Back from a Successful promotion tour

Back from a Successful promotion tour

Posted by: askapache
Posted on: 2007-08-14 20:50:00

original

In reply to:


Multi-posting happens often enough here that the Welcome page and TOS are clearly not as clear as JRS (Jessey Rlparker Seiler) say. When it's for a good or interesting cause, we don't need to make such a big deal about it. Who knows how many people give up on the wiki and forum because of this sort of reception and reaction.

It's ok to disagree with JRS, IMO, and I do. Their word is not gospel, especially here. They don't seem to agree. laugh

When people disagree with JRS, JRS get irate and call names. Everything I said is fact-based (with a perhaps too subtle reference to Jessey previously saying something about what his mom used to tell him). I could've used more polite description than "blah, blah," but Rlparker doesn't show me any more respect, ever since he became so obsessed with puppets; he apparently thinks calling me a puppeteer is somehow more insulting than calling Jessey an atheist, Seiler a name-caller, or an orange a fruit. It's a technically incorrect use of the term, as he knows, since I endeavor not to use multiple user names in the pejorative sense of the term, but apparently that's the best he's got.

Jessey doesn't even have enough vision to see this DHSOTM thread/discussion in full context of both threads. He's done the same things as askapache (self-promotional-linking), here and in wikipedia, but that was different, because he says.

Who's afraid of tricky links anyway - Caveat clicktor. And you can add a comment. And there's a "remove my vote" option. I voted. You should too! laugh warning for link-or-brain-challenged: may require login, may enter a vote

Please also go here to "vote down" the competition. Only if you are so-inclined anyway, or if you don't mind being so encouraged.



Ahh hah! I never read the last half of the posts in the original thread... I was so shocked that I was actually getting negative feedback and accused of using tricky links from people that I just packed up and never read that thread again, weird investing in defeat like that.

My 6months promotion tour for my blog has worked very well I'm pleased to say, and I'm well on my way to becoming a top blog in the next year or 2. I wish this was a cooler place where people could look for solutions and try to solve problems. originally that is why I came here, to talk about what promotional activities I was doing and how much they were succeeding.. laugh

I would love to talk to people like that anonymous2 dude, I mean COME ON... haha.. if you couldn't see how bone-chillingly cool that whole DHSOTM thing I did was then theres nothing to talk about. It will just have to be results I guess.

I did end up winning the contest for May thank you very much, by the biggest and most overwhelming landslide in the history of the contest. I wasn't surprised to see that the mac daddy of dreamhost, Your Egg McMuffin Top,
Josh Jones liked what I did and saw the value of promoting the DHSOTM. And he knows more about links and what cheating really looks like.

I was so infuriated at the amount of negativity that just a couple people were able to produce and so pissed at their ignorance that I decided to show them just how easy I couldve cheated had I wanted to. But I didn't want to cheat and thats the fundamental difference I think.

Rigging the DreamHost Site of The Month Contest

Oh and this is so on-topic... controversy is a huge promotional activity!

Booost DreamHost Referrals!

Re: Back from a Successful promotion tour

Posted by: scjessey
Posted on: 2007-08-15 04:46:00

I can't believe you have just posted that. I have been rendered speechless by your extraordinary stupidity in this matter. If you continue to use this forum to link to your vote-rigging script, I'm confident that DreamHost will see fit to terminate your account for a TOS violation. Frankly, it staggers me that you are so proud of your deception.

-- si-blog --

Re: Back from a Successful promotion tour

Posted by: askapache
Posted on: 2007-08-15 17:35:00

That is the whole point scjessey! I didn't deceive anyone, I didn't use this script, and I was unfairly treated because of a couple people who are either jealous or ignorant of my ability to win the DHSOTM contest in a single day.

I've read and re-read the DreamHost TOS and frankly I encourage you to read it.. nothing I am doing is even close to violating the TOS... if you can't stand the heat from your own mistake than thats ok, everyone understands. But I won the contest fair and square and it just isn't right that it was taken from me because of a couple jealous naysayers who influenced the decision.

Like I said in my blog post, I have already contacted several DreamHost staff about this very thing weeks ago. Even though I am sure that I am not violating the TOS, and I never have and never will, I made sure to alert several DH staff about this proof-of-exploit weeks ago to make sure that they knew about it and to double-check that I was not violating the TOS. Threaten me all you want, and use all your considerable influence with DreamHost to get my account terminated if you really have that much malice and free time, but open your mind to the reality that I love DreamHost and I'm not going to let a couple haters kill my flow.

BTW, you should read about Online defamation before you get slapped with a lawsuit.

Booost DreamHost Referrals!

Re: Back from a Successful promotion tour

Posted by: scjessey
Posted on: 2007-08-15 18:22:00

In reply to:

I didn't deceive anyone


You are clearly deluded. You came up with a scam to try and cheat someone out of the DHSOTM contest, and you got caught. It's as simple as that.

In reply to:

before you get slapped with a lawsuit


Go for it. That's almost as lame as invoking Godwin's Law.

-- si-blog --

Re: Back from a Successful promotion tour

Posted by: askapache
Posted on: 2007-08-19 21:30:00

I mean, I really don't understand how a person could be confused and/or misinformed. Its just a direct link https://panel.dreamhost.com/index.cgi?tab=home&subtab=dhsotm¤t_step=Index&next_step=Site&url=http://www.askapache.com/

Now how in the world is that a scam/cheat/deceitful/etc in any way? It just directs a logged in user to the page where they can vote for me, it doesn't modify their vote or any of their input at all. Am I missing something or are you?

Booost DreamHost Referrals!

Re: Back from a Successful promotion tour

Posted by: scjessey
Posted on: 2007-08-20 06:12:00

In reply to:

I really don't understand


I've noticed.

In reply to:

Am I missing something


Evidently.



-- si-blog --

Re: Back from a Successful promotion tour

Posted by: rlparker
Posted on: 2007-08-20 07:24:00

In reply to:

I mean, I really don't understand how a person could be confused and/or misinformed. Its just a direct link ... Now how in the world is that a scam/cheat/deceitful/etc in any way?


As you stated earlier in the thread, I know you believe that "controversy is a huge promotional activity!" - meh' beating a dead horse isn't going to bring it back to life.

In reply to:

It just directs a logged in user to the page where they can vote for me, it doesn't modify their vote or any of their input at all. Am I missing something or are you?


Yes, you are missing quite a lot actually, but that has pointed out to you before. I suspect that, as you have indicated, you were "so infuriated" that you skipped right over what Josh actually wrote and proceeded to hoist your strawman issue of the nature of the links.

In reply to:

Josh Jones liked what I did and saw the value of promoting the DHSOTM. And he knows more about links and what cheating really looks like.


I'll agree with the second sentence there, but the first one is just plain incorrect. Sure, Josh sees the "value of promoting the DHSOTM" (so do *I*), but he *clearly* did not like what you did, and was very clear in his statement regarding that when he disqualified your site:

From the May, 2007 DH Newsletter:

In reply to:

I just found out he "won" not just by promoting the contest at his own site, but by putting direct links to the "vote" option at our discussion board and the wiki. DISALLOWED!


There is nothing at all in that statement that alleges your links were "a scam/cheat/deceitful/etc in any way". He accurately described your links as being "direct links to the "vote" option". It wasn't the links that got you disqualified, it was where you put them ("putting direct links ... at our discussion board and the wiki). "DISALLOWED!" is *exactly* what should have happened.

Whether *you* think posting those links where you posted them is "spamming" or not, per the TOS, is irrelevant. It is not your opinion that counts, it is the *venue's* opinion - unwelcome links are "linkspam" and the TOS says you are not to do it.

Edited for additional comment:

I had initially refrained from including this next paragraph, but on second thought, I think it *is* relevant here because of your repeated protestations that your linking is not spamming.

Those of us who took you to task on this, and Josh Jones, are not alone in our perception of your linking practices, and this whole issue is *not* new to you. Your Wikipedia history and experience should have been enough to give you a "clue" about this issue, and that was *before* your linkspamming "promotional tour" on the DH Forums/wiki.

The fact that an aggressive "seo" tactic many find to be "spammish" is disliked by the administrators and /or participating members of an online community often irritates the "promoter" is completely predictable. That's no different than the DMA whining and wailing that they should have the right to flood my mailbox with crap and drop piles of "stuff" on my doorstep, or stick flyers on the windshield of my car, ad nauseum.

Scream about how unfairly you were treated all you want; it doesn't change the fact that you were disqualified for posting promotional links where they were not wanted (since you are so averse to the common term - "linkspamming"), and Josh was correct to do so.

--rlparkerEdited by rlparker on 08/20/07 07:57 AM (server time).

Re: Back from a Successful promotion tour

Posted by: askapache
Posted on: 2007-08-20 08:12:00

rlparker-

I appreciate your honest attempt to answer the issues I've raised.. I just wanted to set the record straight (and you have done so) about some kind of tricky link or cheating.

It's true that I posted my DHSOTM direct link on both my wiki user page and on the talk page for the DHSOTM, I still feel both places were entirely appropriate, because I was demonstrating a new technique for utilizing the DHSOTM contest.

The same is true for the discussion board (at which time I only had a couple posts and was inexperienced at dealing with the social heirarchy that apparently trumps content)..

To actually believe that anyone would post something like that in the wiki and forum to "link spam" or whatever is just pointedly ludicrous. I get over 3000 unique visitors/day to my site, and maybe 10 come from dreamhost links.. I honestly posted that technique to help other dreamhosters and to promote the DHSOTM contest. I mean for crying out loud the DHSOTM info is on the https, search engines can't ever see it.. the most you can gain is a single link on the wiki archive of that newsletter.. its not linkspamming and you know it.

Booost DreamHost Referrals!

Re: Back from a Successful promotion tour

Posted by: scjessey
Posted on: 2007-08-20 08:28:00

In reply to:

To actually believe that anyone would post something like that in the wiki and forum to "link spam" or whatever is just pointedly ludicrous.


The problem exists because you have amassed a considerable track record of self-publicity. I first noticed the problem on the DH wiki and it began to spill into this forum, andt now there is evidence that you have previously done this on Wikipedia as well. When you consider this evidence, your attempt to recruit voters for the DHSOTM contents by posting direct links on this forum and the DH wiki puts you in a very negative light indeed. Astonishingly, you have published a method on your website that demonstrates how to rig the competition - something that is right up there with this!


-- si-blog --

Re: Back from a Successful promotion tour

Posted by: rlparker
Posted on: 2007-08-20 08:33:00

askapache-

Thanks for reading what I had to say, and for recognizing that I was sincere in trying to explain what I believe the issue to be.

You and I may never agree on what constitutes "linkspamming", but I'm not at all sure we need to. wink All are best served when a given venue sorts that out for themselves. It will always be true that the same link in the same context may be considered spammish in one venue and acceptable in another - such are the perils of "promotion" in the present "spam sensitive" environment.

My whole point in this, which I think you understand even if you reject it, is that Josh made it pretty clear that DreamHost views self-promotional links in their forum and wiki to be unacceptable. This whole issue started when I, and others, pointed this out to you *before* the issue escalated to the disqualification.

It wasn't about us being "haters" at all; we just perceived the appropriateness of your linking differently than you did. In this instance, DH perceived it the same way we did.

As I have said before, I think you have a very good, and useful, site - I've *never* implied otherwise, and I *do* wish you the best of luck with it even while I might object to the type of promotion you engage in. There are surely places where your promotional links are welcome and, promotional value of controversy notwithstanding, I think you'd probably get more *positive* value by posting them in those places. wink PAX

--rlparker

Re: Back from a Successful promotion tour

Posted by: askapache
Posted on: 2007-08-20 08:45:00

haha, tell me you aren't taking this that seriously! lol

You will notice that all my wikipedia links have been put back on the pages and approved. I met the requirements for an external link for wikipedia because its NOT SPAM. All the links I make are to exceptionally relevant articles, minus the fluff. Thats because I'm not writing for search engines, I'm writing them and linking to them to help out my fellow webmasters.. I've been involved with the tldp.org movement for about 8 years and its just absurd to me that I run up against such heated opposition from only a couple people out of the entire Internet. I'm not sure if its jealousy, or more likely a lack of research into the linked-to articles.

It shouldn't astonish anyone that I published a method to demonstrate how to rig the contest.. It's a proof-of-exploit, meaning I posted it with full disclosure, including contacting several DreamHost staff members who I've dealth with in the past on similar security issues, so that they can fix it. This is actually a very similar method, I would imagine, that was used to steal all those ftp passwords a couple months ago.

I've been staying updated on the panel's coding and they are steadily making improvements and I'm not sure if this code even still works since its now several months old.

O.J. Simpson... that is just too funny!

Booost DreamHost Referrals!

Re: Back from a Successful promotion tour

Posted by: scjessey
Posted on: 2007-08-20 09:00:00

You are still displaying a link in your signature that explains to people how to trick users into thinking they are clicking on a harmless link, but are in fact clicking on a disguised, cookie-setting referral link. You justify this by saying the link is "more appealing to a user". This deceit is covered in the terms of the affiliate program:

Gaining referrals through misrepresentation, improper use of DreamHost intellectual property (ie. DreamHost trademarks and copyrighted material) or impersonation of DreamHost personnel is strictly prohibited and can result in loss of accrued Rewards and/or removal from the program.

How can you expect us to think your just an honest, altruistic person trying to help webmasters when you do things like that?


-- si-blog --

Re: Back from a Successful promotion tour

Posted by: askapache
Posted on: 2007-08-20 09:15:00

im literally flabbergasted at your perception of what I am actually doing with the totally freaking sweet Boosted Promo Codes Links..

>>You are still displaying a link in your signature that explains to people how to trick users into thinking they are clicking on a harmless link, but are in fact clicking on a disguised, cookie-setting referral link.

Sure I have explained a super-freakin-awesome technique combining Apache mod_rewrite and some php code (or just 1 or the other) to turn http://www.dreamhost.com/redir.cgi?ad=rewards|211825&url=signup?plan=3&promo=askapache into http://www.askapache.com/dream/

Thanks for bringing that up as it is one of my all time favorite tips that I share with the world for free (though its only interesting to DreamHosters). You can see how "misrepresenting" and "tricky" my method works at http://www.askapache.com/dreamhost/ where one of DreamHosts suggested banner's is linked to http://www.askapache.com/dream/

This method also means that my access logs show exactly how many times /dream/ was called, which obviously provides an infinately more detailed record of how well your affiliate link is doing.

Seriously don't make me laugh, if you do a little googling you will see that thousands of dreamhosters have already implemented this method, but I should warn people its kind of advanced and a little difficult to grasp.


Booost DreamHost Referrals!

Re: Back from a Successful promotion tour

Posted by: scjessey
Posted on: 2007-08-20 09:32:00

In reply to:

Seriously don't make me laugh, if you do a little googling you will see that thousands of dreamhosters have already implemented this method, but I should warn people its kind of advanced and a little difficult to grasp.


All these "thousands" may risk losing their rewards according to the TOS. Let us hope they don't seek compensation from you when it happens!


-- si-blog --

Re: Back from a Successful promotion tour

Posted by: askapache
Posted on: 2007-08-20 09:54:00

Please direct me to the TOS you keep referring to, as there is definately no violation of the TOS as linked-to and stated below. If you feel any part of the TOS is being violated in any way shape or form please let me know so that I can have my attorney check your opinion against the law. I certainly would never recommend anything even remotely close to a TOS violation, so I will appreciate your reply.

From: TOS

In reply to:

The Fine Print
"Sub-Referrals" are defined as tier-2 referrals. Tier-3 referrals do not earn a credit.

Recurring Payments will be applied to customer's account every time a payment is made by both referrals and sub-referrals.

One-time Payments will be applied to customer's account the first time a referred (or sub-referred) customer makes payment for any full hosting plan (including dedicated servers).

Please only post your link in conjunction with your regular postings, as per our strict anti-spam rules. Please post responsibly.

Violations of our anti-spam policy or our Terms of Service will result in immediate forfeiture of all Rewards payments.

Gaining referrals through misrepresentation, improper use of DreamHost intellectual property (ie. DreamHost trademarks and copyrighted material) or impersonation of DreamHost personnel is strictly prohibited and can result in loss of accrued Rewards and/or removal from the program.

Payments are made on the first business day of the month, via PayPal, for balances of $20 or more.

If you have any hosting accounts with DreamHost, Rewards payments will first be applied to any balance due on those accounts before being paid out via Paypal.

New accounts must use a different credit card number from the referrer to qualify for rewards credit for the referrer. Customers also cannot refer themselves or their spouse/civil union partner. No exceptions will be made.

Promo codes must be unique across our entire system. Promo codes only work for totally new customers (not for existing customers adding more services or new customers trying to host domains that are already in our system).

If a referral cancels and gets their payment refunded, any Rewards payments you earned from that payment will also be cancelled.

Accounts with less than five referrals older than 97 days are subject to a 97 day hold period and 5% fee on PayPal payments.

We call accounts with five or more referrals older than 97 days "Platinum Affiliates". That's because platinum is awesome and implies high-classiness. And that's the kind of customer we host. Oh yes.

"Platinum Affiliates" can also opt to have their payments made via check instead of PayPal.

Customers signing up with a promo code waive their right to decide who gets any referral credit for their account.

We reserve the right to terminate our Rewards program at our discretion.


Booost DreamHost Referrals!

Re: Back from a Successful promotion tour

Posted by: scjessey
Posted on: 2007-08-20 10:03:00

Your "method" encourages webmasters to violate "Gaining referrals through misrepresentation" as I stated above. By all means get your attorney to check it if you want to spend the money.


-- si-blog --

Re: Back from a Successful promotion tour

Posted by: askapache
Posted on: 2007-08-20 10:20:00

In reply to:

Generally, defamation is a false and unprivileged statement of fact that is harmful to someone's reputation, and published "with fault," meaning as a result of negligence or malice. State laws often define defamation in specific ways. Libel is a written defamation; slander is a spoken defamation.


My method does not "encourage" in any way shape or form anyone to violate TOS. That is a false statement that is harmful to my reputation, whether as a result of malice or negligence I do not care, stop it. I would like you to clarify how, in your opinion, this method encourages gaining referrals through misrepresentation. What is being misrepresented in your opinion?

Booost DreamHost Referrals!

Re: Back from a Successful promotion tour

Posted by: scjessey
Posted on: 2007-08-20 10:37:00

In reply to:

What is being misrepresented in your opinion?


Your method conceals the true nature of the link. A user clicks on the link expecting to be taken to a certain page within a site, and they find themselves elsewhere with a cookie having been set. I know this is common on the web, but it makes it no less deceptive and misrepresentative.

Incidentally, quoting definitions of defamation to me will serve only to demonstrate your thorough misunderstanding of it.


-- si-blog --

Re: Back from a Successful promotion tour

Posted by: anonymous2
Posted on: 2007-08-20 10:40:00

Yes, like this type:

http://dreamhost.com/r.cgi?00123|PEEWEE

Re: Back from a Successful promotion tour

Posted by: scjessey
Posted on: 2007-08-20 10:43:00

In reply to:

Yes, like this type


I used the standard, approved method of linking to DreamHost. I make no attempt to deceive users, Bob.


-- si-blog --

Re: Back from a Successful promotion tour

Posted by: Lensman
Posted on: 2007-08-20 12:33:00

In reply to:

What is being misrepresented in your opinion?


I think it's misrepresentation of the navigational operation. By looking at the link you think you're going to one place but you're actually directed to an external site and are specifically setting a cookie at that site.

I do know it's becoming common practice to hide referral links this way and I also know that this is a common practice to get site analytic/goal information.

It's not a black and white issue and I don't think you're evil for doing it.

Re: Back from a Successful promotion tour

Posted by: anonymous2
Posted on: 2007-08-20 16:32:00

> I make no attempt to deceive users

To clickers, it's all the same, Pee-wee.

Re: Back from a Successful promotion tour

Posted by: Lensman
Posted on: 2007-08-20 17:46:00

In reply to:

To clickers, it's all the same,


I disagree that the two methods are identical. In one, the link explicitly declares where you're navigating to. In the other, the destination redirects you to a completely different site.

In fact, it's kind of obvious that the two methods are different given the premise of the original article - that users don't like clicking on referral links and that you'll get much higher conversions if you obfuscate your links using hidden redirects.

I dislike the practice even though I don't condemn it. I dislike it because it violates the principle of affordance - that is, in this context, that it should be obvious where links will take you. Now you can regain some amount of affordance by making sure the link text or the link image describes the action properly, but it does still send a mixed message.

I think this is an area of emerging practice. Some use javascript to capture traffic to all outgoing links from their sites. Some write their links to a script with an argument describing the "real" destination. Some actually have an intermediate page that indicates outside navigation. I'm sure we'll continue to see development in this area as industry practice evolves.

Tags: target blankdreamhostpl