the internet before regarding issues that I have heard about going on over there he is very much a "my way or the highway" type of person who could care less about being fair. I know lots of people over their say they always get emails returned right away, that he is easy to deal with, etc, etc, etc. And I know of alot of people who say they never get emails returned, when they do they are short and rude, etc. Seems he either likes you, or has a grudge against you. From what I have seen he has always had a slight grudge against smug for some reason. This isn't the first time he has made a stink about smugmug users on his forums.

Search his news pages for news on the various web gallery sharing services. No results for smugmug, no results for pbase, surprise results for google (can't anger the gods after all), Results for Fotki (only gallery service he has advertising on his site), no results for photobucket, no results for snapfly, no results for picture trail, etc.

Hmmm see a pattern?

A recent post by Phil:


"Bob,

dpreview don't want smugmug's money, thanks, not after what Don's just done anyway! And frankly if we don't want them to advertise here they don't try and "get around" that by using their own members to advertise for them. Lots of photo sharing sites get lots of traffic from us and I'm sure they're glad of it, they don't feel the need to push their URL's even harder with codes like this. "

What Don did that was so horrible was to share with his users and the general public phil's attitude. The second line tells it all about how phil has felt about smugmug advertising in the past. Thats why companies like smug are far superior. They don't have an attitude towards their users, and potential clients.

Oh and when one of his users responds to his post, explaining how rude phil himself was to don not only in his email, but in refusing to respond to his requests to become an advertiser the whole thread ends up going away. Hmmmm.......

[Harryb]

I think its a dumb move. I have participated at DPR for years (its been rapidly decreasing lately) and Phil has always had a rather paternal way about him. Its his site but I just don't like his management style.

He won't moderate his forums which are filled with trolling, flames and general all around bashing but he has hawk like eye out for anything he views as "advetising". He recently nuked a popular thread on Ron Reznick's new DVDs w/o an explanation. I'm guessing that he saw it as a form of advertising.

Now on the DPR forums there is always talk of this camera, this lens, this software where folks are recommending that others get that gear. They have been numerous threads as to which is the best photo sharing site. Its the way things are and will always be.

It would be self-advertising (aka spam) if Don went on DPR and started a thread about Smugmug or if Ron Reznick started one about his DVDs. However when satisifed users of their products recommend them its not advertising. Phil claims to be unbiased in his reviews but when I see stuff like this in his news section I begin to wonder

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0606/06062301expodiscritz.asp

He has no problem putting up a blatant ad for a product under a misnomer of "News" Its kind of hard to see how he can then turn around and view the recommendation of products and gear by satisfied users as "advertising".

Its his site and he can run it at his whimsy but he won't be getting many more "clicks" from me.

[pmaland]

[reposted from this thread (http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1018&message=18950846) on dpreview]


Sorry, he's deleted that thread already.

[Mike Lane]

So I'm going to post my reply to his reply here:


Phil Askey wrote:
> Don,
>
> I expected more respect for myself and for my private email to you
> than for you to publish it on your blog and draw attention to it
> here on my own forum. I expected you to reply to me and discuss
> it, to try to work out a resolution, but instead you've decided to
> try and turn my own members against me, that's very very sad and
> poor from someone in a position such as yourself.
>
> --
> Phil Askey
> Editor / Owner, dpreview.com

Did you or did you not send the following to Don MacAskill:

"Just to let you know that we will be blocking linking to smugmug from our forums due to the rapid increase in your ‘viral marketing’ technique of using ‘account codes’ for discounts. Numerous of our regular posters are now inadvertently promoting your site by placing such account codes in their signatures, this is considered to be commercial advertising and is against our posting rules. As we have no interest in banning such members we will instead be blocking any external linking or mention of your site."

To me, that does not sound in any way like you "expected [him] to reply to [you] and discuss [the issue], to try to work out a resolution." That sounds like a heavy-handed ploy to wring as much money out of Smugmug as you can. Furthermore, if you did send that email, you are now lying (misrepresenting it) to boot!

That is the very definition of poor foom Phil.

[cmason]

it seems very over the top to me. I post on other, non-photo related boards, and many of them have rules about what you can have in your signature. For example, many do not want links in sigs, or don't want commercial links, etc. Seems that the issue is policing the members, not smugmug itself.

Is the discount code the problem? No, dont think so, it again is the members, not following the rules.

[Budcub]

I owe much of what I've learned about Digital Photography to reading the forums and reviews on dpreview.com But I really have no intention of taking my link to my smugmug page out of my signature. If I find that its been removed from my profile, I'll just add it in manually when I post comments. If necessary I'll get around whatever roadblocks are in my way. I'm sure as hell not going to try and migrate all my stuff to flickr or pbase just to satisfy Phil. Not that there's anything wrong with those services, its just that I'm in bed with Smugmug and don't want to have to change.

[Mac Write]

This is extremely bad as many people have photos posted on dpreview for help, samples, galleries etc. Now all those photos won't display, esp. the people who use identity hiding www.smugmug.com/photo/xxxxxxxx.

[kevin.coppalotti]

I owe much of what I've learned about Digital Photography to reading the forums and reviews on dpreview.com But I really have no intention of taking my link to my smugmug page out of my signature. If I find that its been removed from my profile, I'll just add it in manually when I post comments. If necessary I'll get around whatever roadblocks are in my way. I'm sure as hell not going to try and migrate all my stuff to flickr or pbase just to satisfy Phil. Not that there's anything wrong with those services, its just that I'm in bed with Smugmug and don't want to have to change.

The vast majority of smuggers on DP review do not put discount coupon codes in their signature, so why penalise them and why blame One Thumb for it?
And for the people who put a discount coupon code in their signature did they really know it was the wrong thing to do? And those discount coupon codes have been appearing in signatures for at least 2 years, so why the fuss now? No, I do not put a discount coupon code in my signature.

[Mac Write]

Just posted this thread (http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1018&thread=18952335), and it's not been deleted.

[BobTrips]

I'm the "Bob" from the following post...




A recent post by Phil:


"Bob,

dpreview don't want smugmug's money, thanks, not after what Don's just done anyway! And frankly if we don't want them to advertise here they don't try and "get around" that by using their own members to advertise for them. Lots of photo sharing sites get lots of traffic from us and I'm sure they're glad of it, they don't feel the need to push their URL's even harder with codes like this. "


Like everyone involved (including Phil and Don I don't know everything that happened.

I am pretty sure that there is an excellent chance that one, or probably both, of the major players in this conflict could have handled the situation in a more diplomatic and less destructive manner.

I would encourage both Phil and Don to talk this out a bit and see if there isn't a middle ground that would serve the best interests of both sites.

And perhaps the rest of us should hold back for a little bit and 'give peace a chance'.


Hummmm...... Phil and Don. Now where have I heard those two names before? ;o)

[Mike Lane]

:wave Welcome to the friendly side of photography Bob...

[dogwood]

This anti-smugmug policy on DPR is nuts. I've been posting on DPR for years and rather enjoy the international audience and help I recieve there. I get web hits all the time from around the world coming from my posts there. So this ban on smugmug is really baffling. I'm an active and helpful participant on DPR-- and god forbid, my site is also hosted by smugmug.

I put my url in my signature on DPR so people can contact me or look at my work or whatever-- and so I'm not just an faceless hack and people can judge my critiques or advice based on my experience. It's definitely not a promo for smugmug. I don't put the "save money by using this code if you get a smugmug account" or anything like that. In fact, I'm using the CNAME method so smugmug isn't even mentioned.

I sure hope DPR reconsiders. As has been pointed out here, just the discussion of equipment itself could be considered an ad. Pretty soon you won't be able to recommend lighting equipment or lenses or software to other users and then what will the point of DPR be? I mean, I'm someone who even uses electrical tape to cover the brand and model of my cameras so I'm not promoting some massive corporation when I'm out shooting!

[Harryb]

Looks like sanity is taking hold

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1018&message=18953131


:clap :lynnma

[kevin.coppalotti]

Looks like sanity is taking hold

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1018&message=18953131

:clap :lynnma
Phil Askey from Dp Review denies deleting posts on this topic, but he is a lying. He deleted at least two whole threads today discussing this issue on DP Review.

[Steve Cavigliano]

I suggest letting Don and Phil hash this out.

FWIW, Phil did admit deleting a couple of SM threads, but not deleting posts/threads by the 980 users with SM coupon codes in their signatures.

Flaming Phil or DPReview won't help. It's a very good site and Phil is a decent guy. Even though he banned me once....lol Like many of the other contributors here, I cut my digital teeth over at DPR and it is the "Grandfather" of all photography related websites, IMO. Personally, I think Phil and his staff deserve major kudos for the info they provide and their management of a place that gets as many users as DPR does that is basically unmoderated :thumb

I love SM, but even I was getting tired of the "in your face" promotion some folks were doing with their coupon codes Just as we don't allow Spam here, Phil has a right to control it on his site.

I am sure Don and Phil can come to an understanding. Let's not pour any more gas on the fire....lol


Just my opinion,

Steve

[devbobo]

Phil Asskey...that says it all :lol3

[kevin.coppalotti]

Phil Askey from Dp Review denies deleting posts on this topic, but he is a lying. He deleted at least two whole threads today discussing this issue on DP Review.

I just checked back on the DP Review Open Talk, Phil has fessed up and admitted deleting the threads.
Why delete a thread which has an open honest discussion, no forum rules were broken, to delete a thread because you do not like criticism, smacks of censorship, nazism and a lot other bad things.
Many of us have familiy members who died fighting to protect Democratic principles like freedom of the press and rule of law, when you delete threads it makes people suspicious, honesty and openess is the only real way to thrash it out.

[onethumb]

[reposted from this thread (http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1018&message=18950846) on dpreview]

We just got an email from Phil Askey saying he was going to shut off and ban all links to SmugMug on dpreview. :(

We've tried hard (look at my dpreview post history) to provide relevant, informative posts about ourselves and our service without advertising in any way on the forums. But apparently we're getting in trouble because our *customers* are self-advertising themselves.

We'd like to see if we can find a way to make sure that doesn't happen. I'd love to hear any ideas you may have about how we can avoid catastrophe.

Here's all the gory details: http://blogs.smugmug.com/onethumb/

Thanks!

Don

We've updated our site a bit due to this issue. Underneath all the nastiness of the email, there was a kernel a truth - some SmugMug customers do get a little too promotional.

My latest blog entry (http://blogs.smugmug.com/onethumb) has the details.

Hopefully this will all work out, but I'm not sure yet. (My posts and threads, even the positive ones about dpreview, have been getting deleted.)

Don

[Mike Lane]

to delete a thread because you do not like criticism, smacks of censorship, nazism and a lot other bad things.

Well I guess we're done (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law) here...

[kevin.coppalotti]

Well I guess we're done (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law) here...

Godwins Law eh?? LOL! Actually that law applies to threads that actually continue, not cut off at the knees when things get a little too uncomfortable, so at DP review I would say the principle of Godwins Law applies thus:

Coppalotti's Law:

"The faster a thread is deleted on a forum by a moderator, the more likely nazism is mentioned soon thereafter."

[Dna]

Possibly a bit too late, but I had the promotional code in my signature on another photopgraphy forum and it was simply removed and replaced with "Removed referrer link" <shrug>

So why can't Phil do that ?

I'm sure he has the power to edit signatures.

Dna

[Nikolai]

Was messing around my dpreview profile today and could not save it. Bold red type basically said "no mentioning smugmug" :dunno
This sucks, really... I wonder if other photosharing sites (flckr, pbase, ofoto, fotki, etc.) get the same treatment... For some reason, I don't think so..

[DavidTO]

All I did was enter the URL for my photo galleries--no marketing or mention of a coupon code, just "http://www.davidrosenthal.smugmug.com"

This is what I got:

[DavidTO]

This is what I ended up doing as a work-around:

http://www.davidrosenthal.smug(ahem)mug.com

[Andy]

This is what I ended up doing as a work-around:

http://www.davidrosenthal.smug(ahem)mug.com
Seems like that's gone a bit far, IMO - it's a photography site, and you can't list your photography gallery. :rolleyes

[DavidTO]

Seems like that's gone a bit far, IMO - it's a photography site, and you can't list your photography gallery. :rolleyes


I was tempted to change it to "Boycott DPReview". There were only two problems with that.

1) I rarely post, so hardly anyone sees my sig, anyway.

2) If I posted more often, what would be the sense of calling for a boycott?

and, 3) As stupid as this all is, I don't actually care much, since I don't find dpreview forums all that useful to me, anyway.

[Nikolai]

All I did was enter the URL for my photo galleries--no marketing or mention of a coupon code, just "http://www.davidrosenthal.smugmug.com"

This is what I got:

I just like the big bold red letters.. reminded me of USSR of 70s (Hey, Mike, is communism/stalinism referencing covered by Godwin Law, too?:-)

[DavidTO]

I just like the big bold red letters.. reminded me of USSR of 70s (Hey, Mike, is communism/stalinism referencing covered by Godwin Law, too?:-)


At least you're relating it to something you actually *lived* through.

[dmc]

This is what I ended up doing as a work-around:

http://www.davidrosenthal.smug(ahem)mug.com

will it let you use a tinyurl like this (http://tinyurl.com/m83uz)?

http://tinyurl.com/m83uz

[Andy]

will it let you use a tinyurl like this (http://tinyurl.com/m83uz)?

http://tinyurl.com/m83uz
:thumb thinking out of the box.

[Nikolai]

This is what I ended up doing as a work-around:

http://www.davidrosenthal.smug(ahem)mug.com

And this is what I did :-) (see the title)
After all, there are tons of ways to fool simplistic "black filters".
Put spaces, asteristics, dots, dashes - any special small characters - inside - and you're golden.
Hopefully, Don and Phil will agree on some less disruptive measures.

HTH

[DavidTO]

will it let you use a tinyurl like this (http://tinyurl.com/m83uz)?

http://tinyurl.com/m83uz


heheh. If I cared enough, I'd give it a try!

[retief]

But I was having what I thought was a decent conversation with OneThumb in the DPReview thread and I would like to contact him again. Unfortunately, an email to Help at Smugmug got me nowhere, no response, and I can't send email from here. Hopefully you will see this and reply to me at retief@deweydrive.com. It may be that I simply missed a link to Contact Info, if so, please point me in the right direction.

Thanks,

[Mike Lane]

But I was having what I thought was a decent conversation with OneThumb in the DPReview thread and I would like to contact him again. Unfortunately, an email to Help at Smugmug got me nowhere, no response, and I can't send email from here. Hopefully you will see this and reply to me at retief@deweydrive.com. It may be that I simply missed a link to Contact Info, if so, please point me in the right direction.

Thanks,

I'm sure he'll get the email to the help desk or he'll answer your reply right in here. He's a busy daddy of 5 month old twins so I'm sure he'll get to you as soon as he can. Welcome to dgrin :wave

[Ken CCP]

Phil is very picky about his business model, and values that over cash.
That is cool...

I fear his success has gone to his head that he thinks it is his job to advise others businesses on thier marketing, bording on business extortion. Blocking competitors is what Got Microsoft in trouble.

He doesn't want smugmug's money, just thier free time coding his business model into thier site!!! So he doesn't want people making a few $$ on referals, but he is ok with diverting the resources we pay for to his personal service instead of custom watermarks.


Phill needs to hire a good programmer that can philter refereal codes without breaking one of his sites main features, sharing photos.

He has no business demanding anyone conform to his view of the world and business. He has everyright to censor his site as he wants.. we can only hope he never runs for parlament.

[ltobias]

Phil is very picky about his business model, and values that over cash.
That is cool...

I fear his success has gone to his head that he thinks it is his job to advise others businesses on thier marketing, bording on business extortion. Blocking competitors is what Got Microsoft in trouble.

He doesn't want smugmug's money, just thier free time coding his business model into thier site!!! So he doesn't want people making a few $$ on referals, but he is ok with diverting the resources we pay for to his personal service instead of custom watermarks.


Phill needs to hire a good programmer that can philter refereal codes without breaking one of his sites main features, sharing photos.

He has no business demanding anyone conform to his view of the world and business. He has everyright to censor his site as he wants.. we can only hope he never runs for parlament.

Phil has the right to do with his site what he want. The problem comes from some smugmug usern.

Also it looks like the smugmug links works (again?) in dpreview.

Leif

[Andy]

But I was having what I thought was a decent conversation with OneThumb in the DPReview thread and I would like to contact him again. Unfortunately, an email to Help at Smugmug got me nowhere, no response, and I can't send email from here. Hopefully you will see this and reply to me at retief@deweydrive.com. It may be that I simply missed a link to Contact Info, if so, please point me in the right direction.

Thanks,
Hi Retief,

I can't fine any email from you to our helpdesk. Can you please let me know the name and email address you used - was it the one listed here? If so, it didn't arrive. Please try again, help@smugmug.com we really do answer all our mails, and I'll be sure that Onethumb sees your note straight away :deal

Cheers!

[retief]

Hi Retief,

I can't fine any email from you to our helpdesk. Can you please let me know the name and email address you used - was it the one listed here? If so, it didn't arrive. Please try again, help@smugmug.com we really do answer all our mails, and I'll be sure that Onethumb sees your note straight away :deal

Cheers!

I just forwarded the email sent yesterday. The note is simply the same as I posted here, I'd like to hear from Don so that I can pass on a few comments directly.

Thanks,

[Andy]

I just forwarded the email sent yesterday. The note is simply the same as I posted here, I'd like to hear from Don so that I can pass on a few comments directly.

Thanks,

retief, we don't see it. It's not getting through to us at help at smugmug.com I've been watching the help mail for the past two hours, also. Please try and send it to awilliamsny at yahoo dot com and I will be SURE that Don gets it.

[Andy]

retief, we don't see it. It's not getting through to us at help at smugmug.com I've been watching the help mail for the past two hours, also. Please try and send it to awilliamsny at yahoo dot com and I will be SURE that Don gets it.
You can also Private Message me here, if that helps. I'll be sure your note gets to Don.

[Ken CCP]

Phil has the right to do with his site what he want. The problem comes from some smugmug usern.

Also it looks like the smugmug links works (again?) in dpreview.

Leif

Yup that is correct. I had to eat crow on Phil's site and I will here too.
I had missread comments on Phil'sand Don's part that made me think Smugmug was coding to do active blocking referal codes for Phils site.

It wasn't so, sounds like Smugmug is making policy changes to keep referals from becoming Spam..

I got the story wrong and admit it.

[Awais Yaqub]

Phil :rofl

[tsk1979]

Phil is very picky about his business model, and values that over cash.
That is cool...

I fear his success has gone to his head that he thinks it is his job to advise others businesses on thier marketing, bording on business extortion. Blocking competitors is what Got Microsoft in trouble.

He doesn't want smugmug's money, just thier free time coding his business model into thier site!!! So he doesn't want people making a few $$ on referals, but he is ok with diverting the resources we pay for to his personal service instead of custom watermarks.


Phill needs to hire a good programmer that can philter refereal codes without breaking one of his sites main features, sharing photos.

He has no business demanding anyone conform to his view of the world and business. He has everyright to censor his site as he wants.. we can only hope he never runs for parlament.
I always thought him to be bit of a nazi. Disagree with him and he will fire at you from all angles with counter arguments. Disagree even more and he mau ban you too. A good forum is built with moderators whom the users can trust, not with dictators. The only reason dpreview forums are so popular is due to the great reviews, and also due to the fact that they were one of the early birds.

At some point in time I got banned from dpreview site, atleast thats what I think because I cant even retrieve my password. I think the reason is smugmug referrel code or something else? I am more of a lurker there and not exactly very active. But then I started asking questions on photography-on-the net canon forums and here at dgrin, and I have been very happy
IMHO dgrin has the potential to displace every other photography discussion forum.

[asd]

From here (the bold is mine): http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1018&thread=18952335&page=3

Re: Phil is 100% correct to do this.... NEW

Quite similar to a pyramid scheme actually.

Jay Turberville wrote:
>
> > It's sad to think that so many people are that desperate for a $5
> > credit.
>
> $10 credit toward membership fees. $5 goes to the referred "friend".
>
> --
> Jay Turberville
> http://www.jayandwanda.com

--
Phil Askey
Editor / Owner, dpreview.com

Wow.

[kkart]

[reposted from this thread (http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1018&message=18950846) on dpreview]

We just got an email from Phil Askey saying he was going to shut off and ban all links to SmugMug on dpreview. :(

We've tried hard (look at my dpreview post history) to provide relevant, informative posts about ourselves and our service without advertising in any way on the forums. But apparently we're getting in trouble because our *customers* are self-advertising themselves.

We'd like to see if we can find a way to make sure that doesn't happen. I'd love to hear any ideas you may have about how we can avoid catastrophe.

Here's all the gory details: http://blogs.smugmug.com/onethumb/

Thanks!

Don

Ya know....seeing this literally made my eyes swell----

" Phil Askey wrote:
Don has amended his 'codes' page and we will be (attempting to)
block the posting of promotional codes in signatures, we'll be
contacting anyone who uses them and will (respectfully) ask them to
remove them (which we have done on a good dozen occasions in the
past)."

I used to have respect for dpreview and the site as a whole, but if that is the attitude they want to take, it does nothing but hurt their image which has been severly tarnished because of this. Why on earth would he try and do this....? It honestly makes no sense at all.

[kevin.coppalotti]

Ya know....seeing this literally made my eyes swell----

" Phil Askey wrote:
Don has amended his 'codes' page and we will be (attempting to)
block the posting of promotional codes in signatures, we'll be
contacting anyone who uses them and will (respectfully) ask them to
remove them (which we have done on a good dozen occasions in the
past)."

I used to have respect for dpreview and the site as a whole, but if that is the attitude they want to take, it does nothing but hurt their image which has been severly tarnished because of this. Why on earth would he try and do this....? It honestly makes no sense at all.

The rules at DP Review have been updated, below is the new rules.

"Commercial advertising - Commercial website linking or advertising is not allowed, if you wish to advertise on the site contact us (http://www.dpreview.com/misc/feedback.asp). This rule includes webmasters of other digital photography websites promoting themselves on the forum. You will be banned and have all of your messages removed.
Promotional / discount codes - We do not allow the use of promotional codes or discount codes in messages, users signatures or plans. This is simply to avoid putting our members in a position of inadvertently advertising on behalf of a commercial company and falling foul of our commercial advertising rule. It's for the good of all members, so please don't do it. "

[marlinspike]

Promotional / discount codes - We do not allow the use of promotional codes or discount codes in messages, users signatures or plans. This is simply to avoid putting our members in a position of inadvertently advertising on behalf of a commercial company and falling foul of our commercial advertising rule. It's for the good of all members, so please don't do it. "

That promotional codes one must be new. I remember when I first signed up for smugmug almost 2 years ago I asked on the open talk forum if it was allowed to put my referral code in my sig and everyone told me yes.

[dogwood]

The rules at DP Review have been updated, below is the new rules.

"Commercial advertising - Commercial website linking or advertising is not allowed, if you wish to advertise on the site contact us (http://www.dpreview.com/misc/feedback.asp). This rule includes webmasters of other digital photography websites promoting themselves on the forum. You will be banned and have all of your messages removed.
Promotional / discount codes - We do not allow the use of promotional codes or discount codes in messages, users signatures or plans. This is simply to avoid putting our members in a position of inadvertently advertising on behalf of a commercial company and falling foul of our commercial advertising rule. It's for the good of all members, so please don't do it. "

My opinion is probably going to be unpopular here but this rule sounds entirely reasonable. It does seem DPR overreacted initially by pulling photo links to smugmug sites, but how many of us can say we haven't overreacted at some point in our lives?

Anyway, I actually like DPR quite a bit and I like dgrin and smugmug quite a bit so I'm glad things appear smoothed over. I'm having trouble, though, seeing how the slaugher of 6 million people by the nazis plus the war deaths and invasion of Europe has anything to do with this situation. I'd only suggest that folks making those analogies take some time to read about World War II.

[DavidTO]

I'm having trouble, though, seeing how the slaugher of 6 million people by the nazis plus the war deaths and invasion of Europe has anything to do with this situation. I'd only suggest that folks making those analogies take some time to read about World War II.


Yeah, what a great way to lessen the importance of such a tragic event. To me, equating what's going on here with WWII is akin to spitting on the graves of those who suffered and died.

[devbobo]

The modification of the DPR rules should have happened at the very beginning, approaching SM directly is totally out of order IMO, as it really had nothing to do with SM as a company and more to do with the control of DPR posters.

Let's just hope they apply the new rules to others using promotional codes with as much vigor as they have done with SM.

[garyjwood]

Yeah, what a great way to lessen the importance of such a tragic event. To me, equating what's going on here with WWII is akin to spitting on the graves of those who suffered and died.

Yes! Well said!

[wslam]

Why not do this? Create a new alias for your referral program. So e.g., create referral.smugmug.com/accountid=xxxxx
Explain to Phil that he can block all referral.smugmug.com. That will effectively kills all links that would be considered as advertising.
Having dpreview block smugmug is a BIG deal for many users, including me. I really hope you can solve this ASAP.

[reposted from this thread (http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1018&message=18950846) on dpreview]

We just got an email from Phil Askey saying he was going to shut off and ban all links to SmugMug on dpreview. :(

We've tried hard (look at my dpreview post history) to provide relevant, informative posts about ourselves and our service without advertising in any way on the forums. But apparently we're getting in trouble because our *customers* are self-advertising themselves.

We'd like to see if we can find a way to make sure that doesn't happen. I'd love to hear any ideas you may have about how we can avoid catastrophe.

Here's all the gory details: http://blogs.smugmug.com/onethumb/

Thanks!

Don

[Andy]

Why not do this? Create a new alias for your referral program. So e.g., create referral.smugmug.com/accountid=xxxxx
Explain to Phil that he can block all referral.smugmug.com. That will effectively kills all links that would be considered as advertising.
Having dpreview block smugmug is a BIG deal for many users, including me. I really hope you can solve this ASAP.
Dpreview is not blocking any smugmug links. Only referral code links in your signatures there.

[marieboyer]

Andy:
Can I say in my signature "Get $5 off your Smugmug account," put no referral code in my signature, and then simply include my smugmug link (where my homepage has referral code)? Would that be okay? There would be no referral code in the actual signature that way?

[Andy]

Andy:
Can I say in my signature "Get $5 off your Smugmug account," put no referral code in my signature, and then simply include my smugmug link (where my homepage has referral code)? Would that be okay? There would be no referral code in the actual signature that way?
You are encouraged to put your SmugMug site, and your referral code in your signature, here on Dgrin, if you like, sure. As to other forums, you'll need to abide by their rules :)

[marieboyer]

I am trying to discern if that would abide by dpreview rules. Where do we go to determine what is permissible? I saw nothing at dpreview that spelled it out. The rule only says "no referral codes." I do not want to harm other smugmug users on dpreview because I am not following the rules there. I was hoping someone here might be able to clarify.

You are encouraged to put your SmugMug site, and your referral code in your signature, here on Dgrin, if you like, sure. As to other forums, you'll need to abide by their rules :)

[Andy]

I am trying to discern if that would abide by dpreview rules. Where do we go to determine what is permissible? I saw nothing at dpreview that spelled it out. The rule only says "no referral codes." I do not want to harm other smugmug users on dpreview because I am not following the rules there. I was hoping someone here might be able to clarify.
Marie,

The dpreview rules are right here:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/rules.asp?forum=1018

Phil's made it very clear, no referral codes in your signature or profile.


Cheers,

[marieboyer]

Andy:
Can I say in my signature "Get $5 off your Smugmug account," put no referral code in my signature, and then simply include my smugmug link (where my homepage has referral code)? Would that be okay? There would be no referral code in the actual signature that way?

Andy:
I do not mean to be thick. I really don't. I guess the answer to my original question above is "yes, this is okay." So long as I do not use a referral code in my signature there, I am in compliance.

[DavidTO]

Andy:
I do not mean to be thick. I really don't. I guess the answer to my original question above is "yes, this is okay." So long as I do not use a referral code in my signature there, I am in compliance.


Well, I can't say whether you would be in compliance or not, but I do know that you would not be honoring the spirit of what DPR is asking for. They don't want smugmug users to be pimping for smugmug. My take? You should honor that and leave the referral program out of your signature.

[marieboyer]

Well, I can't say whether you would be in compliance or not, but I do know that you would not be honoring the spirit of what DPR is asking for. They don't want smugmug users to be pimping for smugmug. My take? You should honor that and leave the referral program out of your signature.

Thanks David. Simply put. Answers my question. I will remove even the mention of it. Much appreciated after all my searching.

[Andy]

Andy:
I do not mean to be thick. I really don't. I guess the answer to my original question above is "yes, this is okay." So long as I do not use a referral code in my signature there, I am in compliance.
What David said, for sure.

[SamirD]

Wow, as a forum owner and administrator, this whole thing shocks me. You can't get mad at the beneficiary of broken rules because you didn't enforce (or create) rules that enacted your wishes. :rolleyes

I've posted a sig (accidently) that I wasn't supposed to on a site--and the site admin removed it. That's what we do, administer and keep order in accordance with the rules. If there wasn't enough staff to take care of changing 900 signatures, then there's a bigger problem right there.