28 replies
  • OFF TOPIC
  • |
I just saw the new WSO rules posted here: Warrior Forum - The #1 Internet Marketing Forum & Marketplace - Announcements in Forum : Warrior Special Offers

I believe that once this is fully implemented this will help the quality of the discussion (because certain types won't be coming here to buy or sell their wares anymore) and make the place better overall.

Freelancer has done something with these rules that I think no one really thought they would (despite complaints and criticism to past and current management that have been going on for years about certain of these items) because it would dig deep into their potential profits.

The fact that they did gives me hope that they really are in this for the long term and are really trying the best they can to have a win-win-win (corporation-end user/visitor-seller) experience for all.

Good job Alaister, Daniel, Mods, and others.

Mark
  • Profile picture of the author positivenegative
    Looks good, but only effective if well policed and enforced rigidly.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9775672].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Mark Singletary
      Agreed.

      Seeing this today has given me more hope than anything else they've done. I'm extremely impressed and surprised at the same time.

      I think they have put a lot of time and research into this since they said a long time ago they were working on an update and hopefully they have done some internal training and are ready to go.

      Let's give them a chance to get all the kinks worked out. I've already sent Daniel a couple suggestions where clarification may be helpful. I'm sure there will be a lot of questions and discussion as this all begins to be implemented.

      Mark

      Originally Posted by positivenegative View Post

      Looks good, but only effective if well policed and enforced rigidly.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9775675].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Alaister
      We'll be enforcing these rules for all new WSO that are submitted and over time will be going through the current offers and removing ones that blatantly break the rules.

      I have posted a new thread in the Warrior Forum news section, highlighting the most notable changes.

      http://www.warriorforum.com/warrior-...wso-rules.html

      Our main goal is to provide a trusted marketplace for buyers to be able to find the best Internet marketing deals available and a strong distribution platform for serious sellers with high quality products to promote their offers.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9775677].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author positivenegative
        Originally Posted by Alaister View Post

        We'll be enforcing these rules for all new WSO that are submitted and over time will be going through the current offers and removing ones that blatantly break the rules.

        I have posted a new thread in the Warrior Forum news section, highlighting the most notable changes.

        http://www.warriorforum.com/warrior-...wso-rules.html

        Our main goal is to provide a trusted marketplace for buyers to be able to find the best Internet marketing deals available and a strong distribution platform for serious sellers with high quality products to promote their offers.

        Sounds good and I really hope things turn around for you. The WSO section was once the envy of the IM world and can be again if administered with ethics sympathetic to the buyer.

        Whilst on the subject of WF improvements, does that mean a reply will eventually be forthcoming to either of the 3 unanswered PM's I sent you over a 3 month period?
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9775692].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Alaister
          Originally Posted by positivenegative View Post


          Whilst on the subject of WF improvements, does that mean a reply will eventually be forthcoming to either the 3 unanswered PM's I sent you over a 3 month period?
          Sorry for not getting back to you in regards to your PMs. As you can imagine, I get a huge number of PMs and often get swamped with messages so it's really difficult to keep up with them. Would you be able to send them to me again? I'll keep an eye out for them and get back to you.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9775698].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Cali16
            I just read through the new rules, Alaister. Thank you and your team for doing this. They appear to be quite thorough and do a good job of covering the various issues and concerns that have been brought up.
            Signature
            If you don't face your fears, the only thing you'll ever see is what's in your comfort zone. ~Anne McClain, astronaut
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9775736].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
        Originally Posted by Alaister View Post

        Our main goal is to provide a trusted marketplace for buyers to be able to find the best Internet marketing deals available and a strong distribution platform for serious sellers with high quality products to promote their offers.
        Well said and though it might not happen as fast as I would like that should gradually improve the quality of conversations on the forum as well . Congrats!
        Signature

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9775759].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Mark Singletary
        Originally Posted by Alaister View Post

        Our main goal is to provide a trusted marketplace for buyers to be able to find the best Internet marketing deals available and a strong distribution platform for serious sellers with high quality products to promote their offers.
        Alaister,

        Can I ask where the discussion fits into this goal? What I mean is that we can have a vibrant and popular marketplace and no discussion at all (or poor discussion quality) or we could have a balance between great discussion AND a great marketplace.

        If the future is mostly marketplace it would be good to know sooner than later just because for many of us, the marketplace is secondary to the discussion.

        Thanks.
        Mark
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9775766].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Alaister
          Originally Posted by Mark Singletary View Post

          Alaister,

          Can I ask where the discussion fits into this goal? What I mean is that we can have a vibrant and popular marketplace and no discussion at all (or poor discussion quality) or we could have a balance between great discussion AND a great marketplace.

          If the future is mostly marketplace it would be good to know sooner than later just because for many of us, the marketplace is secondary to the discussion.

          Thanks.
          Mark
          Hi Mark,

          The discussion part of the forum is extremely important for us. When I said "Our main goal..." I was referring to the main goal of these rules with the WSO section.

          The community and quality of discussion is a priority for us and we are working on plans to implement in the new year. I know you have had some suggestions around this, we'd love to hear if you or anyone else has more. Feel free to PM me or post your ideas in the suggestions forum.

          Suggestion Forum
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9775852].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Daniel Evans
            Originally Posted by Alaister View Post

            Hi Mark,

            The discussion part of the forum is extremely important for us. When I said "Our main goal..." I was referring to the main goal of these rules with the WSO section.

            The community and quality of discussion is a priority for us and we are working on plans to implement in the new year. I know you have had some suggestions around this, we'd love to hear if you or anyone else has more. Feel free to PM me or post your ideas in the suggestions forum.

            Suggestion Forum

            Alaister, I'm concerned about the rule which states that a button must direct straight to a checkout.

            Instead, (although admitedly a bit tougher to enforce) you could lay ground rules for the content of sites vendors link to. i.e it should be a perfect reflection of what's shown in the WSO offer and nothing more.

            By permitting this, you won't alienate those who are bound to payment processors that only function when vendors have their payment button embedded into an actual website. Some payment processors do not allow nor cater for embedding buttons in forums for reasons of customer security.

            I'm sure you could get additional feedback in relation to this and other rules from WSO vendors if you make the announcement more prominent and link to the feedback / news forum so that vendors can chime in.

            From my observation, the OT forum actually has few WSO vendors so it's a good idea to consider those potential opinions of those who are actively advertising too.


            Daniel
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9776378].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author smoor2012
    I agree, Mark Singletary. This has always been an excellent forum. I took a break during Christmas, but I am going to get back in the swing now.

    I read the link you posted in the thread above. All forums have to be kept to some level of discipline. They are doing that here.

    You can definitely get good information here.

    I hope all of you in this thread and in Warrior Forum have a prosperous 2015.
    Signature

    PM me and I will respond as soon as possible

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9775724].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Dennis Gaskill
    Alaister,

    The updated rules look like they should help.

    Regarding rule #5, the WSO Approval Policy... many times in the past the sales copy doesn't identify a tool as a spam tool. It usually comes out at some point though, so you might want to consider adding a statement about not giving refunds if it is later revealed your WSO violates the anti-spam tool rule. That might stop some from trying to slide something past the moderators in the first place.
    Signature

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

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9775896].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author danieljb
      Originally Posted by Dennis Gaskill View Post

      Alaister,

      The updated rules look like they should help.

      Regarding rule #5, the WSO Approval Policy... many times in the past the sales copy doesn't identify a tool as a spam tool. It usually comes out at some point though, so you might want to consider adding a statement about not giving refunds if it is later revealed your WSO violates the anti-spam tool rule. That might stop some from trying to slide something past the moderators in the first place.
      Thanks for this Dennis. I have updated the rules to reflect this.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9775917].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Alaister
        Yeh thanks Dennis. That is a really good point.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9775923].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author sbucciarel
    Banned
    You did a great job on the overhaul of the WSO forum rules. I look forward to seeing the benefit of those rules and the rules regarding the discussion forums as well.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9775955].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author lgibbon
    Banned
    I didn't notice any controls over coaching WSO's
    They are probably the worst of the lot.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9776639].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
    Les,

    Yeah, but they're usually sold using income promises. That's a flat out "No" based on the new rules.


    Paul
    Signature
    .
    Stop by Paul's Pub - my little hangout on Facebook.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9776714].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author lgibbon
    Banned
    Well I won't be getting too excited until they stop those Paul.
    They just breed the next generation of crap WSO's
    I'm sure they will just re-word their claims to suit.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9776725].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
      Banned
      I've never done a WSO, am not planning to, and don't even buy many, these days. So - understandably and reasonably enough - nobody should have any real interest in what I think about "WSO rules".

      Nevertheless, everything has a "spillover effect", and since I'm often so very quick to whine and moan about all the things I now dislike about the forum, in the circumstances it would be churlish of me not to thank Freelancer for these new WSO rules.

      I can see that they've been very carefully thought-through and planned, and that plenty of work and care and discussion has gone into constructing them. And that they're very clearly a move in the right direction and ought to be good for the forum.

      So thank you for them, Freelancer.


      .
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9776745].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Karen Blundell
        though I too haven't launched a WSO in ages, I am a recent buyer - so these rules look very good -

        however, are you also going to extend some of these rules re: outrageous income claims - to the banner advertisers as well? Some of the banners appearing at the top of this forum have also contained questionable claims -

        If you're going to clean up the WSO section - great - but be picky about the banner ads you accept too - cause from where I am sitting they are often quite blatant with income claims too and are often the first thing a visitor sees when visiting this forum.
        Signature
        ---------------
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9777019].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author ForumGuru
    Banned
    I commend Freelancer on the rule changes.

    However, many people will try to basically circumvent rule #3, the "no free WSO" rule, by offering one cent to one dollar offers. Are you going to enforce a minimum price requirement to prevent penny sales in the WSO section? I sure hope so, otherwise the spirit (and the intent) of the rule will be obliterated relatively quickly.

    http://www.warriorforum.com/main-int...wf-coffin.html

    Please advise.

    Cheers

    -don
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9777085].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author yukon
    Banned
    No possible way you can verify an income claim.

    A bank statement & tax return can be Photoshoped, same with a video logging into an account.
    Signature
    Hi
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9777625].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Mark Singletary
      Originally Posted by yukon View Post

      No possible way you can verify an income claim.

      A bank statement & tax return can be Photoshoped, same with a video logging into an account.
      I would agree that it would be easier to disallow them altogether. However, I would disagree that it's impossible.

      This is a multi-million dollar corporation - heck it's a multi-million dollar forum. Just like a bank, credit card company, employer, etc. can get the information it needs, including income levels, I believe FL could too. It's just a matter of how much they are willing to go through to get it.

      For the seller, if the income claim is true and is an important part of the ad, providing that proof in a non-fakeable way shouldn't be an issue. It's kind of like Facebook requiring picture ID or PayPal requiring ID plus your latest phone bill or electric bill to back up who you say you are - it's part of the process of doing business with those folks.

      Mark
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9777663].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Alaister
        Originally Posted by Mark Singletary View Post

        I would agree that it would be easier to disallow them altogether. However, I would disagree that it's impossible.

        This is a multi-million dollar corporation - heck it's a multi-million dollar forum. Just like a bank, credit card company, employer, etc. can get the information it needs, including income levels, I believe FL could too. It's just a matter of how much they are willing to go through to get it.

        For the seller, if the income claim is true and is an important part of the ad, providing that proof in a non-fakeable way shouldn't be an issue. It's kind of like Facebook requiring picture ID or PayPal requiring ID plus your latest phone bill or electric bill to back up who you say you are - it's part of the process of doing business with those folks.

        Mark
        Yeh that's exactly right.

        The goal here is to remove the exaggerated hype and outrageously ridiculous income claims and guarantees from the WSO section.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9777667].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author yukon
        Banned
        Originally Posted by Mark Singletary View Post

        I would agree that it would be easier to disallow them altogether. However, I would disagree that it's impossible.

        This is a multi-million dollar corporation - heck it's a multi-million dollar forum. Just like a bank, credit card company, employer, etc. can get the information it needs, including income levels, I believe FL could too. It's just a matter of how much they are willing to go through to get it.

        For the seller, if the income claim is true and is an important part of the ad, providing that proof in a non-fakeable way shouldn't be an issue. It's kind of like Facebook requiring picture ID or PayPal requiring ID plus your latest phone bill or electric bill to back up who you say you are - it's part of the process of doing business with those folks.

        Mark
        Impossible.

        They will not verify any income claims because they can't, just like you can't, just like I can't.








        Originally Posted by Alaister View Post

        Yeh that's exactly right.

        The goal here is to remove the exaggerated hype and outrageously ridiculous income claims and guarantees from the WSO section.
        So why beat around the bush playing guessing games?

        Just point blank don't allow anything that mentions an OPs income or insinuating claims buyers will make money.

        I think your headed in the right direction by trying to clean up the WSOs but zero income claims is far better for removing hype & easier to approve/moderate. Obviously any type of income claim has nothing to do with a buyer so it shouldn't be on a sales page/thread/ad.

        I understand you have a ton of work cleaning up old WSOs but it looks like this WSO (title below) was bumped today (Dec. 30th) which clearly breaks the income claim rule & should have been fixed before allowing the paid bump. Plus it's a free WSO, so that's two broken rules.
        • [FREE WSO]How I Use A Blog To Make $50k + A Month & How You Can Too!!

        I also find it odd the WSOs are being targeted for income claims but paid ads make income claims across the entire Warrior Forum in the header ads & any other paid ad locations (image below).

        Mixed signals.



        Signature
        Hi
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9777890].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
          Originally Posted by yukon View Post

          was bumped today (Dec. 30th) which clearly breaks the income claim rule & should have been fixed before allowing the paid bump. Plus it's a free WSO, so that's two broken rules......................I also find it odd the WSOs are being targeted for income claims but paid ads make income claims across the entire Warrior Forum in the header ads & any other paid ad locations (image below).
          You might have missed it but both issues have already been addressed. The rules will be phased in with new offers first and then old offers (bumped included).

          The paid ads are also going to have updates to policies so its not mixed signals its just as the saying goes - "Rome was not built in a day".

          Just saving mods and/or admins the time of having to answer the same questions and issues over and over again. Theres really nothing odd about it - new changes often take time to settle in. Also Most banners up now were most likely in the pipeline days or more before the rule change.
          Signature

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9778002].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author yukon
            Banned
            Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

            The rules will be phased in with new offers first and then old offers (bumped included).
            They had time to collect the bump payment but no time to make a decision on moderating spam.

            Makes sense...
            Signature
            Hi
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9780228].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author danieljb
    Alaister, I'm concerned about the rule which states that a button must direct straight to a checkout.

    Instead, (although admitedly a bit tougher to enforce) you could lay ground rules for the content of sites vendors link to. i.e it should be a perfect reflection of what's shown in the WSO offer and nothing more.

    By permitting this, you won't alienate those who are bound to payment processors that only function when vendors have their payment button embedded into an actual website. Some payment processors do not allow nor cater for embedding buttons in forums for reasons of customer security.

    I'm sure you could get additional feedback in relation to this and other rules from WSO vendors if you make the announcement more prominent and link to the feedback / news forum so that vendors can chime in.

    From my observation, the OT forum actually has few WSO vendors so it's a good idea to consider those potential opinions of those who are actively advertising too.
    I understand what you're saying here. Some membership sites for example may require HTML, which is not able to be embedded into a WSO. We'll assess each offer on a case by case basis and if further information is required then the moderator will contact the seller to seek clarification on why there is no button. The general rule of thumb is that the best suited place for such offers is Classifieds, or Warriors for Hire if it is a service offer.

    I didn't notice any controls over coaching WSO's
    They are probably the worst of the lot.
    Yeah, but they're usually sold using income promises. That's a flat out "No" based on the new rules.
    Rule #17 around income claims covers many of the "coaching opportunities". These particular WSOs are something we are keeping a close eye on.

    however, are you also going to extend some of these rules re: outrageous income claims - to the banner advertisers as well? Some of the banners appearing at the top of this forum have also contained questionable claims -
    I completely agree. We intend to release new, clearer rules & guidelines for banner advertisers as well within the next few weeks.

    However, many people will try to basically circumvent rule #3, the "no free WSO" rule, by offering one cent to one dollar offers. Are you going to enforce a minimum price requirement to prevent penny sales in the WSO section? I sure hope so, otherwise the spirit (and the intent) of the rule will be obliterated relatively quickly.
    It's the product as a whole that we will be evaluating. We have to remember dimesales that start at micro prices are still important for sellers to gain traction for the offer. At this stage there isn't a firm minimum price requirement, but any offer is subject to Moderator's Discretion that is talked about in the opening paragraph to help prevent any inappropriate offers being approved.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9777660].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author The Copy Nazi
    Banned
    [DELETED]
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9780318].message }}

Trending Topics