One-Line wonders, and other digital cockroaches...

[Steven Fullman]

Originally Posted by ExRat

Hi Steven,



How do you rate on the 'hard knock' scale?

Roger

I don't have gifs on tap, but apart from that, I'm golden...



Steve

[ExRat]

Hi Steven,

I don't have gifs on tap

Do you have gf's on tap?

If so, you're in. In fact you can have all the house points and my sandwiches.

[Steven Fullman]

Originally Posted by ExRat

Hi Steven,



Do you have gf's on tap?

If so, you're in. In fact you can have all the house points and my sandwiches.

Oooh, a JV

You get to keep the piccallily, though...

[ExRat]

Hi Steven,

You get to keep the piccallily, though...

Why? Are your gf's into that? Ok...takes all sorts. Whipped cream's more my bag, but whatever....

Sorry Paul, I'll stop there.

[Paul Myers]

Roger,

Sorry Paul, I'll stop there.

You were about to push the rating to an 'R.'


Paul

[Ken Strong]

Originally Posted by Paul Myers

If you see posts that say things like, "Great post. Thanks for the share," or "Thanks. That's really great info," and the poster has a low post count, look at their profile and check their other comments. If they have a lot of one or two line posts that seem rushed, use the report post button. (The red triangle with the black exclamation point, at the lower left of each post.)

The only reason I haven't been doing this is because I was under the impression the Report Post button was only for the most blatant and obnoxious spamming or trolling.

I thought if I started reporting every one-line drive-by newbie, whoever is on the other end of the Report Post button would lambaste me for adding to their already-overwhelming moderating load.

But if you want more of those kinds of posts reported, I'll be more than happy to help...

[sbucciarel]

Rather than being so fast to nuke posts of possibly misguided noobies, if it were my forum, I'd rather see someone enlighten them first and take drastic measures only if necessary. The WSO forum is what makes this site profitable, and in these economic times, profitable is a good thing ... not to be discouraged, IMHO. It's a natural thing to me to want to get your posts up and try to start making some money. Those who jump into too quickly without some participation and people getting to know them a bit, will probably fail the first few rounds, but may come around eventually.

I've seen some posts of mine disappear with no explanation whatsoever and don't have a clue as to why they did. Someone with a quick trigger finger is all I can guess. They weren't one liners or mindless bitching or any of the other categories you've mentioned.

When you have a forum with a lot of new people coming in, some of them are bound to make "mistakes" but I wouldn't want to be the one chasing prospective "customers" from my forum.

[Ken Strong]

Originally Posted by sbucciarel

Rather than being so fast to nuke posts of possibly misguided noobies, if it were my forum, I'd rather see someone enlighten them first and take drastic measures only if necessary.

Nuking a few posts isn't a drastic measure, especially if they're one-liners that don't contribute anything. A drastic measure would be banning such misguided newbies from the forum, but nobody's advocating that, as far as I can tell.

Encouraging as many WSOs to be posted as possible by anyone who shows up here is not the way to ensure long-term profitability of this forum, IMHO -- just the opposite.

[sbucciarel]

Originally Posted by KenStrong

Nuking a few posts isn't a drastic measure, especially if they're one-liners that don't contribute anything. A drastic measure would be banning such misguided newbies from the forum, but nobody's advocating that, as far as I can tell.

Encouraging as many WSOs to be posted as possible by anyone who shows up here is not the way to ensure long-term profitability of this forum, IMHO -- just the opposite.

I don't believe I said any of the above. I said that instead of nuking a post with no explanation to the person you nuked, why not enlighten them first.

I also said nothing about encouraging as many WSOs as possible by anyone who shows up, but then WSOs is what the WSO forum is all about, isn't it? The quality of WSOs is up to the person who approves or denies them, so I would say that alone, would be sufficient to keep scammy and poor quality WSOs from the forum.

[Paul Myers]

Rather than being so fast to nuke posts of possibly misguided noobies, if it were my forum, I'd rather see someone enlighten them first and take drastic measures only if necessary.

As Ken pointed out, there's nothing "drastic" about nuking pointless one-liners. There is something significantly problematic about allowing them, as you can imagine.

If that's how you think a forum should be run, go run your own forum. One with thousands of active members. Try explaining your policies to people who have no interest in anything but exploiting your efforts for their gain, at your expense. (The last part is the problem, in case that wasn't obvious.)

Do that with every newbie who strolls in, day after day, for as long as you have new members signing up.

Once you've done that for, oh, 10 years or more, come back and tell us how the place should be run.

The stickies at the top of the forum tell you what you need to know. If someone is too lazy or ignorant to learn how an existing community works before they try to exploit it, they deserve to be ejected from that community.

Your suggested approach sounds nice, and shows concern for others, but it doesn't work on any kind of large scale. And the fact remains that many of the people who pull this stuff don't care to learn. They actively resist it, because it's not part of their plan.


Paul

[Paul Myers]

I said that instead of nuking a post with no explanation to the person you nuked, why not enlighten them first.

Do you really want to know the answer to that?


Paul

[tommygadget]

Originally Posted by Paul Myers

TomG and Big Mike,

That's doable, actually.

All it would take is a few people who occasionally post something politely bringing people's attention to the circumstances around the poster. Maybe something like:

"This person has very few posts, many of them contributing little to the group. You may want to consider whether you wish to encourage that sort of behavior by rewarding it."

Of course, the sneaks may use multiple user accounts to get such comments nuked, but that would just tend to expose those accounts to the mods. And there's nothing preventing one from posting such a thing again. If it catches on with even a few people who frequent the WSO forum, that could work.


Paul

Paul and Big Mike - I think this is a good idea, and I'm game. When I see things like this I'll surely make an extra effort to look a little deeper. This forum has been REALLY good to me, and I've made many friends, contacts, and posts and I'll do A LOT to make sure that the spammers and trolls won't lower the quality of this haven one bit.

TomG.

[sbucciarel]

Originally Posted by Paul Myers

Do you really want to know the answer to that?


Paul

No .. not any longer. Not if you're just going to tell me to go run my own forum for expressing an opinion. I'll just unsubscribe to this thread and you all can carry on.

Cheers

[Paul Myers]

No .. not any longer.

I suspected you wouldn't.

Not if you're just going to tell me to go run my own forum for expressing an opinion.

Indeed. How rude of me to suggest that you gather some experience on which to base your opinions. (Note: I didn't say to leave this one. Just gather some experience.)

Whatever. She's left the thread.

For those who might be interested in the answer to her question, here's the short form:

A: The person you explain your actions to will often argue incessantly, sometimes escalating to extreme behaviors in an effort to "win" the point.

The worst psychos in any forum are people who have fixated on one or two people they imagine have wronged them. Those people make a point to be destructive to the entire group, as their only easy way to "punish" the moderator.

B: There isn't enough time in the day to explain every action you take as a mod. Not even with cut-and-paste template comments or hotkeys.

C: Most of them don't care. They don't want to learn what you're teaching. The ones who do care will read the rules and not start this stuff in the first place.

D: You NEVER want to encourage the idea that a forum is a democracy. That will kill most groups faster than you might imagine.


Paul

[TedMarlett]

Paul,

I really do appreciate your comments here. That's why I subscribed to your news letter.

I have been on the forum since 2006 and still find it hard to believe some of the stuff that's written here. I only follow a few people in this forum and listen to what they say.

I am learning to sort the wheat from the chaff, but it is terribly hard.

I believe Ken said something about regurgitated information and I strongly believe he is right on that one.

Many threads have nothing I want to read because it does sound like "the next best solution" to anyone's IM problem set up by someone without many posts and no discernible experience.

I do take replying to posts seriously even though I don't have much experience. Unfortunately most of my posts do not express much help for anyone, let alone me.

Thanks again

[mmurtha]

Hey Paul,

Good and informative post - thanks!

I always thought that trolls, vermin, and digital cockroaches were all the same with the same end goal in mind, but according to your description of each, I stand corrected (and rightfully so).

I think many members are leaving the moderation up to everyone else. The thing is, who is everyone else? If we all think that way, this forum will be taken over in a matter of days. This is a community, and we should be working for the common good of said community.

Thanks for the share! (and no, I don't do the pirating thing either, I sware)


Mary

[The Copy Nazi]

Hmmm...I do wonder what your opinion is on the blackhatters that are infiltrating this forum - the Cookie Stuffers and Craigs List/eBay CPA spammers and scammers. They even have WSOs on it. Personally I find it incredible. But after coming off a two week ban for "spoiling another member's WSO" I'm loathe to even comment on my purchases now. I've just bought one of these blackhat WSOs and the cruel and underhand tactics it recommended just made my blood boil. All I could do was ask for a refund. Meanwhile these b*stards are raking it in. And giving I.M. an even worse rep - if that's possible. What do you think of that?

[Paul Myers]

Tina,

People who get their posts deleted need to realize that there are very few people here who can nuke a thread all by themselves. Most of the time, it takes at least three reports to get one deleted.

That's something folks tend to forget, since they think in terms of the old style of moderation. I'm guilty of forgetting that myself from time to time.

As Mary points out, a lot of people simply forget, don't know, or don't care that they have a role to play in the process. That slows things down, and allows the vermin to chew on the furniture a bit longer before getting nuked.

Ted points out a big chunk of the problem: Just learning to sort the useful stuff from the clueless fluff is tough enough. New folks may be better off focusing on their businesses.

Metronicity,

I agree with you on the issue of WSOs selling stuff that teaches the evil side of "black hat" techniques. Part of the problem is that "black hat" has the double meaning. Some of it isn't really all that "black" in nature. The stuff that is should be removed when it's found, but that comes back to the technical issues I mentioned earlier.

As far as your having been given a forced leave for your comments on a WSO, I don't have a clue what that's about, so I couldn't say with any certainty if it was right or not.

I can suggest that it's possible that your ... aggressive ... posting style may have contributed to the decision. Whether that's right or not is another discussion, but it's something that does tend to get taken into account. How you choose to deal with that is up to you, of course. It is something you need to consider, at the least.

The main point of your question is a valid one. We do need to work out something that lets those types of offers get handled - as in, removed and not reinstated.


Paul

[Adrian Cooper]

How effective is WSO?

I mean if people go to that much trouble there must be a reason.

I have contributed 200 posts in less than a week to participate and help other IM's. Never heard of WSO or knew what is was until a couple of days ago.

I do think WSO posting rights by number of posts is asking for trouble.

A much better way of doing it would be by number of time "thanked", because that shows a genuinely useful contribution.

[tommygadget]

Originally Posted by apc01

How effective is WSO?

I mean if people go to that much trouble there must be a reason.

I have contributed 200 posts in less than a week to participate and help other IM's. Never heard of WSO or knew what is was until a couple of days ago.

I do think WSO posting rights by number of posts is asking for trouble.

A much better way of doing it would be by number of time "thanked", because that shows a genuinely useful contribution.

Sadly, that would only incite multiple user logins and thanks for everybody via automated bots. Same thing. The solution is quite complex, looking at range of IPs, determining patterns between users, age and type of posts, etc. The best algorithm is simply having people actually give a crap (oops, did I say crap?).

TomG.

[Paul Myers]

A much better way of doing it would be by number of time "thanked", because that shows a genuinely useful contribution.

Just as easily gamed. The creeps create a few extra accounts, thank each other, and *poof.*

There's another, less obvious, problem with that idea in practice. Some people use styles that don't promote others to thank them. These tend to be folks who give direct replies, without the personal touch. The information in those replies is often the most useful in the thread, but it doesn't invoke the "Thank you" response.

There's no way to stop the gaming of the system. The goal then is to reduce the impact of, and profit from, that gaming.


Paul

[Adrian Cooper]

Well the WSO looks a mess to me - only serves to really confuse IM's - especially new ones. Forum software doesn't lend itself to this sort of thing.

I actually would not want a product of mine to be seen there Sends the wrong message.

[Paul Myers]

Forum software doesn't lend itself to this sort of thing.

Yet, strangely, it's been a working tradition for some ten years or so. And a profitable one for many people.

I actually would not want a product of mine to be seen there Sends the wrong message.

Really? What message is that?


Paul

[TelegramSam]

Originally Posted by Steven Fullman

You get to keep the piccallily, though...

My God!

Piccallily. I haven't heard that word since I was a small boy going round to my gran's for Sunday lunch.

Pity it tasted so foul as a kid. I would probably like it now.

Back to the point of the thread, if 3 people complain about something, does that mean it always gets deleted?

What if the subject is contentious and it does evoke complaints in people, but that it should remain on the site for others to comment on?

How does moderation work then?

Just a thought.

[Bev Clement]

Before Roger & Steven got talking about Picallily (which you can buy in Hong Kong), Roger made a good comment about people who seem to be permanently in the WSO, bumping and rebumping their WSO without seeming to contribute to the forum.

Would it be possible to make the WSO like the OT, where the posts are not added to the post count.

Silly question time from me. Any reason why we have to be logged in to view the OT but not the WSO?

[Paul Myers]

Sam,

Back to the point of the thread, if 3 people complain about something, does that mean it always gets deleted?

What if the subject is contentious and it does evoke complaints in people, but that it should remain on the site for others to comment on?

Depends on which three people, but if enough complain, it will get sent to a separate section for review. Very few threads come back from there.

There have been a lot of threads that got sent away simply because some folks are too touchy. Not a large percentage, but a lot in absolute numbers. That's a cost of the speed of member moderation.


Paul

[The Copy Nazi]

I can suggest that it's possible that your ... aggressive ... posting style may have contributed to the decision. Whether that's right or not is another discussion, but it's something that does tend to get taken into account. How you choose to deal with that is up to you, of course. It is something you need to consider, at the least.

The main point of your question is a valid one. We do need to work out something that lets those types of offers get handled - as in, removed and not reinstated.

WTF you mean "aggressive posting style"!!! Just kidding - I take your point.

As to the second bit, if I were to show you the tactics in the PDF I bought, I think you would be more than somewhat annoyed too. And again its from someone with a minimum of posts/very new and gaming the system. In cahoots with another more established Warrior who leaves a glowing "review". The PDF is an 11 page double-spaced poorly-written "treatise" on how to con people with false classifieds leading to their crappy CPA offers. And of course the OP sees nothing unethical or wrong in what they're doing.

The other worry is the well-known cookie-stuffer who's currently running a WSO. I wouldn't be clicking on his signature for starters.

That's all I'm saying or I run the risk of being sin-binned again. PM me if you want to know more.

[Adrian Cooper]

Originally Posted by Paul Myers

Yet, strangely, it's been a working tradition for some ten years or so. And a profitable one for many people.

Interesting. I must take a closer look it seems.

I had assumed that with so many offers being posted, they would be pushed down to the second and deeper pages soon, and not getting any exposure - bit like not being on the first page of Google SERPS.

Really? What message is that?
Paul

I could have phrased that better

What I meant was that if you have a really good product, if there are loads of people here posting 30 quick posts to post in WSO just to post their offer, then it devalues all the genuine offers.

That said, after a week, I know next to nothing about WSO, so I am sort of assuming that to be the case.

[Paul Myers]

Metronicity,

The PDF is an 11 page double-spaced poorly-written "treatise" on how to con people with false classifieds leading to their crappy CPA offers.

I've commented on such offers within their WSO threads. Pointing out that they're unethical is fine, assuming you've seen the product. Whoever banned you either had other additional reasons, or they screwed up. Or both. It's a messy process, and mistakes happen.

If you run into that sort of thing again, PM me a copy of the product. I am ... ummm ... unlikely to be banned for making a comment on such a thing. And I can almost certainly get it removed.

apc01,

I had assumed that with so many offers being posted, they would be pushed down to the second and deeper pages soon, and not getting any exposure - bit like not being on the first page of Google SERPS.

They do get pushed down quickly. That doesn't stop them from working, if you have the right kind of offer.


Paul

[Paul Buckley]

Originally Posted by JazzOscar

Thanks for the ....., Paul!

One group you didn't spesifically mention are those that, in addition to posting a lot of posts with an average of 5-6 minutes between them, almost seem to go by the alphabet, sending out hundreds of friendship requests.

When I get a request from someone behaving like that I don't want to accept it. I see many others seem to be less critical about it than me though.

Funny you should mention this one. I just rejected a friend request from a Romanian "warrior" who had 10 total posts and 747 friends

[123rlp]

Now I know why my post count went from 80 something to 18 boy I must admit that paranioa is never 20/20.Not only am I an admitted noob I dont evean have a signature.

[tkalamba]

One liners and the like are pretty much universally found in any forum, regardless of niche. Their motives may not always be the same, but I find them in everything from automotive forums to videogaming forums. Unfortunately they are a sad reality in forums.

[Kay King]

I agree with the rules for "qualifying" before posting in the WSO section - whether posting something to sell or a comment. I've noticed quite a few WSO's in recent months that I know are based on "money for me" rather than on "quality product/advice" but the rule on not interfering has kept me from saying anything. I'm not going to buy crap just to warn others about it.

I've wondered, though, what percent of refund requests come from those brand new people who join, hit the WSO section and start buying. Also wonder what percent of the "sharing" of products on other sites is done through this particular group.

kay

[Tyrus Antas]

The WSO has become more popular than the General Section. What does that tell you? Many people are just here because of the WSO's and would quickly leave if they couldn't use them to make a profit.

If you take a look at forums like digital point you'll see the marketplace has also become the most popular section of the forum by far.

People want to make some quick cash. The WSO forum allows them that. Whatever restriction exists people will find a way to go over them, one way or the other.

Tyrus

[Paul Myers]

Nathan,

There are two schools (at least) on the subject. One is that it benefits sellers to have the WSO forum open. The other is that it encourages abuse. I'm not convinced of the last one enough to lobby for closing it to all but members. I'm not opposed to the idea, either.

That's Allen's call. He's the one you'd have to sell.

Kay,

I've wondered, though, what percent of refund requests come from those brand new people who join, hit the WSO section and start buying. Also wonder what percent of the "sharing" of products on other sites is done through this particular group.

The first... probably fairly high. Hard to say with any certainty.

The second... Not so much. There's probably quite a lot of it from folks who join and start selling as soon as they can. I'm seeing some interesting patterns in topics, behaviors and locations for many of those.


Paul

[Paul Myers]

Metronicity,

Got the PDF, thanks. One of the techniques involves spamming, of a sort. The other two are outright fraud, in the "get caught, get fined, maybe go to jail" sense of the word.

I've posted a comment in the thread and sent Allen a note about the WSO. Thank you.

Tyrus,

Many people are just here because of the WSO's and would quickly leave if they couldn't use them to make a profit.

Cool. Let them leave. Especially if they're selling crap like what Metronicity just sent me.

People want to make some quick cash. The WSO forum allows them that. Whatever restriction exists people will find a way to go over them, one way or the other.

Don't be too certain of that. There are ways that are MUCH harder to get around, to the point where it's not even close to worth the effort that would be needed.


Paul

[Diana Lane]

Maybe it would help if it was noted somewhere (and not necessarily in detail) what happens after the 'report' button is pushed. I used to think that reporting a post meant that the entire thread would disappear, which is enough to make anyone think twice if the thread is clearly a valuable one.

Even now I wonder just who or what I'd be over-burdening if I were to report all of the 'Thanks nice share!' posts that there are around here. If I knew it was a system that was mostly automated and could handle the deluge then I'd probably report more often, but it's the prospect of a bunch of mods drowning under reports of one-liners while bigger offenders get away that usually stops me.

It's been an interesting thread, Paul. Thank you.

[Harvey Segal]

A key issue here is whether only 'contributing members'
should be allowed to post a WSO.

The problem is that you can't easily define a contributing
member and even if you do (by means of minimum posts or
number of thank-yous) there will always be workarounds.

Also it could be argued that we should similarly restrict
access to purchase a WSO (as opposed to post) to
contributing members.

Personally I think the WSO section should be an open
marketplace where you purchase products at a discount.

So my suggestion would be

* Scrap the 30 post restriction. This removes the huge
problem of the one-line post workarounds.

* Put a big warning in the WSO section advising members to
check the posting history if they are concerned about an
offer. So it's up to you if you are happy to purchase from a
new member.


Harvey

[Paul Myers]

Diana,

If it's the first post in a thread and it goes away, the whole thread goes away. If it's not, then only the reported post gets sent to "purgatory."

Harvey,

Personally I think the WSO section should be an open marketplace where you purchase products at a discount.

I now remember why I once thought it should be closed to non-members. And I think I've just revived that opinion.

The idea was for Warriors to offer special deals to other Warriors, as one of the perks (both ways) of membership.

* Scrap the 30 post restriction. This removes the huge problem of the one-line post workarounds.

And opens up a whole other set of problems. At that point, posting measures become pointless, as do any other metrics. It's a plain old classified ad forum, which we already have.


Paul

[Ken Strong]

Originally Posted by tommygadget

The best algorithm is simply having people actually give a crap (oops, did I say crap?).

Well -- the race is on to build a better give-a-crapbot.

[Harvey Segal]

Paul

Originally Posted by Paul Myers

The idea was for Warriors to offer special deals to other Warriors, as one of the perks (both ways) of membership.

What's the point of a perk if membership is free and takes a few seconds ?

Originally Posted by Paul Myers

And opens up a whole other set of problems. At that point, posting measures become pointless,
as do any other metrics. It's a plain old classified ad forum, which we already have.

- What are these problems ?

- "posting measures become pointless" - I don't understand, there
will be no need for posting measures regarding the 30 post limit

- It's not a "plain old classified ad forum" because you need
to make a special offer i.e a reduced price not given elsewhere


Harvey

[Adrian Cooper]

Originally Posted by Tyrus Antas

The WSO has become more popular than the General Section. What does that tell you? Many people are just here because of the WSO's and would quickly leave if they couldn't use them to make a profit.

If you take a look at forums like digital point you'll see the marketplace has also become the most popular section of the forum by far.

People want to make some quick cash. The WSO forum allows them that. Whatever restriction exists people will find a way to go over them, one way or the other.

Tyrus

I have noticed that far more people browse WSO as well, which tell me that people are looking for IM products.

[Adrian Cooper]

Originally Posted by Harvey.Segal

A key issue here is whether only 'contributing members'
should be allowed to post a WSO.

The problem is that you can't easily define a contributing
member and even if you do (by means of minimum posts or
number of thank-yous) there will always be workarounds.

Also it could be argued that we should similarly restrict
access to purchase a WSO (as opposed to post) to
contributing members.

Personally I think the WSO section should be an open
marketplace where you purchase products at a discount.

So my suggestion would be

* Scrap the 30 post restriction. This removes the huge
problem of the one-line post workarounds.

* Put a big warning in the WSO section advising members to
check the posting history if they are concerned about an
offer. So it's up to you if you are happy to purchase from a
new member.


Harvey

As I see it the main issues with WSO are:

1. Lack of human management

2. Using forum software for a purpose it was not designed for.

3. Encouraging random people with "offers" to downgrade the main forums to hit the 30 post requirement.

From what I see of WSO - large number of products and very large number of people browsing the products, WSO should be a dedicated resource.

It could be done, but of course it is Allen's call.

[John Taylor]

Of course there's an obvious solution, which
won't go down to well, but someone needs to
say it..

Shut down the WSO Forum.

That would solve a lot of problems.

John

[Devon Brown]

I don't want to be redundant in what others have said here, Paul, FANTASTIC post. I think this happens with any large forum group though. You'll start to collect all types, sad but true. This goes for any group forum, online or offline.
There's no real cure for any of it, just something we all must endure.

Was anyone here when WF first opened? What was it like then? Were all those critters on then too?

[Paul Myers]

Harvey,

What's the point of a perk if membership is free and takes a few seconds?

Who are you, and what have you done with Harvey?

Access to selling in the WSO section is supposed to "cost" in participation, not cash. I would personally be in favor of raising the required post count to 100, AND adding a time requirement for membership of at least 2 months. It would be much harder to sneak by both of those.

Consider what we'd have if we used your approach: Two advertising sections, both costing $20 to post in, and both open to World+Dog. The main difference is that one requires offering a discount and the other doesn't.

That's not a WARRIOR special at that point. It's a generic discount section.

apc01,

which tell me that people are looking for IM products.

DOH!

Did you happen to catch the full name of this place? Dude, they're not here for knitting supplies.

John,

Shut down the WSO Forum.

"Kill the patient. Then we can all go home and have dinner."

Feh.


Paul

[Kay King]

I received an email in the past week from a member here (2+ years as a member and over 2000 posts here) - giving a "fast ways to make money" freebie to his list.

One of the ten "fast money makers"? Join the WF, make TEN posts and run a WSO. If long time members can't get the rules right - how do we expect new members to understand? This is someone who RUNS a lot of WSO's, and that person probably has a large email list, too. To his credit, he mentioned that just posting "yes" wasn't good enough!

The rules - and the WSO section - are what they are. We choose whether to participate in it or not but we don't set the rules for it. I doubt it will disappear - but if it seriously needs adjusting, I expect Allen will take care of it.

kay

EDIT: Paul I agree with the "time frame as a member" and have suggested that several times as have others. A combination of contributions plus time frame would eliminate many of the worst of the bunch. Those folks don't have the patience to make 100 decent posts or to wait 60-90 days to make some "fast cash" from people here. They'd be on to other places before the time was up. Might put the "special" back into "Warrior Offers".

[Ken Strong]

Originally Posted by John Taylor

Shut down the WSO Forum.

No, I think we've tried enough of these minor tweaks and tiny adjustments and they don't work. It's time to do something more bold and radical.

[John Taylor]

Paul,

Using your analogy the WSO Forum isn't the
patient. The patient is a growing number of
people who are becoming increasingly reliant
upon Allen's hospitality as their sole source
of income.

There was a day when the WSO Forum was
a great place to test offers, to get feedback
and to ask for testimonials before launching
to the general public.

These days it seems that the WSO Forum has
become the destination market and not the
proving ground. There is a growing number of
"Made for the WSO Forum" products appearing.

John

[JohnMcCabe]

apc01, you made the comparison between the WSO section and Google results. You might be right about visibility, but there are two big differences...

1. You really can't post links to your Google listing when it drops off the front page. You can with a WSO post.

2. You can't pay Google to bump your listing back to the top of the first page. You can with a WSO post, as an alternative to simply posting the same offer again.