# Poll - Should we allow multiple Deals threads?



## Mike Greene (Dec 28, 2017)

There are _three_ new threads right now in the Deals section for the AudioPluginDeals SoundIron offer. One is by APD, the other two are affiliates. (Affiliates make a commission on any sales that come from links through them.) Given that it already takes 4 to 5 pages to get through 24 hours of Latest Posts, I'm starting to think some trimming may be in order.

The temptation is to only allow one thread per deal, but in this particular case, I noticed that a couple people asked retunes in his thread for advice, so I suppose value was added there. Still, three threads on the same deal is a little much.

For that matter, I'm still not sure what to do with affiliates in general. Some add value, which is good for the forum, but some don't, which means there are a number of useless threads. The challenge is how to make rules which differentiate between the two.

Or maybe I'm making much ado about nothing, and most people aren't bothered by multiple Deals threads. So before I start getting too far into the weeds on this, let me know what you think.


----------



## Thorsten Meyer (Dec 28, 2017)

It could make sense to allow only the main distributor of the deal, for example APD to post the deal as they are active on this forum anyhow.


----------



## Polkasound (Dec 28, 2017)

No matter the topic or sub-forum, redundant threads are redundant threads, and redundant threads are annoying. No offense to anyone, but affiliates and retailers posting in the same forum makes as much sense as setting up a Starbucks coffee kiosk right in front of a Starbucks store. I think deals should be handled like all other topics -- the first one to post gets the thread; all other posts must follow _in that thread_.


----------



## Mike Greene (Dec 28, 2017)

The poll is already at 21-0 in favor of limiting to just one thread, so I locked two of the threads and left the APD thread alive. I'll add this rule to the sticky in the sub-forum when I get time.


----------



## chillbot (Dec 28, 2017)

Sure are a lot of new rules around here.

If you're adding rules anyway I would like to be called "Mr. Chillbot" or "Mr. Bot" from now on. I feel it's a sign of respect.

EDIT: also accepting "sir".

EDIT: debating accepting "señor" as well.


----------



## fiestared (Dec 28, 2017)

chillbot said:


> Sure are a lot of new rules around here.
> 
> If you're adding rules anyway I would like to be called "Mr. Chillbot" or "Mr. Bot" from now on. I feel it's a sign of respect.
> 
> ...


To be complete you should accept " monsieur"...


----------



## mouse (Dec 28, 2017)

How much do you want to bet we'll now see "updates" to the main thread like "any opinions on this deal" / "just bought, amazing must have" from not so random accounts like on previous ones...


----------



## higgs (Dec 28, 2017)

Does it make sense to have posts that critique a "Deal" in the same thread started by the outfit offering said deal?


----------



## ism (Dec 28, 2017)

Some affiliate deals are producing valuable review-like content, which while hardly impartial is funding library reviews.

In general there some good review content floating about, but I'm really feeling the need for more and better reviews. And given that none of us (myself included) are actually paying for such reviews, the fact is that affiliate deals are a way of funding reviews in general. While this commercial structure is far from ideal, there is value in reviews funded directly or indirectly by affiliate deals. 

(In fact this is a terrible commercial structure, but I'm not sure that the dumpster fire of that is internet revenue streams offers any obvious alternative).

So I'm not saying that all affiliate reviews add value (some just rehash existing videos or performs an uncritical unboxing), but some definitely do add value, and I do try to buy deals via an affiliate when I think that the review adds something. 

So maybe a policy that distinguishes affiliate deals accompanied by a substantive review are ok, unboxing adverts aren't? ie. Additional affiliate deal videos need to quality for the review section and not "deals deals deals"?

Not saying I want to be the one who has to enforce the distinction though. So maybe that's too complex.


----------



## Polkasound (Dec 28, 2017)

higgs said:


> Does it make sense to have posts that critique a "Deal" in the same thread started by the outfit offering said deal?



New Rule:

Posts that critique deals in the Tier 2 Deals thread that were started by the developer will be moved to the Tier 1 Commercial thread, but only if no Tier 1 affiliates have started a similar threads in either Tier 1 or Tier 2 Deals, unless the deal was posted in Tier 2 Commercial Announcements by a Tier 2 developer, except when the critiquing posts discuss products by a Tier 2 developer who posted in Tier 1 Deals, in which case the thread will by subdivided and the original post relocated to the appropriate Tier 1 and/or Tier 2 affiliate deals thread and the subsequent responses subdivided among the Tier 1 and Tier 2 categories which will be decided by whether or not the developer whose product is being discussed posted the deal before the affiliate, assuming the affiliate is advertising a Tier 1 developer's product. In that case, affiliate links will be condensed with responses for the Tier 2 developers in Tier 1 deals, with the exception that responses to Tier 2 developers' posts will remain with the original Deals post, as long as the post is not combined with an affiliate post in Tier 1 Commercial or Tier 2 Deals.


----------



## heisenberg (Dec 28, 2017)

Something that may have got lost here, as inferred by higgs, is there was a courtesy given to the vendor that if they started a thread people would refrain from making negative or critical comments about said product but if a forum member started a thread either to promote or question a deal that posters were less restricted on what they could say. Hence, why there was a commercial thread and place(s) where the locals could promote or critique a product.

That distinction was/is extremely valuable. Much of that benefit is diluted in this new solution which is meant to deal with vendors who are reaping SIGNIFICANT financial benefit this site provides but not contributing to its operation. I will have to reflect further on this but right now it looks like the users of VI-C will be the losers in this new scenario with reduced facility to have honest discussion about libraries, synths and effects promoted here.


----------



## rrichard63 (Dec 28, 2017)

These rules are time consuming to monitor and enforce. As much as it would be nice to have every review, comment, question and answer about a new product in one thread, I don't think that result is worth the effort involved. So I voted "no".


----------



## higgs (Dec 28, 2017)

heisenberg said:


> Something that may have got lost here, as inferred by higgs, is there was a courtesy given to the vendor that if they started a thread people would refrain from making negative or critical comments about said product but if a forum member started a thread either to promote or question a deal that posters were less restricted on what they could say. Hence, why there was a commercial thread and place(s) where the locals could promote or critique a product.
> 
> That distinction was/is extremely valuable. Much of that benefit or diluted in this new solution which is meant to deal with vendors who are reaping SIGNIFICANT financial benefit this site provides but not contributing to its operation. I will have to reflect further on this but right now it looks like the users of VI-C will be the losers in this new scenario with reduced facility to have honest discussion about libraries, synths and effects promoted here.



Yes, the courtesy element is precisely what I meant to address. I feel the notion of drawing a line between "Deal Announcements" and general community "Deal Discussions," (do you like these products? is the deal worth it? why would I not want the deal?, etc) is worth exploring.


----------



## heisenberg (Dec 28, 2017)

rrichard63 said:


> These rules are time consuming to monitor and enforce... I don't think that result is worth the effort involved. So I voted "no".



I changed my vote to "No". Too many unintended consequences, all in an effort to deal with some key vendors taking advantage of VI-C's casual approach. We should tread carefully as the editorial aspect of forum posts often evaluate and promote products adding value to this site and driving habitual return visits. The most effective way this happens is when a forum member does the commenting and promotion. Inadvertent restriction of this will devalue the site and reduce traffic.

This situation began with the issue of errant software publishers not paying for advertising, doing it on the backs of those paying and on the backs users who buy their products and "pay" with their time, content and endorsement on the subject matter at hand often to promote their products.

VI-C with its reach to composers & musicians is arguably one of the most effective methods in the music software industry that promotes and encourages the actual purchase of music creation software, in an industry that is rampant with piracy.

Let's not jump into a restructure of the forum that will result in damage to the effectiveness VI-C with new content constantly being added to it. I strongly suspect these changes will stifle that.

EDIT: for brevity & clarity


----------



## ironbut (Dec 28, 2017)

IMHO the fewer rules the better. 
Folks who spend a lot of time here will get to know the rules but I think that casual members/venders don't want to have to learn a bunch of stuff just to turn people onto a deal they have going. 
If enough members complain about something, that might warrant a new rule, but seeing this is the extended Black Friday period, I'd have a pretty high tolerance to the antics of venders (maybe just warn them).
Too many rules killed a forum I moderated. They rubbed a few guys the wrong way and they created an alternative forum where they lived happily ever after.


----------



## dzilizzi (Dec 28, 2017)

I'm kind of with the people who pay for advertising - i.e. Tier 1, should get a little respect and a separate comment-y thread. Tier 2? Comment away, negative or positive. And generally, except at this time of the year, and maybe around June, the deals thread shouldn't be so crazy. 

And since it says I'm a senior member here, even though I think I've been coming here less than a year, my opinion must be very important.


----------



## elpedro (Dec 28, 2017)

there's plenty of room on social media for the affiliates to post their deal news, i usually look up my fav affiliate if i decide to go for a deal.


----------



## Polkasound (Dec 28, 2017)

I think dzilizzi has a good point about paying advertisers having a dedicated place to post their product announcements without having to deal with negative criticism, but I think simply making it a rule, hoping people abide by it, and trying to enforce it, is impractical.

My ideas aren't going to work for everyone, but if VI-C were my forum, this is how I would streamline it:

"Commercial Announcements" would be changed to *Paid Commercial Announcements*, and it would be a publicly visible, moderator-approved sub-forum for paying advertisers only. After a developer or retailer submits a post, a VI-C moderator receives the post, verifies it came from a paying advertiser, publishes it, and immediately locks the thread so that nothing can be posted after it._ Paid Commercial Announcements would be strictly a one-way conduit of information._

"Commercial Announcements Tier 2" would be changed to *Free Commercial Announcements*. Though blocked from public view, it would be free to use by all developers and retailers, and would also remain open for feedback/discussion by the membership.

Tiers 1 and 2 of "DEALS, DEALS, DEALS!" would be consolidated into just one *DEALS, DEALS, DEALS!* sub-forum, blocked from public view, which would be free for everyone to use, whether they're developers, retailers, affiliates, or regular forum members. The whole purpose of this sub-forum would be to serve as an ultra-convenient, one-stop shopping sub-forum for members.


----------



## Mike Greene (Dec 28, 2017)

Just so we're on the same page, this new rule only applies to companies. I don't think there's need for three financially motivated threads on the same deal.

Members can still post their own threads about a deal. If you want to ask whether people think it's a _good_ deal, then go ahead and post it. Personally, I'd post in Sample Talk, but if you want to post in the Deals section, that's fine, too. No need to overthink it.


----------



## playz123 (Dec 29, 2017)

Starting to understand that owning and running a music forum like this one is far more complicated and time consuming than one might think.


----------



## enCiphered (Dec 29, 2017)

Commercial announcements and deals should only be allowed for the developers and the companies selling the libraries and software plugins. Not for affiliates and not for people who want to comment them.
The announcements should be locked threads and only the original OP should have the administration rights to comment or update them.
People who want to give some constructive criticism or just start a conversation about it should open a new thread.
Without including any affiliate links! Double threads for discussion should be merged or deleted by the mods or admin.

By the way, @playz123 is right.
How does Mike handle to manage such a complex forum and develop VI´s at the same time?
I´m deeply impressed!


----------



## gsilbers (Dec 29, 2017)

chillbot said:


> Sure are a lot of new rules around here.
> 
> If you're adding rules anyway I would like to be called "Mr. Chillbot" or "Mr. Bot" from now on. I feel it's a sign of respect.
> 
> ...



i second this motion


----------



## higgs (Dec 29, 2017)

I wonder if it would make sense to just shut off comments on deal announcements by paying advertisers while leaving on the ability to "like" the post. My forum admin experience is limited to phpBB but XenForo is quite similar, and this is doable in phpBB.


----------



## Quasar (Dec 29, 2017)

Polkasound said:


> I think dzilizzi has a good point about paying advertisers having a dedicated place to post their product announcements without having to deal with negative criticism, but I think simply making it a rule, hoping people abide by it, and trying to enforce it, is impractical.
> 
> My ideas aren't going to work for everyone, but if VI-C were my forum, this is how I would streamline it:
> 
> ...


I think this might be a winner, and would have the happy side effect of a paid commercial area in which the most current deals are always on top, because there is no bumping.

But one possible problem: Would the static nature of the paid commercial forum make it less attractive for the more popular developers who are constantly getting bumped back to the top, sometimes for months or even years after the announcement has become dated?


----------



## Polkasound (Dec 29, 2017)

Quasar said:


> Would the static nature of the paid commercial forum make it less attractive for the more popular developers who are constantly getting bumped back to the top



They way I see it is like this... advertisers are paying for banner exposure. Giving advertisers their own, locked, commercial sub-forum viewable by the public would be a privilege. A bonus. The lack of thread-bumping would even the playing field for all advertisers who take advantage of that privilege. If that's not good enough for some advertisers, they can up their exposure by buying more banners, or they can take their business elsewhere.


----------



## Quasar (Dec 29, 2017)

Polkasound said:


> They way I see it is like this... advertisers are paying for banner exposure. Giving advertisers their own, locked, commercial sub-forum viewable by the public would be a privilege. A bonus. The lack of thread-bumping would even the playing field for all advertisers who take advantage of that privilege. If that's not good enough for some advertisers, they can up their exposure by buying more banners, or they can take their business elsewhere.



And they can always post in your free-for-all _Deal, Deals, Deals!_ section as well (which, _sans_ tiers, wouldn't shame the paying devs with 2nd tier status). Yes, I think Mike ought to give your idea serious consideration. By far the best I've read yet.


----------



## Mike Greene (Dec 29, 2017)

Quasar said:


> But one possible problem: Would the static nature of the paid commercial forum make it less attractive for the more popular developers who are constantly getting bumped back to the top, sometimes for months or even years after the announcement has become dated?


Yes, that would make it _much_ less attractive. If threads in Commercial Announcements died after one post, I suspect we'd see a lot more fake members posting in Sample Talk to get conversations started there instead.

Plus, I think it's healthy to have discussion about a release. This is a forum, after all.  What better place to ask how long the intro pricing lasts, or whether a library includes schlargando samples?

Also, long threads tend to be about products that warrant it, which is helpful to the casual visitor. If they see a thread that has gone on for lots of pages, they know there must be something significant there. If they see a thread with no responses, they can assume it's probably a less significant release. There are exceptions, of course, but it's mostly true.



Polkasound said:


> They way I see it is like this... advertisers are paying for banner exposure. Giving advertisers their own, locked, commercial sub-forum viewable by the public would be a privilege. A bonus.


It's the other way around. Almost all developers are here to get their products discussed in threads. Even the developers who "aren't here" have surrogates who post for them. Ads are secondary.

That's why I did the two tier system for Announcements and Deals. It incentivized the ads.


----------



## tmhuud (Dec 29, 2017)

I think schlargando and legato deserve their own section.


----------



## Polkasound (Dec 29, 2017)

Mike Greene said:


> It's the other way around. Almost all developers are here to get their products discussed in threads.



That wouldn't change. Nobody would be preventing discussions of advertised products to take place in Sample-Talk (or whichever appropriate sub-forum would apply).



Mike Greene said:


> If threads in Commercial Announcements died after one post, I suspect we'd see a lot more fake members posting in Sample Talk to get conversations started there instead.



Conversations about the advertised products? Well, isn't that the purpose of Sample-Talk? No matter who is doing the posting, the whole point of locking each thread in Paid Commercial Announcements would be to: 1. Automatically protect the advertisement from unflattering feedback. 2. Get conversations about the products started in Sample-Talk (or whichever appropriate sub-forum would apply).

The way things are now, you've got new members having to read about tiers, you're having to monitor feedback in commercial announcements to make sure it doesn't cross a "negativity threshold", you're moving tier 1 threads into tier 2 sub-forums, etc., and all of this work is for the sake of catering to advertisers. If you like it that way, that's great, and I'm sure your advertisers are especially appreciative. But at what point do you feel your advertisers are getting enough for their money?

Right now, your advertisers are getting banner exposure, advertising in commercial announcements, and publicity from discussion of their products. As a former forum administrator, I see ways to streamline VI-C for both the membership's and moderators' benefit by changing a few words, removing a few restrictions, and merging sub-forums. The streamlining wouldn't exactly pander to advertisers, but neither would it inhibit their exposure. They'd still be getting banner exposure, advertising in commercial announcements, and publicity from discussion of their products.


----------



## Mike Greene (Dec 29, 2017)

While I do appreciate the intentions, I think this is what's known as "a solution in search of a problem."  Don't get me wrong, there are still a number of things I want to do, but the Commercial Announcements and Deals forums are doing what they need to do. Best of all, they pretty much run themselves.

We don't need to monitor Commercial Announcements for negativity. We do get reported posts from time to time, but those are rarely in Commercial Announcements. It really isn't a problem. Years ago, when there was only Sample Talk and no separate Commercial Announcements section ... _that's_ when we had problems.

I don't think the Tiers are much of a problem, either. I suppose a new member might wonder why there are two (if he even notices, since most people use Latest Posts), but I don't think it's something he's going to lose sleep over. If he doesn't want to use Latest Posts and he wants to check for Announcements or Deals, he'll just ... check both tiers. Simple.

None of this stuff is a problem on my end and I'm actually really happy with how things are right now. I'm definitely not looking to make any sweeping changes. I do want to find a slicker way to display the two tiers, and I have Claudio and André working on that, but even if they can't find a better way, I'm fine. The two-tier system has already been very successful at waking up advertisers to pay for an ad, so I would need a very compelling reason to change that back.


----------



## Polkasound (Dec 29, 2017)

Sounds good. I just remember a few days or weeks back, you said something about the forum pulling you away from Realitone, so I was just thinking of ways to cut down administration time. If you're happy, the moderators are happy, the advertisers are happy, and the members are happy, then nothing needs to change.


----------



## ironbut (Dec 31, 2017)

I'm not sure if it's the way I remember it, but for every minute your spend dealing with things that are visible to the members/guests of your forum, you spend an hour dealing with spammers (and sometimes 8 hours).


----------



## MarcusD (Jan 5, 2018)

Just an idea..might be rubbish but.

How about having two new threads. One for smaller indipendant sellers (or anyone) where new form topics have a lifecycle before self deleting. You could set it to be "shown" for 7 days (or something) from the initial post, people can comment etc.. then after 7 days self deletion.

Then the other thread can be for approved developers, who are the only ones able to create new threads about their products. Unapproved members can only post comment to those threads.


----------



## Mike Greene (Jan 5, 2018)

MarcusD said:


> Just an idea..might be rubbish but.
> 
> How about having two new threads. One for smaller indipendant sellers (or anyone) where new form topics have a lifecycle before self deleting. You could set it to be "shown" for 7 days (or something) from the initial post, people can comment etc.. then after 7 days self deletion.
> 
> Then the other thread can be for approved developers, who are the only ones able to create new threads about their products. Unapproved members can only post comment to those threads.


That would be a bunch of work. I don't like work.  

The current way has its flaws, but it's working pretty well and it's been especially effective at getting non-advertisers to take notice, so I'm going to leave things as is for a while.


----------

