What's new

Poll - Should we allow multiple Deals threads?

Should we limit Deals announcements to one thread?

  • Yes

    Votes: 77 85.6%
  • No

    Votes: 13 14.4%

  • Total voters
    90

Mike Greene

Senior Member
Moderator
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

Senior Member
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

Senior Member
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.
 
OP
Mike Greene

Mike Greene

Senior Member
Moderator
Thread starter
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread Starter
  • #4
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

Sock Muppet
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

Vintage -but- not obsolete
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.
To be complete you should accept " monsieur"...
 

mouse

Active Member
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

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

ism

Senior Member
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

Senior Member
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.

:rofl:
 

heisenberg

having uncertain feelings
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.
 
Last edited:

rrichard63

Perpetual Novice
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

boson
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

having uncertain feelings
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
 
Last edited:

ironbut

Senior Member
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

Senior Member
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. :eek: :rofl: :confused:
 

elpedro

Active Member
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

Senior Member
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.
 
OP
Mike Greene

Mike Greene

Senior Member
Moderator
Thread starter
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread Starter
  • #19
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. ;)
 
Top Bottom