New FTC Rules Take Effect January 1st: Are Your Websites Ready?

193 replies
NOTE: If you are finding this post through an Internet search engine, odds are good this is not what you are looking for. Go back to your search results page and try another link. Else, read this post very thoroughly.

As you may recall, early in 2010, the FTC implemented new rules and regulations regarding disclaimers to be used on websites where the website owner earns commissions through affiliate sales or other means.

Internet marketers were all up in arms over this and, in many cases, rightly so. As with so many other things, these new rules and regulations put an increased burden on the honest sellers while doing very little, in fact, to harm the ones that are actually hurting customers.

But, I digress...

The bottom line is that these rules and regulations are here to stay and we just have to learn to live with them.

Still, they were very confusing, so a couple months ago, the FTC released a final set of guidelines which clarifies things for website owners and describes how disclosures must be made. These rules go into effect on January 1st, so you need to make sure that you are ready for them.

First, all disclosures must be made prominent. You should have a dedicated disclosure page. The link to this page needs to be included in your navigation system, whether you use a row of links in your header, down a sidebar or across the bottom. The important thing is that this disclosure page must be linked from within your primary navigation system.

That means that, if you are using a sidebar for navigation, you can't just bury the disclaimer page link at the bottom of the page. It must be included with your primary navigational links.

On pages where you are actually promoting a product, a disclaimer must be displayed at both the top and the bottom of the page. This disclaimer needs to be in type at least one point size larger than your typical body type. So, no hiding it in tiny print!

Also, each place you have a link to a product you are promoting, you must include a link to your disclaimer page, like this: productNameLink [DISCLAIMER], where the word "DISCLAIMER" is a hyperlink to your disclaimer page.

I know these steps are rather onerous and a royal pain in the neck, but these are rules we will simply have to put up with. Despite earlier claims to the contrary, penalties for non-compliance DO, in fact, start at $11,000.

And, that would not be per individual or company, but per website. So, if you have 5 websites that are not in compliance, you're looking at fines starting at $55,000.

So, that is good reason to comply!

Of course, you can understand why the FTC is doing this. This post, for example, I largely made up. Yes, there are new rules and regulations, as most people are already aware, but the "guidelines" I've listed here are ones I just fabricated. But, watch the responses to this thread. You will see people that will not have read to this point and will complain about these new things that they have to start doing. If you've read to this point, you might be a little upset (sorry), but you'll soon see the point I am making when you read the replies. People don't read things all the way through; they largely read what they want to see, not necessarily what's there.

So, when you say someone COULD make $1,000 a day using your system, but that typical results are that people will make $10 a day, people will only see the $1,000 a day because that's the bit that they want to see. So, that's why the FTC wants things a little more prominent.

Of course, that's no reason to fear, because the same basic notion holds true, that people read what they want to see. There are threads here where follow-up posts will say in bright red letters that the initial premise of the thread was false, yet people still do not see it.

So, in a sense, it doesn't matter what the FTC wants you to display on your website to warn prospective buyers, they will continue to see what they want to see. You tell them typical results are that they will fail miserably, and they'll overlook it because they don't consider themselves "typical."

It is always amazing how things can be hidden in plain sight!

If you're an honest seller, you have no real reason to worry. People will continue to buy quality products.

Of course, that doesn't mean you still can't complain about new rules and regulations because a lot of times they prove to be more of an additional burden and headache than an effective means of stopping whatever they were intended to stop.
#1st #effect #ftc #january #ready #rules #websites
  • Profile picture of the author tpw
    OMG Dan!!!

    I got as far as:

    Of course, you can understand why the FTC is doing this. This post, for example, I largely made up.
    Then it took me several minutes to quit laughing, so that I could keep reading...

    Great job...
    Signature
    Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
    Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3090816].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Josh Anderson
      Is there some sort of conspiracy going on with all these purposefully deceptive threads?

      Are you guys just trying to insight paranoia? A warrior riot maybe?

      For a moment I was beginning to think it was April 1st :p

      Originally Posted by tpw View Post

      Dan!!!
      You too
      Signature
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3090837].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Dan C. Rinnert
        Originally Posted by Josh Anderson View Post

        Are you guys just trying to insight paranoia? A warrior riot maybe?
        No, we're just offering hidden marketing insights. Next year, maybe we'll try our hands at inciting something.
        Signature

        Dan's content is irregularly read by handfuls of people. Join the elite few by reading his blog: dcrBlogs.com, following him on Twitter: dcrTweets.com or reading his fiction: dcrWrites.com but NOT by Clicking Here!

        Dan also writes content for hire, but you can't afford him anyway.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3090882].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author tpw
          Originally Posted by Dan C. Rinnert View Post

          No, we're just offering hidden marketing insights. Next year, maybe we'll try our hands at inciting something.

          You never truly understand what people are reading on your sales pages, until first you understand what they are not reading...
          Signature
          Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
          Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3090911].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Aussie_Al
        Originally Posted by Josh Anderson View Post

        Is there some sort of conspiracy going on with all these purposefully deceptive threads?

        Are you guys just trying to insight paranoia? A warrior riot maybe?

        For a moment I was beginning to think it was April 1st :p
        Haha yeah me too! That's twice in 10 minutes now - what the heck???
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3090941].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author LastBeatleBug
      Originally Posted by tpw View Post

      OMG Dan!!!

      I got as far as:
      Then it took me several minutes to quit laughing, so that I could keep reading...

      Great job...
      That is exactly what happened to me TOOO!! Good post
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3093744].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author DivaOnline
    Glad I read... Will check back later.
    Signature
    FREE Report -"Search Engine Seduction" - Learn to Seduce the Search Engines!
    FREE Internet Marketing Dictionary - Know the meanings of all the IM terms - stop guessing!
    Want Millions Viewing Your Ads Everyday? -Learn How To Develop iPhone Apps!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3090839].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Mike Hlatky
    Subliminal messages

    Ahhhh!!!!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3090849].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Michael Oksa
    I get Dan's point, but at the same time, I don't think we should make fun of people for doing EXACTLY what Dan intended them to do.

    Instead, we should congratulate Dan for being clever.

    Yes, some people will scan things, or stop reading once they get a "match" on their pre-conceived beliefs, but we ALL do that in one way or another. No sense in ridiculing them...

    ...

    ...at least not publicly.



    Besides, the LESS we call them out, the MORE fun we can have.

    All the best,
    Michael
    Signature

    "Ich bin en fuego!"
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3090914].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author kindsvater
    You forgot the pop-up requirement for affiliate links. Before sending someone through an affiliate link a pop up should appear with a full, but short, and easily read disclaimer about it being an affiliate link and what that means, and asking if the person still wants to continue to the merchant's website.


    If anyone has any questions about this, please re-read Dan's original post. This time, read it all.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3090918].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author KatyaSenina
      Originally Posted by kindsvater View Post

      You forgot the pop-up requirement for affiliate links. Before sending someone through an affiliate link a pop up should appear with a full, but short, and easily read disclaimer about it being an affiliate link and what that means, and asking if the person still wants to continue to the merchant's website.
      LOL if this was for real no one would make money as an affiliate EVER!
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3090939].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author MichaelHiles
    Watch one of these posts get quoted in some IM blog somewhere, then tweeted across the twitverse.

    Comedy gold.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3090945].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Alfred Shelver
    Dear Mods, Please do not look at this new trend of purposely deceitful Threads as a bad thing, maybe if there were like 40 more, and more people feel silly , it may cause people to actually read properly.

    I believe the minimum requirement for being able to contribute to a thread should be at the very least reading the OP (not just the title), But also read the other replies or at least skim the replies to avoid duplication. This seem logical to me, but lately seems like there are very few who do it.

    SO again please do not discourage such threads as I feel they ad value and teach a lesson that needs teaching.

    Maybe even a prize for the best one.


    P.S Brian K. as a lawyer known to the forum your presence here on these threads just serves to confuse people more..... I like it
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3090954].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author tpw
      Originally Posted by Cathy Shelver View Post

      Dear Mods ...

      I believe the minimum requirement for being able to contribute to a thread should be at the very least reading the OP (not just the title), But also read the other replies or at least skim the replies to avoid duplication. This seem logical to me, but lately seems like there are very few who do it.

      That is the best lesson here if you ask me...

      The mods agree with you Cathy...

      If they see someone posting to a thread, "Well, I did not have time to read all of the comments, but...."

      When mods note this kind of behavior, they either lock the thread or nuke it.

      Now that we have shown them that many people fail to even read the OP, they might have to rethink the nuking policy...

      After all, if they nuke every thread where people don't take the time to read the OP before throwing in their two cents, then they would probably have to nuke the entire forum.
      Signature
      Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
      Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091005].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Michael Oksa
      People, please read the other replies or at least skim the replies to avoid duplication. This seem logical to me, but lately seems like there are very few who do it.

      ~M~
      Signature

      "Ich bin en fuego!"
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091072].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Alfred Shelver
        Sorry Michael no more thanks.... very funny

        Originally Posted by Michael Oksa View Post

        People, please read the other replies or at least skim the replies to avoid duplication. This seem logical to me, but lately seems like there are very few who do it.

        ~M~
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091104].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author tpw
        Originally Posted by Michael Oksa View Post

        People, please read the other replies or at least skim the replies to avoid duplication. This seem logical to me, but lately seems like there are very few who do it.

        ~M~

        Great play...

        I am all out of Thanks buttons again darn it...
        Signature
        Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
        Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091131].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Dan C. Rinnert
          Originally Posted by tpw View Post

          I am all out of Thanks buttons again darn it...
          Ditto. Me too.
          Signature

          Dan's content is irregularly read by handfuls of people. Join the elite few by reading his blog: dcrBlogs.com, following him on Twitter: dcrTweets.com or reading his fiction: dcrWrites.com but NOT by Clicking Here!

          Dan also writes content for hire, but you can't afford him anyway.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091146].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Don Schenk
    Dan, you missed the part in the new requirements specifying the disclaimer to be displayed as a tattoo on the affiliate's forehead, and place a photo of that on the sales page as a full-size image of the affiliate's face - including the prerequisite disclaimer.

    :-Don
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3090969].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Alfred Shelver
      Oh geez tattoos , now that is just getting ridiculous I would understand photo id on every affiliate link but tattoos is just a bit much..... That is why internet marketing is DEAD see proof here http://www.warriorforum.com/main-int...ting-died.html

      Originally Posted by Don Schenk View Post

      Dan, you missed the part in the new requirements specifying the disclaimer to be displayed as a tattoo on the affiliate's forehead, and place a photo of that on the sales page as a full-size image of the affiliate's face - including the prerequisite disclaimer.

      :-Don
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091020].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Dan C. Rinnert
        Originally Posted by Cathy Shelver View Post

        Oh geez tattoos , now that is just getting ridiculous I would understand photo id on every affiliate link but tattoos is just a bit much...
        Just chalk it up to the cost of doing business. If you're not serious enough about your business to put a tattoo on your forehead, I'm not sure I want to be doing business with you.
        Signature

        Dan's content is irregularly read by handfuls of people. Join the elite few by reading his blog: dcrBlogs.com, following him on Twitter: dcrTweets.com or reading his fiction: dcrWrites.com but NOT by Clicking Here!

        Dan also writes content for hire, but you can't afford him anyway.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091032].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Mike Schwenk
          Originally Posted by Dan C. Rinnert View Post

          Just chalk it up to the cost of doing business. If you're not serious enough about your business to put a tattoo on your forehead, I'm not sure I want to be doing business with you.
          With all of the sudden obligations to make sure I've met the FTC's new standards, I've still been too busy to get this done.

          Fortunately, I've been able to outsource it:
          shweet: I will tattoo your business or products name on my body for $5 at Fiverr.com

          I figured I should get it done now, before the new guidelines kick in and we're no longer allowed to outsource most types of work without extensive tax/transaction records.

          It never ends...
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091237].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author tpw
        Originally Posted by Cathy Shelver View Post

        Oh geez tattoos , now that is just getting ridiculous I would understand photo id on every affiliate link but tattoos is just a bit much..... That is why internet marketing is DEAD see proof here http://www.warriorforum.com/main-int...ting-died.html

        Nice plug.

        p.s. A lot of CPA networks already require photo ID's for new affiliates.
        Signature
        Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
        Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091034].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author WebPen
    Very clever way of getting your message across! I was definitely getting pretty concerned until the "I largely made up" line.

    I actually had to re-read it a few times to make sure I understood what was goin on :-p
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3090970].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Mike Schwenk
      And now to back our regularly-scheduled program...

      Internet Marketers: Scared Straight

      Perhaps this trend will make people too paranoid NOT to read messages in their entirety.

      -Mike
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091018].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Dan C. Rinnert
        Originally Posted by Mike Schwenk View Post

        Perhaps this trend will make people too paranoid NOT to read messages in their entirety.
        Just doing our part to increase reading comprehension levels one day at a time.
        Signature

        Dan's content is irregularly read by handfuls of people. Join the elite few by reading his blog: dcrBlogs.com, following him on Twitter: dcrTweets.com or reading his fiction: dcrWrites.com but NOT by Clicking Here!

        Dan also writes content for hire, but you can't afford him anyway.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091023].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Jill Carpenter
        Well, I just moved to Vermont, and being a very liberal state, I found out we are exempt from these new laws!

        I may not be leaving anytime soon, just because of that.
        Signature

        "May I have ten thousand marbles, please?"

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091103].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Dan C. Rinnert
    Originally Posted by royj View Post

    What if you live outside the US? Different rules right?
    Are you selling to US customers?
    Signature

    Dan's content is irregularly read by handfuls of people. Join the elite few by reading his blog: dcrBlogs.com, following him on Twitter: dcrTweets.com or reading his fiction: dcrWrites.com but NOT by Clicking Here!

    Dan also writes content for hire, but you can't afford him anyway.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091053].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Lance K
      I hope Dan doesn't get a temporary or permanent ban for failure to include a prominent enough...

      DISCLAIMER: "I (Dan C. Rinnert) MADE UP THESE GUIDELINES. YES...THEY ARE FAKE. Read The Whole Thing Next Time."


      Signature
      "You can have everything in life you want if you will just help enough other people get what they want."
      ~ Zig Ziglar
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091106].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author MichaelHiles
    Chicks with tats are hot.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091071].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Lauryn
    LMAO!!!! I read through this whole post and was done when I saw you made it up.
    You're right though! Love it
    Signature

    I Go Hard = "Slanguage" for putting forth a lot of effort.

    Don't be an arse and try to flip something you clearly have no knowledge of against me.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091095].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Willie Crawford
    Excellent post.

    Most of us do seem to skim too many things that
    we should not. Sometimes we skim them several
    times when it would have taken LESS time to read
    them all the way through once

    I did read the thread all the way through because
    early in the email certain "facts" didn't strike me
    as plausible.

    Willie
    Signature

    Over Six Figures Per MONTH From Ranking And Renting Website?
    Watch The Eye-Opening Video Here!

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091114].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author donhx
    Originally Posted by Dan C. Rinnert View Post


    Of course, you can understand why the FTC is doing this. This post, for example, I largely made up. Yes, there are new rules and regulations, as most people are already aware, but the "guidelines" I've listed here are ones I just fabricated. But, watch the responses to this thread. You will see people that will not have read to this point and will complain about these new things that they have to start doing. If you've read to this point, you might be a little upset (sorry), but you'll soon see the point I am making when you read the replies. People don't read things all the way through; they largely read what they want to see, not necessarily what's there.

    Upset? No. But I personally have zero respect for people who spread mis-information like this. Someone ought to offer a WSO on ethics. This post is not funny, just wrong on so many levels. I hope those in power nuke this thread.
    Signature
    Quality content to beat the competition. Personalized Author Services
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091149].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Alfred Shelver
      Come on Don, you need to see what people post on non misinformed threads.... this is a fun tongue in cheek way of teaching that reading is essential to this business.

      Wow you took this way too seriously, I see no ethical question in this thread at all and I believe myself to be very ethical

      Originally Posted by donhx View Post

      Upset? No. But I personally have zero respect for people who spread mis-information like this. Someone ought to offer a WSO on ethics. This post is not funny, just wrong on so many levels. I hope those in power nuke this thread.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091170].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author donhx
        Originally Posted by Cathy Shelver View Post

        Come on Don, you need to see what people post on non misinformed threads.... this is a fun tongue in cheek way of teaching that reading is essential to this business.

        Wow you took this way too seriously, I see no ethical question in this thread at all and I believe myself to be very ethical

        Come on, Cathy, the OP has shown poor judgment here. It's not about humor, but it is about ethics. The OP is a "distinguished warrior" but has betrayed trust now--who can believe anything else he says...it may be another prank. He has chosen a very poor way to make his point.
        Signature
        Quality content to beat the competition. Personalized Author Services
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091233].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author CDarklock
          Originally Posted by donhx View Post

          He has chosen a very poor way to make his point.
          It seems to me that a great many people are paying attention, which probably means it was a very good way to make his point.
          Signature
          "The Golden Town is the Golden Town no longer. They have sold their pillars for brass and their temples for money, they have made coins out of their golden doors. It is become a dark town full of trouble, there is no ease in its streets, beauty has left it and the old songs are gone." - Lord Dunsany, The Messengers
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091245].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author tpw
            Originally Posted by CDarklock View Post

            It seems to me that a great many people are paying attention, which probably means it was a very good way to make his point.

            Out of Thanks buttons again...


            p.s. Paul: Doesn't this consume more forum resources than a Thanks button?
            Signature
            Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
            Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091301].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Kay King
            I have to take issue with the forehead tattoo - my sources say the tattoo must be prominently displayed on the rearamus situponamous - and must be either neon green or colonial read.

            At least someone had the sense to dump the rule about notifying customers after a purchase with "if you object to this affiliate earning money from your purchase, just click here to obtain a full refund". That one had me worried.
            Signature
            Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world will change forever for that one dog.

            I wish offended people would react like fainting goats and quietly tip over.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091881].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author bgean
            Does anyone have the link to the real FTC Rules, that went into circulation, by chance?
            Signature
            ----- ** -----

            BonnieGean.com · Building Community
            Free Reports & Tutorials for Budding Entrepreneurs
            Creator of Infographics KickStart
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3262247].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author tpw
              Originally Posted by bgean View Post

              Does anyone have the link to the real FTC Rules, that went into circulation, by chance?

              If I remember right, it is somewhere in this thread, like on page 2 or 3.

              Search for "Rinnert" in the page, b/c he is the one that posted it.
              Signature
              Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
              Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3262264].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Julie McElroy
            Originally Posted by CDarklock View Post

            It seems to me that a great many people are paying attention, which probably means it was a very good way to make his point.
            I agree! I did read the post all the way through, with a big sigh of relief when I got to fabrication part (you never know! ...aka I'm gullible).

            I am liking this forum more each day - I was wondering about the sense of humor..
            Signature
            Tired of paying for low-quality writing? If you care about your reputation, get Professional Writing Services for your business needs.

            If you can not afford to pay for unique content, why not get limited PLR articles for your website?
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3262719].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Rob Howard
          Originally Posted by donhx View Post

          Come on, Cathy, the OP has shown poor judgment here. It's not about humor, but it is about ethics. The OP is a "distinguished warrior" but has betrayed trust now--who can believe anything else he says...it may be another prank. He has chosen a very poor way to make his point.
          I don't think you can claim poor ethics here.

          He stated he made it all up and provided the lesson.

          You can not like it, fine. But he isn't:

          1. Being deceptive. His subject line is honest. New rules DO take into effect. His first part is a joke, which he describes later on and explains why he does it.

          2. Ripping people off. No body is buying into it unless they only half-ass read the post.


          If you can't trust anything else he says, well, your loss I suppose. I'll continue to listen and trust Dan, and I'm quite sure that many others will too.


          Originally Posted by CDarklock View Post

          It seems to me that a great many people are paying attention, which probably means it was a very good way to make his point.
          The proof is in the pudding, as they say. Seems to me that he is pretty successful at making his point indeed.

          Rob
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091255].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Leslie B
          Originally Posted by donhx View Post

          Come on, Cathy, the OP has shown poor judgment here. It's not about humor, but it is about ethics. The OP is a "distinguished warrior" but has betrayed trust now--who can believe anything else he says...it may be another prank. He has chosen a very poor way to make his point.
          No he hasn't. If he hadn't mentioned in the OP that it was a joke, then maybe, but I think he made his goal very clear. It's not his fault some people don't like to be called out on their own mistakes, now is it?

          Leslie
          Signature
          Taking it one day at a time!
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091464].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Ken Leatherman
          Originally Posted by donhx View Post

          Come on, Cathy, the OP has shown poor judgment here. It's not about humor, but it is about ethics. The OP is a "distinguished warrior" but has betrayed trust now--who can believe anything else he says...it may be another prank. He has chosen a very poor way to make his point.
          Don,

          I have no problem trusting Dan, because I have followed his post for many years, here on the WF and have been on several of his list at one time or another. There was no "poor judgment" or "bad ethics" on his part, IMO and of course your entitled to your own.

          When I started reading his OP, I was reading it in all seriousness and had every intent of reading it all the way through. Why, because I trust him and know he can go off on a tangent, once in a while. So I wasn't surprised to read the "I made it up".

          He also hit the nail on the head when he said some of the responses to his OP, would reflect the failure of some folks, to see what they are reading. Dan used humor, just like many columnist, editorial writers, and others (including Abe Lincoln) to make a point.

          Dan now that I've sucked up to you when do I get my payment. :p

          I'm just kidding with the above sentence. Kidding, Joke, Humor, well bad humor and yes I just made it up.

          Oh yes to stay on topic The FTC is changing regulations and I didn't make that up.

          Ken Leatherman

          The Old Geezer
          Signature

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091801].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Rob Howard
      Originally Posted by donhx View Post

      Upset? No. But I personally have zero respect for people who spread mis-information like this. Someone ought to offer a WSO on ethics. This post is not funny, just wrong on so many levels. I hope those in power nuke this thread.
      Except Dan stated in his thread that he made this up.

      What is unethical about it? It was a joke, he stated in the thread that he made it up, is it his fault people don't read everything?

      If so, then this is a sad, sad world we live in now...where people no longer take responsibility for their own actions and can easily blame others for their failures/mistakes.

      Rob
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091203].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author donhx
        Originally Posted by ccmusicman View Post

        Except Dan stated in his thread that he made this up.

        What is unethical about it? It was a joke, he stated in the thread that he made it up, is it his fault people don't read everything?

        If so, then this is a sad, sad world we live in now...where people no longer take responsibility for their own actions and can easily blame others for their failures/mistakes.

        Rob
        I read it all. I saw he was out to dupe people. I'm just saying I don't respect his methods. I'm a pretty light-hearted guy, but sorry, I don't think it's funny. A Senior Warrior should not be spreading mis-information like this, even though he has buried the truth about his post.
        Signature
        Quality content to beat the competition. Personalized Author Services
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091258].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author CDarklock
          Originally Posted by donhx View Post

          I saw he was out to dupe people.
          By writing a post they did not read?

          How does that "dupe" anybody? I don't see the problem here. Nobody is going to lose any money on this unless they decide to implement his frankly absurd guidelines. Nobody is going to be giving Dan any money.

          The worst that can happen to any reasonable human being is that they post in this thread without knowing the guidelines are false, and look stupid in front of the other forum members.

          Which, if you ask me, is precisely what ought to happen. If you don't read the whole post and decide to post your ill-informed opinion anyway, you deserve to look stupid because - at least temporarily - you were.
          Signature
          "The Golden Town is the Golden Town no longer. They have sold their pillars for brass and their temples for money, they have made coins out of their golden doors. It is become a dark town full of trouble, there is no ease in its streets, beauty has left it and the old songs are gone." - Lord Dunsany, The Messengers
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091268].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Rob Howard
          Originally Posted by donhx View Post

          I read it all. I saw he was out to dupe people. I'm just saying I don't respect his methods. I'm a pretty light-hearted guy, but sorry, I don't think it's funny. A Senior Warrior should not be spreading mis-information like this, even though he has buried the truth about his post.
          Ok, provide proof that he is spreading misinformation.


          You can't. Sorry, but you can't. He states, plainly inside the post that he made it all up and then goes on to explain it.

          Unless you only read the first part of the post, then you get exactly what happens.

          He wasn't out to dupe people and it appears you are in the minority, based on the responses to this thread. Several other highly respected warriors thought it was funny and got the point.

          Rob
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091271].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Zeus66
    ever'body's a comedian. I planned ahead. It's too late to start now, but you should begin a similar project asap to get into compliance...

    Step 1: Breed an army of flying monkeys.
    Step 2: Train aforementioned flying monkey army (see Step 1) to unfurl large banners mid-flight announcing your affiliation with the corresponding vendor or merchant (see Addendum 4i, subparagraph 6b).
    Step 3: Provisionally train the flying monkey army (see Steps 1 & 2) to attack upon receipt of the command "It's a trap!" whenever an employee of the FTC is spotted while on aerial patrol.

    Update: replace the word "army" wherever it appears in this document with "air force." Those responsible for sacking those responsible for this egregious error have been sacked.

    Sincerely,
    John P. Llama
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091197].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author tpw
    Originally Posted by royj View Post

    I can't believe the OP has 10 "thank yous" for posting what is basically nonsense.

    I have learned something from this thread though and that is never to subscribe to Dan C Rinnert's email list as I can imagine the type of email subject lines I'd be getting.

    Be sure also not to subscribe to that other Jackwad's email list either -- the one who started the Matt Cutts' thread, because it used a similar technique to teach a valuable lesson about writing sales copy.
    Signature
    Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
    Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091205].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author paulie888
      Originally Posted by tpw View Post

      Be sure also not to subscribe to that other Jackwad's email list either -- the one who started the Matt Cutts' thread, because it used a similar technique to teach a valuable lesson about writing sales copy.
      Some people just don't have any sense of humor, and fail to see the very important point that all these threads are making - people need to read and comprehend better - unfortunately everyone is so lazy these days all they only care about is watching video, and I truly wish this trend would reverse, as it's breeding a whole slew of lazy, robotic newbies who want everything spoonfed to them!
      Signature
      >>> Features Jason Fladlien, John S. Rhodes, Justin Brooke, Sean I. Mitchell, Reed Floren and Brad Gosse! <<<
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091302].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author MichaelHiles
        Originally Posted by paulie888 View Post

        Some people just don't have any sense of humor, and fail to see the very important point that all these threads are making - people need to read and comprehend better - unfortunately everyone is so lazy these days all they only care about is watching video, and I wish this trend would reverse, as it's breeding a whole bunch of lazy, robotic newbies that want everything spoonfed to them!

        And they can all VOTE!!
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091307].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author tpw
        Originally Posted by paulie888 View Post

        Some people just don't have any sense of humor, and fail to see the very important point that all these threads are making - people need to read and comprehend better -

        unfortunately everyone is so lazy these days all they only care about is watching video, and I truly wish this trend would reverse, as it's breeding a whole slew of lazy, robotic newbies who want everything spoonfed to them!

        Paul: Watching videos does not help either.

        Suppose they are watching TV while listening to the exact same thread being read to them -- spooning each word to them carefully...

        Spooning... LOL... He said, "spooning"...

        What if the kids run through screaming at the apex of the presentation?

        Remember hearing about the "War of the Worlds" broadcast in 1938?

        They announced at the beginning of the program, and at least three times during its presentation that it was a "narrated story based on a story by H.G. Wells"...

        Source

        People heard what they wanted to hear.

        From the About.com story:

        Hours after the program had ended and listeners had realized that the Martian invasion was not real, the public was outraged that Orson Welles had tried to fool them. Many people sued. Others wondered if Welles had caused the panic on purpose.

        Does this sound somewhat familiar?
        Signature
        Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
        Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091389].message }}
        • You had me worried until I got to the end! Thankfully, I always read things thoroughly.

          Originally Posted by tpw View Post

          Paul: Watching videos does not help either.

          Suppose they are watching TV while listening to the exact same thread being read to them -- spooning each word to them carefully...

          Spooning... LOL... He said, "spooning"...

          What if the kids run through screaming at the apex of the presentation?

          Remember hearing about the "War of the Worlds" broadcast in 1938?

          They announced at the beginning of the program, and at least three times during its presentation that it was a "narrated story based on a story by H.G. Wells"...

          Source

          People heard what they wanted to hear.

          From the About.com story:




          Does this sound somewhat familiar?
          Brilliant comparison to "War of the Worlds". It really IS pretty much the same thing.
          Signature

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091772].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Alfred Shelver
    Then you have learned nothing from this thread. If Dan c can get 10 thank yous from really senior warriors for nonsense, imagine what else he can do.

    The bigger picture needs to be looked at from a distance or Else its blurry


    Originally Posted by royj View Post

    I can't believe the OP has 10 "thank yous" for posting what is basically nonsense.

    I have learned something from this thread though and that is never to subscribe to Dan C Rinnert's email list as I can imagine the type of email subject lines I'd be getting.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091207].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author jasonmorgan
    Unfortunately, the true entertainment has been ruined because too many people couldn't keep the joke to themselves.

    Due to loose lips sinking ships, what could have been a very entertaining thread will end as a failure.
    Signature

    I'm all about that bass.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091214].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Alfred Shelver
      Jason stick around it gets funnier because you will still see the replies you were after come in even after everyone has said what they have,

      It is really crazy see Bills other thread to see what I mean . Paul Myers basically pointed out the threads hidden meaning and many many others still jumped on and took the bait


      Originally Posted by jasonmorgan View Post

      Unfortunately, the true entertainment has been ruined because too many people couldn't keep the joke to themselves.

      Due to loose lips sinking ships, what could have been a very entertaining thread will end as a failure.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091223].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author tpw
      Originally Posted by jasonmorgan View Post

      Unfortunately, the true entertainment has been ruined because too many people couldn't keep the joke to themselves.

      Due to loose lips sinking ships, what could have been a very entertaining thread will end as a failure.

      This is also a marketing test.

      In his first thread, it took until the 9th post before the joke was obviously outed.

      In my thread, the 3rd post outed me.

      In this thread, I outed Dan on the 2nd post.

      We have proven with all three threads that people do not read the OP in full. So the remaining question was how many of the comments do they scan before hitting reply?

      LOL
      Signature
      Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
      Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091266].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Rob Howard
    Originally Posted by royj View Post

    I can't believe the OP has 10 "thank yous" for posting what is basically nonsense.

    I have learned something from this thread though and that is never to subscribe to Dan C Rinnert's email list as I can imagine the type of email subject lines I'd be getting.
    Make that 11. I just added mine.

    And about his email list - if you are offended by this, then you shouldn't be on his list. And I'm going to imagine that Dan doesn't want you on his list if you are so easily offended.

    I know I don't.

    Rob
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091213].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author CDarklock
      Originally Posted by ccmusicman View Post

      And about his email list - if you are offended by this, then you shouldn't be on his list. And I'm going to imagine that Dan doesn't want you on his list if you are so easily offended.
      Bingo!

      Email lists are not supposed to be as big as possible. They are supposed to contain people who want to read your emails.

      And if you wouldn't like Dan's emails, trust me, you'd hate mine.
      Signature
      "The Golden Town is the Golden Town no longer. They have sold their pillars for brass and their temples for money, they have made coins out of their golden doors. It is become a dark town full of trouble, there is no ease in its streets, beauty has left it and the old songs are gone." - Lord Dunsany, The Messengers
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091225].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Rob Howard
        Originally Posted by CDarklock View Post

        Bingo!

        Email lists are not supposed to be as big as possible. They are supposed to contain people who want to read your emails.

        And if you wouldn't like Dan's emails, trust me, you'd hate mine.
        Yup. And what is so funny is that a lot of people really think themselves so important that by not buying a product or giving out an email address, they are truly "Hurting" that other persons business.

        If the business owner knows what he is doing, he isn't interested in having the "most" but only those who will be enjoy buying and listening to what he has to say.

        Powerful marketing is about segmenting - it is better to state a message and gather a group that agrees with you, than it is to try and be everything to everyone. The first comes off as a strong leader, the second just appears as weak and possibly unfocused.

        Sad so many fail to understand simple marketing and tribal principles.

        Rob
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091243].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author MCD
    I was getting all bummed out reading your post... but I was planning on trying something else out that didn't involve affiliate marketing so my plan B would have still worked.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091218].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Alfred Shelver
      See Jason right after your post

      Originally Posted by MCD View Post

      I was getting all bummed out reading your post... but I was planning on trying something else out that didn't involve affiliate marketing so my plan B would have still worked.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091226].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author wanna-succeed
        Dude, ur NUTZ!!!---->
        Speaking of disclaimers DAN, put one on top of your post stating that reading it might induce heart\lung failure with a good possibility of stroke on the side.
        Signature

        No sig, good day m8...

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091309].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author neodarth
    That's why I hate those fiscal entities!! I whish they all burn in..... wait a minute... ohh... I get it...
    Signature
    ==> Negocios Estables en la Web Internet marketing en español.

    ==> Internet Marketing Newbie Created for IM virgins
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091222].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author MichaelHiles
    Dear GAWD... it's a dadgummed internet forum. Have some fun every now and then.

    I am going to have to break out my

    "Teh interwebz is serious business" pic.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091280].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Lance K
      Originally Posted by donhx View Post

      I read it all. I saw he was out to dupe people. I'm just saying I don't respect his methods. I'm a pretty light-hearted guy, but sorry, I don't think it's funny. A Senior Warrior should not be spreading mis-information like this, even though he has buried the truth about his post.
      I had a lengthy reply typed up and my laptop crashed. Anyway, here's the main point of what I had written...
      Even if Dan was out to "dupe" people (which IMO he was NOT)...If you're making compliance/legalese type changes to your site(s) based on the opinions and/or advice of anyone other than your attorney, your reaction to Dan's OP should be the least of your worries.
      Signature
      "You can have everything in life you want if you will just help enough other people get what they want."
      ~ Zig Ziglar
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091377].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Rob Howard
    lol - Michael, there is always someone who has to come in all high and mighty with their supposed moral and ethics, ruining the fun of us devilish pranksters.

    Why can't we just torment others for our own amusement in peace????

    [That was a JOKE btw - hope no one gets offended.]

    Rob
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091285].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author ryansjones
    Thanks for the heads up. I will update my websites this week
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091299].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author MichaelHiles
    Originally Posted by royj View Post

    What if everyone started posting deceptive threads on here? In my opinion it's stupid, and not remotely funny.
    It's only deceptive for people who DON'T READ.

    Originally Posted by Dan C. Rinnert View Post


    ...

    Of course, you can understand why the FTC is doing this. This post, for example, I largely made up. Yes, there are new rules and regulations, as most people are already aware, but the "guidelines" I've listed here are ones I just fabricated. But, watch the responses to this thread. You will see people that will not have read to this point and will complain about these new things that they have to start doing. If you've read to this point, you might be a little upset (sorry), but you'll soon see the point I am making when you read the replies. People don't read things all the way through; they largely read what they want to see, not necessarily what's there.

    ...
    It is always amazing how things can be hidden in plain sight!

    ....
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091360].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author MichaelHiles
      Originally Posted by royj View Post

      Right now there's another thread on the first page of the internet marketing discussion board which is basically nonsense or a "joke" as some people are calling it.

      Looks like a new trend. Start a thread pretending something bad is going to happen and then saying it isn't, that they made it up.

      :rolleyes:

      The real irony is that the trend of people complaining about the topic actually illustrating the entire point of both discussions.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091455].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Dennis Gaskill
        Originally Posted by Dan C. Rinnert View Post

        Just chalk it up to the cost of doing business. If you're not serious enough about your business to put a tattoo on your forehead, I'm not sure I want to be doing business with you.
        No no no ... didn't your mother teach you not to get tattoos in places where a judge could see them if you get into trouble? The tattoo should clearly be on people's buttocks, and then they can show it as needed.

        Originally Posted by MichaelHiles View Post

        And they can all VOTE!!
        That is sooo depressing to think about.
        Signature

        Just when you think you've got it all figured out, someone changes the rules.

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091541].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author tpw
      Originally Posted by royj View Post

      Right now there's another thread on the first page of the internet marketing discussion board which is basically nonsense or a "joke" as some people are calling it.

      Looks like a new trend. Start a thread pretending something bad is going to happen and then saying it isn't, that they made it up.

      :rolleyes:

      Truth is that many of these things are inspired by each other.

      Original Content Penalty?

      What about that looked truthful? Especially when it was described as a rumor, and you were told that most rumors are wrong?



      The Admin of this forum would be the first to tell you that your headline is everything.

      Without a good headline, people will not pay attention or even open your message.

      And if people read everything, instead of just some of it, there will be no misunderstandings or mis-information.

      If at the end of the story, the truth is told and a valid lesson is taught, then what you read was effective copy.



      Originally Posted by donhx View Post

      Someone ought to offer a WSO on ethics.
      p.s. I did buy the WSO on Ethics, and it said that as long as I employ full disclosure, then it is ethical.
      Signature
      Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
      Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091470].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Bill Farnham
    Originally Posted by royj View Post

    What if everyone started posting deceptive threads on here? In my opinion it's stupid, and not remotely funny.
    What if everyone started posting deceptive threads in the WSO section.

    OH WAIT!

    Never mind...

    ~Bill

    (See Disclaimer Below*)







    *Disclaimer:

    In no way is this post meant to imply that all the threads posted in the WSO section are deceptive. Some are, some aren't. Check your FTC guidelines for clarification on the matter.
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091372].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author paulie888
    Originally Posted by royj View Post

    What if everyone started posting deceptive threads on here? In my opinion it's stupid, and not remotely funny.
    You obviously fail to see the very important point that these threads are trying to make. How can anything substantive be discussed in these forums when people don't even read thoroughly/properly?
    Signature
    >>> Features Jason Fladlien, John S. Rhodes, Justin Brooke, Sean I. Mitchell, Reed Floren and Brad Gosse! <<<
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091392].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Jill Carpenter
      Originally Posted by paulie888 View Post

      You obviously fail to see the very important point that these threads are trying to make. How can anything substantive be discussed in these forums when people don't even read thoroughly/properly?
      Dan typed a lot of stuff there.

      Was I supposed to read the whole thing?

      Is there a video on it I can download or an mp3 I can listen to later?

      Tks.
      Signature

      "May I have ten thousand marbles, please?"

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091406].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author collegeguru
    Haha Great Post. I passed the test I suppose.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091399].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author joinforum
    Banned
    [DELETED]
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091405].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Jill Carpenter
      Originally Posted by joinforum View Post

      here is a great new im forum
      Thanks for sharing
      Signature

      "May I have ten thousand marbles, please?"

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091409].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author neodarth
    Originally Posted by royj View Post

    What if everyone started posting deceptive threads on here? In my opinion it's stupid, and not remotely funny.
    I think being funny wasn't intend here (even though I found it hilarious), Dan just made a point, that most people doesn't read the whole post before jumping into conclusions.

    Is exactly what happened with most wannabe marketers that buy a product, they don't finish to read/watch/apply and they are already saying is worthless.

    Check the whole picture, digest it and then give an opinion, that sounds stupid?.

    Perhaps if Dan wanted to teach us that most people doesn't read the whole post before jumping into conclusions he should put in the thread: "most people doesn't read the whole post before jump into conclusions" that would be more ethical... (sarcasm intended :rolleyes
    Signature
    ==> Negocios Estables en la Web Internet marketing en español.

    ==> Internet Marketing Newbie Created for IM virgins
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091462].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author jasonthewebmaster
    Banned
    Thanks for trying to update us on these new FTC laws, but I just don't have the fortitude to read them all...

    Anyone wanna spoon feed me?

    LMAO
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091474].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Sloop John B
    The real lesson here is for the writer, not the reader. We should get to the point, be clear and concise. Adults skim, particularly when they want to just get an idea of the content. Under time pressure skimming has been demonstrated to be superior to normal reading wrt comprehension (well, save when the intent of the writer is to play with the reader). I'd reference my source, but I must have skipped over it
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091545].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author paulie888
      Originally Posted by Sloop John B View Post

      The real lesson here is for the writer, not the reader. We should get to the point, be clear and concise. Adults skim, particularly when they want to just get an idea of the content. Under time pressure skimming has been demonstrated to be superior to normal reading wrt comprehension (well, save when the intent of the writer is to play with the reader). I'd reference my source, but I must have skipped over it
      Don't make excuses here. Adults do not arbitrarily skim through everything they read, only the lazy and incompetent ones do. Do you have any real statistics to back up your ridiculous claims, or did you just pull them out of your hat?
      Signature
      >>> Features Jason Fladlien, John S. Rhodes, Justin Brooke, Sean I. Mitchell, Reed Floren and Brad Gosse! <<<
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091671].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author tpw
        Originally Posted by paulie888 View Post

        Don't make excuses here. Adults do not arbitrarily skim through everything they read, only the lazy and incompetent ones do. Do you have any real statistics to back up your ridiculous claims, or did you just pull them out of your hat?

        121% of the time, I just make this crap up.
        Signature
        Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
        Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091681].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author paulie888
          Originally Posted by tpw View Post

          121% of the time, I just make this crap up.
          I know, Bill, so please keep up the good work and rile up the 'haters' in here as much as you want!
          Signature
          >>> Features Jason Fladlien, John S. Rhodes, Justin Brooke, Sean I. Mitchell, Reed Floren and Brad Gosse! <<<
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091697].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Palusko
            I don't mind the tactics, but I think you picked a wrong subject to truly test the audience's attention. I mean, this was way too serious to simply skim through. Well, for me it was, so I read the whole thing the first time.
            Wonder how a positive thread would go. Something in line of "FTC is allowing not to include any disclaimer on the affiliate websites"... Seriously, I wonder...
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091725].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author tpw
              Originally Posted by Palusko View Post

              I don't mind the tactics, but I think you picked a wrong subject to truly test the audience's attention. I mean, this was way too serious to simply skim through. Well, for me it was, so I read the whole thing the first time.

              Wonder how a positive thread would go. Something in line of "FTC is allowing not to include any disclaimer on the affiliate websites"... Seriously, I wonder...

              Given what you said in your first paragraph, I think he did pick the right headline. You read it beginning to end, careful not to miss a word...

              So you got his point...

              Yet, despite the seriousness of his topic, many more people did not read everything he said, which is the whole point of this thread.

              I still believe there is an important lesson for us marketers who have read the entire thing.

              If we think people are reading all of our sales copy, we are probably silly to believe that. If they are not reading the stuff of serious gravity like this, what else do they not read?

              Dan and I have created threads of the more serious nature, and you know what... These over-the-top threads get read far more often than our serious stuff, by a scale of like 10-to-1...

              But as this is part of a marketing test, keep an eye out for your suggestion in a thread in the near future.... LOL
              Signature
              Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
              Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091802].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author CDarklock
              Originally Posted by Palusko View Post

              I mean, this was way too serious to simply skim through.
              So if someone just skimmed through it, weren't they already playing a very dangerous game?

              What if they'd done what Dan suggested? What would happen?

              Well, they'd be about eight thousand times more compliant with disclosure than necessary. Which may not be smart, but it's harmless.

              Yes, someone could have been misled by skimming. But they wouldn't have faced any more consequences than a few lost sales, and you'd face the same risk by taking any of the bad advice out there on forums.
              Signature
              "The Golden Town is the Golden Town no longer. They have sold their pillars for brass and their temples for money, they have made coins out of their golden doors. It is become a dark town full of trouble, there is no ease in its streets, beauty has left it and the old songs are gone." - Lord Dunsany, The Messengers
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3092082].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Palusko
                I think you misunderstood what I was saying (or maybe I misunderstood you). I was not criticizing the OP or anything like that. I get the idea. I was just saying, that to ME, when I read the words "new FTC rules", I made SURE I read the whole post because that was too serious info for me to just scan through. Obviously, by doing so, I found out it was a joke/test right away.

                I was not implying, that other people may have jumped to conclusion (and action) after just reading the title or skimming through the text. Maybe some did, but I don't really care. Making decisions regarding legal compliance based on a forum post...I guess they deserve what's coming to them. (although I don't think anyone really did that from this thread). I just know that I would not, because this type of information I do read thoroughly. And, should this not be a joke, I would also head to FTC site to confirm the info.

                So, all and all, if this thread was aimed to see if people read the OP - like I said, this may not be the best topic, because of the seriousness. But like you and others pointed out, despite of the seriousness, many people still did not read it. So I guess you can still consider it a test of how and if people read serious information that can have huge impact on their business.


                Originally Posted by CDarklock View Post

                So if someone just skimmed through it, weren't they already playing a very dangerous game?

                What if they'd done what Dan suggested? What would happen?

                Well, they'd be about eight thousand times more compliant with disclosure than necessary. Which may not be smart, but it's harmless.

                Yes, someone could have been misled by skimming. But they wouldn't have faced any more consequences than a few lost sales, and you'd face the same risk by taking any of the bad advice out there on forums.
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3095907].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author JohnMcCabe
                  Late to the party again, dagnabbit. Oh, well, what the hell...

                  Originally Posted by Mike Schwenk View Post

                  And now to back our regularly-scheduled program...

                  Internet Marketers: Scared Straight

                  Perhaps this trend will make people too paranoid NOT to read messages in their entirety.

                  -Mike
                  Mike, thanks to the new Original Content Penalty, they'll only have to read one...

                  Originally Posted by MichaelHiles View Post

                  And they can all VOTE!!
                  Up to a dozen times, but cell phone votes cost 99 cents, the money-grubbing weasels...:p

                  Oh, you meant the elections...
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3097398].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author halmo
              Originally Posted by Palusko View Post

              Wonder how a positive thread would go. Something in line of "FTC is allowing not to include any disclaimer on the affiliate websites"... Seriously, I wonder...
              Such a title might be positive, but the consequences would be negative (in some cases) because people would skim through the post (or only read the title), and delete the disclaimers from their sites, Then be surprised to receive some bills.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3092902].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author paulie888
                Originally Posted by halmo View Post

                Such a title might be positive, but the consequences would be negative (in some cases) because people would skim through the post (or only read the title), and delete the disclaimers from their sites, Then be surprised to receive some bills.
                You're absolutely right, such a title would cause the majority of people to pay significantly less attention to the contents within it (or ignore it altogether), so then it would defeat the original purpose of creating the post, which was to highlight a fundamental flaw in how people typically read/skim through posts with minimal comprehension.
                Signature
                >>> Features Jason Fladlien, John S. Rhodes, Justin Brooke, Sean I. Mitchell, Reed Floren and Brad Gosse! <<<
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3093165].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Dan C. Rinnert
        There are so many lessons in this thread, including ones I will probably miss in the list below.

        1) If you have not done so already, make sure your website is in compliance with FTC rules and regulations. And, don't ust get your advice on what to do from a forum, go straight to the source or ask a professional.

        2) Reading is important. Reading with comprehension is even more important. Too many people don't fully read what is right in front of them. They read what they want to see. They look for the viewpoint that matches their own and ignore that which doesn't conform to their expectation of the thread.

        And, some people may be upset that this post "deceived" them, but there are plenty of posts here where there is absolutely no deception at all--where everything the author writes is straightforward. And there will still be people leaving comments that have little or nothing to do with what the original poster wrote. I'm not talking about the forum spammers here; I'm talking about people that come in and leave comments that don't appear to have anything whatsoever to do with the original post or any of the subsequent posts in the thread. There are people that seem only to read the subject line of a thread, and make a comment based on the subject line rather than what was actually written in the post itself.

        3) Don't overly concern yourself with having to put up a disclaimer. As noted above, people won't necessarily even pay attention to it. I don't know how many things I've put on websites using big bold letters, colorful letters, graphics and all sorts of means to stand out to people and they will still overlook it. Often, people will not see what is in plain sight because they are not looking for it.

        There is a video (actually a number of variations now) that illustrates this perfectly. The video shows two groups of people. One group is wearing white and the other is wearing black. Each group has a basketball, and you need to count the number of times one group passes the ball to one another. Most people are so focused on counting the ball that they completely overlook the guy dressed in a gorilla suit that dances his way through the groups of players.

        I mean, it's a guy in a gorilla suit. Dancing. Clearly visible in the video. Not trying to hide behind people or sneak through at all. And people miss it!

        There's another test that was done. People come in to an office to fill out a form or survey. They are directed to a counter for the form. They ask the person standing there for the form. That person ducks behind the counter to grab the form, and a completely different person pops back up with the form and hands it to the person. And many people don't even notice!

        People can become so focused on one thing that they completely overlook all else. And, it's important we know this so that we can be more careful about people who are deceiving us with the intent of actually doing us harm.

        4) If you miss important points while skimming, you're doing it wrong. Even when you're skimming, you're looking at the words in front of you. If you overlook basically a full paragraph that explains an important point to you, you're not skimming correctly.

        These are important points, I think. Now, I could have started a thread with this post right here, but do you think it would have attracted the same amount of attention? Based on my experience here, I bet it'd be buried on page 2 or page 3 by now. However, by doing it the way I've done it, I present the same information and it has gotten more reads and hopefully reached more people that it can help than a more straight-forward post would have done.

        And, often, a lesson learned through first-hand experience is more easily understood and remembered than one that is simply read.
        Signature

        Dan's content is irregularly read by handfuls of people. Join the elite few by reading his blog: dcrBlogs.com, following him on Twitter: dcrTweets.com or reading his fiction: dcrWrites.com but NOT by Clicking Here!

        Dan also writes content for hire, but you can't afford him anyway.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091823].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author tpw
          Originally Posted by Dan C. Rinnert View Post

          There is a video (actually a number of variations now) that illustrates this perfectly. The video shows two groups of people. One group is wearing white and the other is wearing black. Each group has a basketball, and you need to count the number of times one group passes the ball to one another. Most people are so focused on counting the ball that they completely overlook the guy dressed in a gorilla suit that dances his way through the groups of players.

          I mean, it's a guy in a gorilla suit. Dancing. Clearly visible in the video. Not trying to hide behind people or sneak through at all. And people miss it!

          There's another test that was done. People come in to an office to fill out a form or survey. They are directed to a counter for the form. They ask the person standing there for the form. That person ducks behind the counter to grab the form, and a completely different person pops back up with the form and hands it to the person. And many people don't even notice!

          People can become so focused on one thing that they completely overlook all else. And, it's important we know this so that we can be more careful about people who are deceiving us with the intent of actually doing us harm.


          Hey!!!

          Have you been sleeping with my wife?

          How do you know to watch the same things I watch on TV?!



          Just kidding...

          How many people do you think will miss that last sentence of this post?
          Signature
          Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
          Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091867].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Sloop John B
        Originally Posted by paulie888 View Post

        Don't make excuses here. Adults do not arbitrarily skim through everything they read, only the lazy and incompetent ones do. Do you have any real statistics to back up your ridiculous claims, or did you just pull them out of your hat?
        I didn't say adults arbitrarily skim, nor did I say they skim through everything (And I'm not sure how one goes about doing both simultaneously).

        I also indicated I couldn't quote my source re: the study. Jeez, Paulie, did you arbitrarily skim through everything I wrote?
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091864].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Michael Oksa
      Originally Posted by Sloop John B View Post

      The real lesson here is for the writer, not the reader. We should get to the point, be clear and concise. Adults skim, particularly when they want to just get an idea of the content. Under time pressure skimming has been demonstrated to be superior to normal reading wrt comprehension (well, save when the intent of the writer is to play with the reader). I'd reference my source, but I must have skipped over it
      You may be right, in some cases. But there are also times when more lengthy discourse is called for.

      Sound bites may be great for the evening news, but why should Dan or anybody else limit themselves, especially when making a point?

      As for skimming, there may be times when it's "superior" BUT what the whole OP is saying is that skimming IS the true form of "normal" reading. Which has been so elegantly demonstrated in many of the posts that have followed.

      Anyway, I'm hoping the smiley face is saying you're in on the joke.

      All the best,
      Michael
      Signature

      "Ich bin en fuego!"
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091685].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Sloop John B
        Originally Posted by Michael Oksa View Post

        You may be right, in some cases. But there are also times when more lengthy discourse is called for.

        Sound bites may be great for the evening news, but why should Dan or anybody else limit themselves, especially when making a point?

        As for skimming, there may be times when it's "superior" BUT what the whole OP is saying is that skimming IS the true form of "normal" reading. Which has been so elegantly demonstrated in many of the posts that have followed.

        Anyway, I'm hoping the smiley face is saying you're in on the joke.

        All the best,
        Michael
        Hi Michael, I didn't mean to imply that we should write for sound bytes. I meant that we shouldn't take our reader's attention for granted. The OP had a purpose and was provocative. But I took something else away from it than others. Also, the OP doesn't demonstrate what is "normal." It only demonstrated how we each read a single post on an internet forum
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091985].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author BigNorm
    Do you think next time you could put your little joke in a youtube video and put it up, I prefer videos over reading. Maybe it could go viral and spread like wild fire haha.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091754].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author 82ana
    Thanks Dan for bringing this to my (ever shrinking) attention.
    Could you point me to a link where I could find the real guidelines?

    I have a disclaimer, prominently displayed on the bottom of the home page and the top navigation but you can never be too sure, because no matter how many hours I spend on the content people rarely read through all of it... :/

    Thanks,
    Sana
    Signature
    Old age means realizing you will never own all the dogs you wanted to.

    Healthy Aging
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091927].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Dan C. Rinnert
      Originally Posted by 82ana View Post

      Thanks Dan for bringing this to my (ever shrinking) attention.
      Could you point me to a link where I could find the real guidelines?
      http://www.ftc.gov/os/2009/10/091005...mentguides.pdf
      Signature

      Dan's content is irregularly read by handfuls of people. Join the elite few by reading his blog: dcrBlogs.com, following him on Twitter: dcrTweets.com or reading his fiction: dcrWrites.com but NOT by Clicking Here!

      Dan also writes content for hire, but you can't afford him anyway.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091937].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Sylonious
      Originally Posted by 82ana View Post

      Thanks Dan for bringing this to my (ever shrinking) attention.
      Could you point me to a link where I could find the real guidelines?

      I have a disclaimer, prominently displayed on the bottom of the home page and the top navigation but you can never be too sure, because no matter how many hours I spend on the content people rarely read through all of it... :/

      Thanks,
      Sana
      2011: Proposals For New Guidelines Are Being Discussed Now

      You will need a machine readable privacy policy.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3093707].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author 100Bandz
    Dan scared the hell out of me
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091960].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Kay King
      Dan - you are one powerful dude.

      I just got an infraction from someone I've never heard of or responded to - and he was banned by the time I saw the infraction.

      I think you need a disclaimer for that....

      kay
      Signature
      Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world will change forever for that one dog.

      I wish offended people would react like fainting goats and quietly tip over.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091983].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author ckerne054
    Thanks for the real link Dan 4 posts up.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3091986].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author pappyy3
      Damn - I'm in the wrong thread .....where's the link to the Jokes thread people?????
      Signature

      Tonster

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3092033].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Peggy Baron
    Ok, I read up through the sentence before you said you made it all up. I stopped because it distressed me and I had to go stick my head in the sand. I felt immediately better for having ignored it and while picking sand out of my eyes I jumped ahead to the comments.

    Hahahahaha!
    and
    Whew!

    Peggy
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3092015].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Gail Sober
    I just deleted all of my sites and hope that's good enough (I'd never be able to backtrack and make those required changes on 15+ years of work)

    j/k

    I will make the changes but it is going to take forever!!








    Ok, ok... j/k again. I actually read the entire post!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3092052].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Steve Wells
    I know the original post was mostly fabricated but here is a question, what if you are promoting your own graphics services or products and make no claims as to how much money someone will make for buying your service or product?

    I am not an affiliate for other people products...
    Signature
    Need Custom Graphics Work? - Message Me For A Design Quote!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3092053].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author tpw
      Originally Posted by Steve Wells View Post

      What if you are promoting your own graphics services or products and make no claims as to money being made?

      I am not an affiliate for other people products...

      Take a deep breath...

      Relax...

      Then read this in its entirety...
      Signature
      Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
      Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3092066].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Steve Wells
        Originally Posted by tpw View Post

        Take a deep breath...

        Relax...

        Then read this in its entirety...
        I did, and I know what you are reffering to, what I am asking is besides the point......

        refer back to my post, I clarified that I understood......
        Signature
        Need Custom Graphics Work? - Message Me For A Design Quote!
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3092280].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author paulie888
          Originally Posted by Steve Wells View Post

          I did, and I know what you are reffering to, what I am asking is besides the point......

          refer back to my post, I clarified that I understood......
          I don't see why you'd need to include any income disclaimer when you're most likely not mentioning anything about income that can be made with your graphics product/service in your salesletter?
          Signature
          >>> Features Jason Fladlien, John S. Rhodes, Justin Brooke, Sean I. Mitchell, Reed Floren and Brad Gosse! <<<
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3092327].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Michael Oksa
      Originally Posted by Steve Wells View Post

      I know the original post was mostly fabricated but here is a question, what if you are promoting your own graphics services or products and make no claims as to how much money someone will make for buying your service or product?

      I am not an affiliate for other people products...
      I am not a lawyer, but as you are not making any income claims, and not earning an affiliate commission, you shouldn't have to add any kind of income disclaimer.

      That would be like me adding a medical disclaimer to the front of a guide on playing the piano. But...I'm not a lawyer, so who knows?

      All the best,
      Michael
      Signature

      "Ich bin en fuego!"
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3092309].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author tpw
      Originally Posted by Steve Wells View Post

      I know the original post was mostly fabricated but here is a question, what if you are promoting your own graphics services or products and make no claims as to how much money someone will make for buying your service or product?

      I am not an affiliate for other people products...

      The gist of the somewhat new "FTC regulations" should not apply to you.

      Although these regulations or guidelines have been on the books for years, they are more accurately described as newly enforced.
      {As to any advice you receive in a forum, you should never take the advice of the layman in that forum. Check with your attorney when in doubt, and review the real guidelines for yourself to be familiar with the basics of it.}

      If you do not make earnings claims, and you don't sell products or services created by third-parties, I do not believe any of these "new" guidelines will apply to you.

      The best person around these parts to ask about these things is Brian Kindsvater, but if you search his old posts, you will find that he has covered this material rather extensively over the last several months, and he may have already directly answered your questions.
      Signature
      Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
      Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3092332].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author paulie888
        Originally Posted by tpw View Post

        The gist of the somewhat new "FTC regulations" should not apply to you.

        Although these regulations or guidelines have been on the books for years, they are more accurately described as newly enforced.
        {As to any advice you receive in a forum, you should never take the advice of the layman in that forum. Check with your attorney when in doubt, and review the real guidelines for yourself to be familiar with the basics of it.}

        If you do not make earnings claims, and you don't sell products or services created by third-parties, I do not believe any of these "new" guidelines will apply to you.

        The best person around these parts to ask about these things is Brian Kindsvater, but if you search his old posts, you will find that he has covered this material rather extensively over the last several months, and he may have already directly answered your questions.
        Those were my thoughts too, Bill. If he's not making any income/earnings claims, why on earth would he need to have an income disclaimer? A disclaimer is usually only created in reference to some type of claim/assertion you make in your sales message.
        Signature
        >>> Features Jason Fladlien, John S. Rhodes, Justin Brooke, Sean I. Mitchell, Reed Floren and Brad Gosse! <<<
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3092352].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author tpw
          Originally Posted by paulie888 View Post

          Those were my thoughts too, Bill. If he's not making any income/earnings claims, why on earth would he need to have an income disclaimer? A disclaimer is usually only created in reference to some type of claim/assertion you make in your sales message.

          Yeah, the disclaimer would apply to claims in his copy.

          Disclosure would apply to the fact that recommended links may lead to revenues for him.
          Signature
          Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
          Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3092364].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author paulie888
            Originally Posted by tpw View Post

            Yeah, the disclaimer would apply to claims in his copy.

            Disclosure would apply to the fact that recommended links may lead to revenues for him.
            This is true, but I'm pretty sure when he referred to an income disclaimer it was more along the lines of the standard one you see in reference to income claims.
            Signature
            >>> Features Jason Fladlien, John S. Rhodes, Justin Brooke, Sean I. Mitchell, Reed Floren and Brad Gosse! <<<
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3092409].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author AnitaCross
      Originally Posted by Steve Wells View Post

      I know the original post was mostly fabricated but here is a question, what if you are promoting your own graphics services or products and make no claims as to how much money someone will make for buying your service or product?

      I am not an affiliate for other people products...
      This is one of several posts that prove the OP was doing us a real service in the guise of a joke.

      In spite of the nature of the original post, and the original intent as well, it got people thinking about the FTC guidelines. When one member asked for a link to the real guidelines, Dan was quick to provide it.

      And it got Steve here to ask about disclaimers for his own products and services.

      In answer to your question, Steve, it is my understanding that disclaimers for your own products or services are only required if and when you make claims regarding potential income for the purchaser. As you make no such claims, you shouldn't need a disclaimer.

      However, if you have any doubts whatsoever, contact an attorney that specializes in business law, preferably online business. (Forget the bankruptcy or divorce lawyers... )

      I personally wouldn't try to talk to someone at the FTC. I am skeptical of getting answers from any government employees. My experience there is the left hand rarely knows what the right hand is doing.

      -Anita
      Signature
      Looking For A Short Cut To Online Retail Profits?
      OSOA on Facebook -- SimplySilk on Facebook

      Anita
      is one of several Moderators at "Live Marketing Chat"
      LMC, mixing work and fun on Saturday nights -- Google it
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3092375].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Dan C. Rinnert
      Originally Posted by Steve Wells View Post

      I know the original post was mostly fabricated but here is a question, what if you are promoting your own graphics services or products and make no claims as to how much money someone will make for buying your service or product?

      I am not an affiliate for other people products...
      Well, basically, transparency is largely the whole intent of the FTC guidelines. There are valid arguments as to why bloggers have to do things that print columnists aren't required to, and so on, but the basic intent is transparency.

      If you are selling graphics or products intended for resale, then you need to be able to back up any claims you make with regard to how much money they can make reselling them. Of course, if you don't make any income claims, you don't need to worry on that point.

      If you are advertising that your graphics will increase their sales by such and such a percentage as compared to graphics created by your competitors, then you're going to need to back up your claims.

      The bulk of the new FTC guidelines cover affiliates and not direct sellers. However, direct sellers were already covered by existing rules and regulations, especially regarding truth in advertising.

      So, basically, you're probably not going to have to do anything special if you're not making any claims about what your products or services will do for people. And, if you do make claims, be able to back them up.

      Of course, I am not a lawyer or anything and if you want a more concrete and definitive answer, your best bet is to talk to an attorney or other relevant professional with whom you can discuss your situation, your products/services and any claims relating to them in order to determine your potential liability for any legal or FTC action as well as the need for any specific disclaimers.
      Signature

      Dan's content is irregularly read by handfuls of people. Join the elite few by reading his blog: dcrBlogs.com, following him on Twitter: dcrTweets.com or reading his fiction: dcrWrites.com but NOT by Clicking Here!

      Dan also writes content for hire, but you can't afford him anyway.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3092562].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author tpw
        Originally Posted by Dan C. Rinnert View Post

        Of course, I am not a lawyer or anything and if you want a more concrete and definitive answer, your best bet is to talk to an attorney or other relevant professional with whom you can discuss your situation, your products/services and any claims relating to them in order to determine your potential liability for any legal or FTC action as well as the need for any specific disclaimers.

        Are you sure you are not a lawyer??

        You managed to shove ALL of that into one sentence...
        Signature
        Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
        Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3092584].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Michael Oksa
    Originally Posted by Dan C. Rinnert View Post

    As you may recall, early in 2010, the FTC implemented new rules and regulations regarding disclaimers to be used on websites where the website owner earns commissions through affiliate sales or other means.

    Internet marketers were all up in arms over this and, in many cases, rightly so. As with so many other things, these new rules and regulations put an increased burden on the honest sellers while doing very little, in fact, to harm the ones that are actually hurting customers.

    But, I digress...

    The bottom line is that these rules and regulations are here to stay and we just have to learn to live with them.

    Still, they were very confusing, so a couple months ago, the FTC released a final set of guidelines which clarifies things for website owners and describes how disclosures must be made. These rules go into effect on January 1st, so you need to make sure that you are ready for them.

    First, all disclosures must be made prominent. You should have a dedicated disclosure page. The link to this page needs to be included in your navigation system, whether you use a row of links in your header, down a sidebar or across the bottom. The important thing is that this disclosure page must be linked from within your primary navigation system.

    That means that, if you are using a sidebar for navigation, you can't just bury the disclaimer page link at the bottom of the page. It must be included with your primary navigational links.

    On pages where you are actually promoting a product, a disclaimer must be displayed at both the top and the bottom of the page. This disclaimer needs to be in type at least one point size larger than your typical body type. So, no hiding it in tiny print!

    Also, each place you have a link to a product you are promoting, you must include a link to your disclaimer page, like this: productNameLink [DISCLAIMER], where the word "DISCLAIMER" is a hyperlink to your disclaimer page.

    I know these steps are rather onerous and a royal pain in the neck, but these are rules we will simply have to put up with. Despite earlier claims to the contrary, penalties for non-compliance DO, in fact, start at $11,000.

    And, that would not be per individual or company, but per website. So, if you have 5 websites that are not in compliance, you're looking at fines starting at $55,000.

    So, that is good reason to comply!

    Of course, you can understand why the FTC is doing this. This post, for example, I largely made up. Yes, there are new rules and regulations, as most people are already aware, but the "guidelines" I've listed here are ones I just fabricated. But, watch the responses to this thread. You will see people that will not have read to this point and will complain about these new things that they have to start doing. If you've read to this point, you might be a little upset (sorry), but you'll soon see the point I am making when you read the replies. People don't read things all the way through; they largely read what they want to see, not necessarily what's there.

    So, when you say someone COULD make $1,000 a day using your system, but that typical results are that people will make $10 a day, people will only see the $1,000 a day because that's the bit that they want to see. So, that's why the FTC wants things a little more prominent.

    Of course, that's no reason to fear, because the same basic notion holds true, that people read what they want to see. There are threads here where follow-up posts will say in bright red letters that the initial premise of the thread was false, yet people still do not see it.

    So, in a sense, it doesn't matter what the FTC wants you to display on your website to warn prospective buyers, they will continue to see what they want to see. You tell them typical results are that they will fail miserably, and they'll overlook it because they don't consider themselves "typical."

    It is always amazing how things can be hidden in plain sight!

    If you're an honest seller, you have no real reason to worry. People will continue to buy quality products.

    Of course, that doesn't mean you still can't complain about new rules and regulations because a lot of times they prove to be more of an additional burden and headache than an effective means of stopping whatever they were intended to stop.
    In direct relation to your ENTIRE post...you forgot to mention that they have been busy collecting information on various sites so they can let the hammer fall as soon as the clock strikes midnight to ring in the new year.

    ~M~
    Signature

    "Ich bin en fuego!"
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3092319].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author vip-ip
    So what, the FTC doesn't want me hiding the truth when I make outlandish claims about the billions I've already earned? About the cars and mansions that I use and reside in? Sigh.

    Best Regards,
    vip-ip ...
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3092914].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author stephfoster
    Great joke. I started out wondering where on earth you'd found such ridiculous, specific guidelines. Figured out you were kidding just before the reveal.

    Now so long as the FTC doesn't get any ideas from this post, we'll all be just fine.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3093332].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Dennis Gaskill
      Originally Posted by stephfoster View Post

      Great joke. I started out wondering where on earth you'd found such ridiculous, specific guidelines. Figured out you were kidding just before the reveal.

      Now so long as the FTC doesn't get any ideas from this post, we'll all be just fine.
      If they search the web to see what people are saying they might find this thread and get ideas. The thread is ranked #10 for new ftc rules for websites and if we keep writing new ftc rules for websites in our posts then it might climb to #1 for new ftc rules for websites before long.
      Signature

      Just when you think you've got it all figured out, someone changes the rules.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3093350].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author paulie888
        Originally Posted by Dennis Gaskill View Post

        If they search the web to see what people are saying they might find this thread and get ideas. The thread is ranked #10 for new ftc rules for websites and if we keep writing new ftc rules for websites in our posts then it might climb to #1 for new ftc rules for websites before long.
        Dennis, I did not realize that - but it is a scary thought. After reading the dumb responses from some of the commenters here, one can only assume that equally ignorant people searching for the latest FTC rules and who love to skim over written material may have very poor comprehension of what is being written here, and totally misinterpret what is being talked about!
        Signature
        >>> Features Jason Fladlien, John S. Rhodes, Justin Brooke, Sean I. Mitchell, Reed Floren and Brad Gosse! <<<
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3093355].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Dennis Gaskill
          Originally Posted by paulie888 View Post

          Dennis, I did not realize that - but it is a scary thought. After reading the dumb responses from some of the commenters here, one can only assume that equally ignorant people searching for the latest FTC rules and who love to skim over written material may have very poor comprehension of what is being written here, and completely misinterpret what is being talked about!
          That's possible, but I was referring to the FTC finding the thread and getting ideas. You stole my thunder with the very next post though.
          Signature

          Just when you think you've got it all figured out, someone changes the rules.

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3093368].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author paulie888
            Originally Posted by Dennis Gaskill View Post

            That's possible, but I was referring to the FTC finding the thread and getting ideas. You stole my thunder with the very next post though.
            I know exactly what you were getting at, Dennis. However, as I've described above, we could also be helping to disseminate disinformation to the mass public who don't like reading.
            Signature
            >>> Features Jason Fladlien, John S. Rhodes, Justin Brooke, Sean I. Mitchell, Reed Floren and Brad Gosse! <<<
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3093417].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Dennis Gaskill
              Originally Posted by paulie888 View Post

              I know exactly what you were getting at, Dennis. However, as I've described above, we could also be helping to disseminate disinformation to the mass public who don't like reading.
              I wouldn't be too worried about that. The FTC comes up in first four spots. Google must think they're some kind of authority site or something.
              Signature

              Just when you think you've got it all figured out, someone changes the rules.

              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3093440].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author paulie888
                Originally Posted by Dennis Gaskill View Post

                I wouldn't be too worried about that. The FTC comes up in first four spots. Google must think they're some kind of authority site or something.
                Well, that perfectly illustrates why everyone's piggybacking on .edu and .gov domains for authority backlinks.
                Signature
                >>> Features Jason Fladlien, John S. Rhodes, Justin Brooke, Sean I. Mitchell, Reed Floren and Brad Gosse! <<<
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3093447].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Dan C. Rinnert
              Originally Posted by paulie888 View Post

              I know exactly what you were getting at, Dennis. However, as I've described above, we could also be helping to disseminate disinformation to the mass public who don't like reading.
              I've added a little disclaimer for their benefit.
              Signature

              Dan's content is irregularly read by handfuls of people. Join the elite few by reading his blog: dcrBlogs.com, following him on Twitter: dcrTweets.com or reading his fiction: dcrWrites.com but NOT by Clicking Here!

              Dan also writes content for hire, but you can't afford him anyway.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3093465].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Dennis Gaskill
                Originally Posted by Dan C. Rinnert View Post

                I've added a little disclaimer for their benefit.
                Your disclaimer seems inadequate. At the least it should be at the top and bottom of your original post, and in larger type than the rest of the post. In fact, there are several things lacking. You should read this informative article and follow it's instructions to be safe.



                Edit: This thread is now #7 for new ftc rules for websites.
                Signature

                Just when you think you've got it all figured out, someone changes the rules.

                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3093537].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author paulie888
                  Originally Posted by Dennis Gaskill View Post

                  Your disclaimer seems inadequate. At the least it should be at the top and bottom of your original post, and in larger type than the rest of the post. In fact, there are several things lacking. You should read this informative article and follow it's instructions to be safe.



                  Edit: This thread is now #7 for new ftc rules for websites.
                  Dennis, mark my words, it may very well rise to #5 or even higher, so there is indeed cause for concern.
                  Signature
                  >>> Features Jason Fladlien, John S. Rhodes, Justin Brooke, Sean I. Mitchell, Reed Floren and Brad Gosse! <<<
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3093596].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author Dennis Gaskill
                    Originally Posted by paulie888 View Post

                    Dennis, mark my words, it may very well rise to #5 or even higher, so there is indeed cause for concern.
                    No worries, Paulie. I'm working on a New FTC Rules for Websites special report right now. I'll post it in my sig file soon and rake in the moolah! Gotta think like a marketer, ya know?
                    Signature

                    Just when you think you've got it all figured out, someone changes the rules.

                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3093610].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author tpw
                  Originally Posted by Dennis Gaskill View Post

                  This thread is now #7 for new ftc rules for websites.

                  Dennis: That is amazing... LOL

                  If we play our cards right, we can out-SEO the federal government.
                  Signature
                  Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
                  Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3093641].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author paulie888
                    Originally Posted by tpw View Post

                    Dennis: That is amazing... LOL

                    If we play our cards right, we can out-SEO the federal government.
                    With the authority and backlinks this forum has, we might very well gain a position in the coveted top 3 spots! LOL
                    Signature
                    >>> Features Jason Fladlien, John S. Rhodes, Justin Brooke, Sean I. Mitchell, Reed Floren and Brad Gosse! <<<
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3093658].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author Dan C. Rinnert
                    Originally Posted by tpw View Post

                    Dennis: That is amazing... LOL

                    If we play our cards right, we can out-SEO the federal government.
                    And then they'll see the urinal talk and know what we think of them.
                    Signature

                    Dan's content is irregularly read by handfuls of people. Join the elite few by reading his blog: dcrBlogs.com, following him on Twitter: dcrTweets.com or reading his fiction: dcrWrites.com but NOT by Clicking Here!

                    Dan also writes content for hire, but you can't afford him anyway.
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3093667].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author Onash
                      Originally Posted by Dan C. Rinnert View Post

                      And then they'll see the urinal talk and know what we think of them.

                      hahaha.... couldn't stop laughing when I read this !
                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3093698].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author tpw
                      Originally Posted by Dan C. Rinnert View Post

                      And then they'll see the urinal talk and know what we think of them.

                      OMG!!! A new anagram springs to mind: the PONFTC, short for Piss on the FTC.

                      How is that for a keyword that attracts more angry people to this thread.
                      Signature
                      Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
                      Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3093725].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author paulie888
                      Originally Posted by Dan C. Rinnert View Post

                      And then they'll see the urinal talk and know what we think of them.
                      I think my post on urinals was the one that was displayed when Bill last checked on Google, so they may very well already know.
                      Signature
                      >>> Features Jason Fladlien, John S. Rhodes, Justin Brooke, Sean I. Mitchell, Reed Floren and Brad Gosse! <<<
                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3094466].message }}
                      • Profile picture of the author tpw
                        Originally Posted by paulie888 View Post

                        I think my post on urinals was the one that was displayed when Bill last checked on Google, so they may very well already know.
                        They should already know Dan. The thread is already archived in Google to post #168.
                        Signature
                        Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
                        Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
                        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3095418].message }}
                        • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
                          Sorry not getting this thread-

                          People don't read through an entire post for various reasons and claiming that they are all based on laziness, tunnel vision or some lack on their part really is no less knee jerk than people coming on and saying that all marketers that use hype sell inferior products. those people get blasted for saying so because its a generalization. Its a well known fact in copywriting and in news print that you put the important information first because its a natural human tendency to lose focus the longer the person has to read and thats so even when attention is high because the person engaging with the information has other ideas they are relating it to which can be distracting.

                          I get dan's point but I'm just not seeing how this really does less harm than good. I could be reading a post and the phone rings. I get a PM or some of the many other things that come up in life happens and I never get back to it but I don't really think a respected warrior would have the time or desire to write falsehoods in his first two or three relatively long paragraphs so I very well might believe what I read up to that point.

                          Frankly the premise itself takes away from the real problem. People are not taking away hype from IM copy merely because its what they want to see. They take away the hype in IM sales copy because thats what the copywriter wants them to take away. You see this time and time again in the WSo section and across IM. Denying it is futile. Placing all or even most of the blame for it on the reader doesn't hold up when the whole purpose of most sales copy is to sell the hype and sizzle.

                          Dan is right that if you are honest you have nothing to worry about but that assumes that the copy is honest AND balanced and there is a problem in IM because sometimes even honest people don't have both ingredients in their copy.
                          Signature

                          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3095700].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author Dennis Gaskill
                    Originally Posted by tpw View Post

                    Dennis: That is amazing... LOL

                    If we play our cards right, we can out-SEO the federal government.
                    Yeah, but why rank for "new ftc rules for websites" when we can rank for "FTC urinals" instead?




                    Of course, seeing how fast this thread ranked, it makes me wonder how easy it would be to rank for a good keyword phrase by focusing on a tight theme and using that phrase frequently on various pages of your site.

                    Naw ... that would never work.
                    Signature

                    Just when you think you've got it all figured out, someone changes the rules.

                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3093697].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author paulie888
                      Originally Posted by Dennis Gaskill View Post

                      Yeah, but why rank for "new ftc rules for websites" when we can rank for "FTC urinals" instead?




                      Of course, seeing how fast this thread ranked, it makes me wonder how easy it would be to rank for a good keyword phrase by focusing on a tight theme and using that phrase frequently on various pages of your site.

                      Naw ... that would never work.
                      It won't be difficult at all, in my estimation. The right keyword phrase is one part of the equation, and the other is getting lots and lots of views very quickly, and this thread certainly succeeded in doing that!
                      Signature
                      >>> Features Jason Fladlien, John S. Rhodes, Justin Brooke, Sean I. Mitchell, Reed Floren and Brad Gosse! <<<
                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3093712].message }}
                      • Profile picture of the author tpw
                        Originally Posted by paulie888 View Post

                        It won't be difficult at all, in my estimation. The right keyword phrase is one part of the equation, and the other is getting lots and lots of views very quickly, and this thread certainly succeeded in doing that!

                        Yes, Google last crawled this page 45 minutes ago and grabbed your first post on the page.

                        This particular thread is running light speed on the Google bot, and the natural Google Love that Warrior Forum gets will help elevate it up the ranks faster.

                        The Matt Cutts thread comes up for both "original content penalty" and "unique content penalty", but only when using quotes on those phrases. Nothing yet on those two phrases without quotes, even though that is about the only place on the net where those two phrases are used as a phrase. :rolleyes:

                        For some silly reason, Google thinks that the spoofed topic (Duplicate Content Penalty) should rank higher than the spoofed versions. LOL

                        That is why I am tapping this thread to build more link juice to that thread.

                        We also have juice coming from there to here.

                        And much much more...

                        LOL



                        FTC Disclaimer: Some links on these pages may or may not allow certain participants to earn revenue, if a reader clicks the link on the page and buys a product or service from the linked website.
                        Signature
                        Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
                        Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
                        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3093860].message }}
                        • Profile picture of the author paulie888
                          Originally Posted by tpw View Post

                          Yes, Google last crawled this page 45 minutes ago and grabbed your first post on the page.

                          This particular thread is running light speed on the Google bot, and the natural Google Love that Warrior Forum gets will help elevate it up the ranks faster.

                          The Matt Cutts thread comes up for both "original content penalty" and "unique content penalty", but only when using quotes on those phrases. Nothing yet on those two phrases without quotes, even though that is about the only place on the net where those two phrases are used as a phrase. :rolleyes:

                          For some silly reason, Google thinks that the spoofed topic (Duplicate Content Penalty) should rank higher than the spoofed versions. LOL

                          That is why I am tapping this thread to build more link juice to that thread.

                          We also have juice coming from there to here.

                          And much much more...

                          LOL



                          FTC Disclaimer: Some links on these pages may or may not allow certain participants to earn revenue, if a reader clicks the link on the page and buys a product or service from the linked website.
                          Well, that's a little embarassing considering what I was referring to...LOL! I hope that Google quickly crawls this page again and picks up some other post instead of mine - I don't exactly want to be known for talking about urinals!
                          Signature
                          >>> Features Jason Fladlien, John S. Rhodes, Justin Brooke, Sean I. Mitchell, Reed Floren and Brad Gosse! <<<
                          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3094006].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author MichaelHiles
                  Originally Posted by Dennis Gaskill View Post

                  ...


                  Edit: This thread is now #7 for new ftc rules for websites.
                  NOW THIS IS WHAT WILLIS WAS TALKIN' BOUT!!!

                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3094137].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author tpw
                    Originally Posted by MichaelHiles View Post

                    Originally Posted by Dennis Gaskill View Post

                    This thread is now #7 for new ftc rules for websites.
                    NOW THIS IS WHAT WILLIS WAS TALKIN' BOUT!!!


                    All we need is a few more juiced links to squeeze the Feds a little tighter than most people do... LOL

                    New FTC rules for websites will continue to climb as we drop a few more of these imaginary back links that people are always talking about.
                    Signature
                    Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
                    Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3094155].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author paulie888
                      Originally Posted by tpw View Post

                      All we need is a few more juiced links to squeeze the Feds a little tighter than most people do... LOL

                      New FTC rules for websites will continue to climb as we drop a few more of these imaginary back links that people are always talking about.
                      Bill, it's still at #7 at the time of writing this, but I would not be surprised at all if it jumps up a few notches later in the day. It's good that Dan placed that little disclaimer at the top, hopefully that will keep this thread from inciting mass hysteria out there outside of these forum walls.
                      Signature
                      >>> Features Jason Fladlien, John S. Rhodes, Justin Brooke, Sean I. Mitchell, Reed Floren and Brad Gosse! <<<
                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3094300].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author halmo
          Originally Posted by paulie888 View Post

          You're absolutely right, such a title would cause the majority of people to pay significantly less attention to the contents within it (or ignore it altogether), so then it would defeat the original purpose of creating the post, which was to highlight a fundamental flaw in how people typically read/skim through posts with minimal comprehension.
          Yes. So, that implies that Dan actually did a favor by using a "negative" title.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3093433].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author paulie888
            Originally Posted by halmo View Post

            Yes. So, that implies that Dan actually did a favor by using a "negative" title.
            Negativity almost always tends to incite more attention and interest. It's an unfortunate fact, but it's true - the news and tabloid headlines you see every day highlight this fact only too well.
            Signature
            >>> Features Jason Fladlien, John S. Rhodes, Justin Brooke, Sean I. Mitchell, Reed Floren and Brad Gosse! <<<
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3093582].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author paulie888
      Originally Posted by stephfoster View Post

      Great joke. I started out wondering where on earth you'd found such ridiculous, specific guidelines. Figured out you were kidding just before the reveal.

      Now so long as the FTC doesn't get any ideas from this post, we'll all be just fine.
      I'm sure they won't take it too much to heart...lol. You see, the FTC is there to protect the consumer, but if they overstep their boundaries too much they'll wind up hurting business and the economy in general, because the economy will only grow if money exchanges hands - this will not happen if they make every consumer overly paranoid about online transactions!
      Signature
      >>> Features Jason Fladlien, John S. Rhodes, Justin Brooke, Sean I. Mitchell, Reed Floren and Brad Gosse! <<<
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3093351].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author homeworkin
        Originally Posted by paulie888 View Post

        I'm sure they won't take it too much to heart...lol. You see, the FTC is there to protect the consumer, but if they overstep their boundaries too much they'll wind up hurting business and the economy in general, because the economy will only grow if money exchanges hands - this will not happen if they make every consumer overly paranoid about online transactions!
        If you believe that government agencies will not deliberately ruin the economy or destroy small businesses - it might pay to do some reading about a sweet little law called the CPSIA.

        Under the guise of protecting children from lead and other nasties - a law was passed that could have killed nearly all small businesses that produce toys, books, kids clothing, and anything else intended for anyone under 13. The cost to our economy has been huge and many small businesses have been devastated. I am a mom, I WANT my kid protected from REAL dangers not imaginary ones. Lead is a huge concern but it does not exist in all products, mostly only those with metal, plastic, paint or vinyl. So, why create expensive and redundant testing that is beyond the reach of most small businesses?

        Some repair work has been done (like the Consumer Product Safety Commission deciding that it is not actually necessary to test things like cotton or wool for lead - since it is basically impossible for them to contain lead in the first place).

        However, there is still a potentially disasterous deadline approaching for enforcement of the part of the law that would require a manufacturer to test a sample of every single product they make - in every size and color - even if they make only one of each item (such as unique handmade items) or if they make the items in six sizes from one set of materials.

        Coupled with the silly new rule that businesses will need to start creating a 1099 for every supplier (not contractor) they do business with. (Yes, this means that you will have to issue a 1099 to Staples for paper and ink purchases - or the new laptop you bought - etc.) Then add in the FTC issues, it really makes you wonder what the government is thinking (don't blame any one party - they are both equally culpable in these messes). Seriously, in this economy they are working hard to create mountains of crazy paperwork and obscene lab testing fees that don't actually make kids safer. Making life more difficult for online sales is not going to worry the FTC.
        Signature
        www.CashCowContent.com ~Quality PLR
        Topics include green energy, local marketing and more. Professional, English-speaking writer.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3093796].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author bigredrassler
    That was awesome, my heart was pounding right up until the "wait, what" moment of your reveal.
    Signature

    Experience is overrated, usually by old men who nod wisely and speak stupidly.-Og Mandino

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3093408].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Onash
    I reported you guys to the FTC for making fun of them. This is NOT acceptable.

    I am not kidding. See the report here --> ftc.gov/Complaints/16352
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3093487].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Alfred Shelver
    Wow, How long does it take to get your thanks back. This was a great refreshing thread. There was so much to learn if you took it as intended and thought about some responses and the human mind set.

    Bill you and Dan should alternate these types threads once a week, I think it could only do good.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3093499].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Dan C. Rinnert
      Originally Posted by Cathy Shelver View Post

      Wow, How long does it take to get your thanks back.
      24 hours, which is too short a response so I have to write this extra bit.
      Signature

      Dan's content is irregularly read by handfuls of people. Join the elite few by reading his blog: dcrBlogs.com, following him on Twitter: dcrTweets.com or reading his fiction: dcrWrites.com but NOT by Clicking Here!

      Dan also writes content for hire, but you can't afford him anyway.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3093513].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Sylonious
    If your visitors click your affiliate link and it goes to a "marketing opt-in page" before they reach the affiliate vendor then it won't matter how you disclose. That's what the FTC was proposing in this new round of regulations.

    Designation of affiliates and commonly accepted practices of data collection: viability of consumer opt-in of affiliate links and data sharing with merchants. - Source
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3093605].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author OpticalOut
    Hah, good forum bait. I read through your post and got pretty annoyed but good job.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3093756].message }}
  • {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3094120].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author SteveJohnson
    I thought the OP was cheap and tacky.

    Cheap, because he obviously doesn't outsource his forum postings. Isn't that the thing to do nowadays?

    Tacky, because by the time I got to the 'disclosure' part I was ready to pound carpet tacks into the foreheads of anyone who admits to a non-confrontational relationship with the FTC or thinks that the New FTC rules for websites are even in the running for consideration as anything other than completely asinine.

    But now to the heart of the matter: It's sad state of affairs when we can read such a spoof of the 'new rules' and not doubt their validity. We have come to expect such idiotic actions from government goofballs that even the most stupid of rules doesn't come as a surprise.
    Signature

    The 2nd Amendment, 1789 - The Original Homeland Security.

    Gun control means never having to say, "I missed you."

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3095704].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author tonydbaker
    I am absolutely OUTRAGED that the FTC would try to impose these rules on me.

    I can clearly see that they are all about imposing their will over us and that they are more interested in power than they are in consumer safety.

    I too jest my outrage.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3097471].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author paulie888
      Originally Posted by tonydbaker View Post

      I am absolutely OUTRAGED that the FTC would try to impose these rules on me.

      I can clearly see that they are all about imposing their will over us and that they are more interested in power than they are in consumer safety.

      I too jest my outrage.
      Good one, Tony - you had me really fooled until your last sentence!
      Signature
      >>> Features Jason Fladlien, John S. Rhodes, Justin Brooke, Sean I. Mitchell, Reed Floren and Brad Gosse! <<<
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3107676].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Leo McMackin
    If I'm honest I was fooled by it until I read Tpw's first reply
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3097596].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author chris032
    Is this for real or a joke? Because I want to make sure I follow the rules?
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3107671].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author lesterlim85
    I had read through the full post of Dan and I thought some of our warriors here might have taken the whole issue abit too serious to the extend of deeming it as deceit or immoral, etc etc.

    For me, I will definitely take the time to finish reading the whole post because the topic itself is very important. But not everyone thinks the same.

    The OP is just doing a simple harmless experiment to test the responses that's all, in my opinion. Chill my dear fellow warriors!

    Cheers
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3137330].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author LetsGoViral
    So basically only USA marketers should be concerned.
    Signature
    Time of thinking is over.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3137913].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Richard Van
      Originally Posted by LetsGoViral View Post

      So basically only USA marketers should be concerned.
      James,

      I'm assuming there's some kind of real, deep, dry sense of humour going on with that last comment? :rolleyes:
      Signature

      Wibble, bark, my old man's a mushroom etc...

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3137953].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author paulie888
      Originally Posted by LetsGoViral View Post

      So basically only USA marketers should be concerned.
      Sounds like you've been skimming this thread. Go back and start reading from post #1.
      Signature
      >>> Features Jason Fladlien, John S. Rhodes, Justin Brooke, Sean I. Mitchell, Reed Floren and Brad Gosse! <<<
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3262288].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author zeromaster
    mmmm...I used to like to read a good book...you know the type!
    first page and the last page! hehehe
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3189374].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author tpw
      Originally Posted by zeromaster View Post

      mmmm...I used to like to read a good book...you know the type!
      first page and the last page! hehehe

      I remember that -- Book Reports for the lazy.
      Signature
      Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
      Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3189435].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author jaegirl75
    Thank you for taking the time to detail this out for us! We need it!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3262669].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Orator
    I read that post all the way down to the made up admission swearing up a storm. I can't decide if I want to laugh or hit you Dan.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3262749].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author tpw
      Originally Posted by Orator View Post

      I read that post all the way down to the made up admission swearing up a storm. I can't decide if I want to laugh or hit you Dan.

      Looking at your sig, I hope you are not whining...
      Signature
      Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
      Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3262757].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Orator
        Originally Posted by tpw View Post

        Looking at your sig, I hope you are not whining...
        Like my dad use to say.

        "Son I don't care how much you swear, as long as the work gets done."

        Granted this post had the wonderful time of being read just after dealing with a couple of Fiverr's more annoying clients.

        Ah well, you have to laugh.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3262791].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author tpw
          Originally Posted by Orator View Post

          Like my dad use to say.

          "Son I don't care how much you swear, as long as the work gets done."

          Granted this post had the wonderful time of being read just after dealing with a couple of Fiverr's more annoying clients.

          Ah well, you have to laugh.

          If you cannot laugh, you are taking life way too seriously...
          Signature
          Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
          Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3262800].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author cnicely
    Got the Point! Nice
    Signature
    Watch our new show "Entrepreneur Live", and WIN in the process!... Join Today!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3262797].message }}

Trending Topics