or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › General › General Chat › Site Topics - Part II
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Site Topics - Part II - Page 900

post #13486 of 15049
Quote:
Originally Posted by indesertum View Post

I don't think the times goes back to the Archives and deletes all advertorials ever printed for the company once they stop placing orders

While no they can't delete what's printed, I have little doubt that if you searched for the Key West advertorial online, there would not be anything once the contract expires.
post #13487 of 15049
Quote:
Originally Posted by edinatlanta View Post

While no they can't delete what's printed, I have little doubt that if you searched for the Key West advertorial online, there would not be anything once the contract expires.

Yeah, but a lot of the content on here is from the users. The users are what makes up the community.

A lot of people have written pages and pages of content and attached photos, guides and information to those threads. Seems a bit unfair to those users that all of their hard work goes to waste just because the affiliate is done paying. What if the affiliate went out of business but people were still interested in discussing their stuff? Obviously they won't keep paying since they are closed, and it's not much advertising value since you can't buy the stuff anyways. Will the TOJ thread (and all of its knowledge on care/repairs/unrelated cooking advice) disappear when they stop taking orders?

What constitutes an official affiliate thread? Is the TOJ thread one since it doesn't say "Affiliate Thread" in the title? Is the Everlane thread an affiliate thread? They don't sell anything directly from the thread, but there is a company representative there that answers questions and helps people out...but the thread itself was started by an ordinary user.

I could see locking the thread, or maybe even deleting the actual affiliate's own posts, but just squirreling it all away seems like a terrible thing for the community. Won't matter much if some small affiliate who only used their thread to post sales goes away...but the big ones are so much more than a sales platform...they are a big piece of the community.
post #13488 of 15049
Quote:
Originally Posted by otc View Post

Yeah, but a lot of the content on here is from the users. The users are what makes up the community.

Yes, I agree. I'm not advocating that what I said should be done.

Also, CM sucks. any new posts would not be missed.
post #13489 of 15049
Quote:
Originally Posted by otc View Post

Yeah, but a lot of the content on here is from the users. The users are what makes up the community.

A lot of people have written pages and pages of content and attached photos, guides and information to those threads. Seems a bit unfair to those users that all of their hard work goes to waste just because the affiliate is done paying. What if the affiliate went out of business but people were still interested in discussing their stuff? Obviously they won't keep paying since they are closed, and it's not much advertising value since you can't buy the stuff anyways. Will the TOJ thread (and all of its knowledge on care/repairs/unrelated cooking advice) disappear when they stop taking orders?

What constitutes an official affiliate thread? Is the TOJ thread one since it doesn't say "Affiliate Thread" in the title? Is the Everlane thread an affiliate thread? They don't sell anything directly from the thread, but there is a company representative there that answers questions and helps people out...but the thread itself was started by an ordinary user.

I could see locking the thread, or maybe even deleting the actual affiliate's own posts, but just squirreling it all away seems like a terrible thing for the community. Won't matter much if some small affiliate who only used their thread to post sales goes away...but the big ones are so much more than a sales platform...they are a big piece of the community.

This is some pretty entitled shit, man. If you want to own your own content, your own "hard work" of internet fashion posting, start a blog. If bigger operations feel that not participating in Styleforvm anymore makes sense, then don't blame Fok and Co. for disrespecting all of your hard work. Fashion moves quickly enough that the archives become increasingly less useful and make for worse information anyway. I am honestly surprised to hear all of the whining here, except I am not.
post #13490 of 15049
I think he is talking more about the community "owning" the content not the creator.
post #13491 of 15049
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bhowie View Post

I think he is talking more about the community "owning" the content not the creator.

I didn't realize this was a co-op.
post #13492 of 15049
Quote:
Originally Posted by itsstillmatt View Post


This is some pretty entitled shit, man. 

 

You are projecting again. 

 

This would probably be easier if SF gave affiliates their own forums rather than affiliate threads. I wonder if it would be possible to hide such threads but make posts by users visible to those users when they search for them. That way users could simply quote or copypaste from the old post to republish parts of it if so desired. 

post #13493 of 15049
Quote:
Originally Posted by itsstillmatt View Post

I didn't realize this was a co-op.

It isn't, you know it isn't, and I never said it was. Now that we have that throwaway line addressed...

I realize SF is making a shift to be seen more as a lifestyle platform than just a forum for clothes, much like the thrillist, the monocle, etc. However, 98% of this platform's content creators are also the end users. To deny the importance of this is facetious.
post #13494 of 15049
I'm just never in favor of content disappearing forever. I'm not saying SF needs to get archived in the library of congress, but simply deleting useful and factually correct content doesn't help anyone.

The part that bugs me is like Douglas said: Once there is an affiliate thread, it becomes the defacto place to discuss something. So much so that sometimes in more general threads, people will say things like "take that shit to the XYZ thread" when discussion is getting too deep or there are too many detailed questions.

I recognize that they are turning this into a business, but there's a difference between a sponsored thread and a banner ad. The banner ads get seen by everybody but they also go away when you stop paying. The sponsored threads...You're paying for the privilege of selling and marketing to SF users, but it still requires that someone comes and clicks on your thread (and staying anywhere near the front page requires lots of users discussing your wares). I understand losing the sponsorship aspect...if you don't pay you can't stick around and keep posting, maybe lock the "Official" thread and wait for a normal user to start a new thread...but don't kill off the content.

Amazon doesn't delete the reviews of products they don't carry anymore or whose creators have gone out of business.
post #13495 of 15049
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hayward View Post

You are projecting again. 
 

Not that I am not entitled, but in this circumstance, as in others, what you say makes no fucking sense.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bhowie View Post

It isn't, you know it isn't, and I never said it was. Now that we have that throwaway line addressed...

I realize SF is making a shift to be seen more as a lifestyle platform than just a forum for clothes, much like the thrillist, the monocle, etc. However, 98% of this platform's content creators are also the end users. To deny the importance of this is facetious.

I don't disagree with you about the content of your post, but I think it is important to understand the multiple goals of SF not only from the point of view of the members, but also from the point of view of the owners. There is some serious business risk involved in allowing perpetual advertising for a one time payment and most of the alternatives are so inelegant as to be impossible. Take for example the idea of locking the threads. At that point, two things can happen. First, the thread can be a historical artifact which acts as advertising without information, and in that case does good for the merchant who has left but not for the site owners and the value to the members quickly diminishes as the information becomes old and stale. Otherwise, the thread can be continued by starting a second non-official thread about the product, which is OK for everybody except for the fact that it encourages the advertiser to buy once and then rely on the follow up. Big deal? Probably not, but whatever. I can see why the complaints come up, and can understand why it may be good policy to soften the SF stance, but it isn't because "it's so unfair, we deserve it!!!" which is what a lot of people are basically saying. If there is a better way to deal with this issue, it should be found, but the ones being bandied about are really just people asking for what they want, or worse deserve, which is fine, but it is not a very nuanced look at a complicated situation.

As for me, I never really liked the official threads and never used them. On top of that, I detest the writing style and point of view, and overall lameness, of some of the major contributors to the advertorial side of the business so I avoid them. Those are my complaints, but they should fall on deaf ears because I am a minority here. I just wanted to complain too.
post #13496 of 15049
What an entitled bitch.
post #13497 of 15049
Back of the bus with you, Matt.
post #13498 of 15049
I am definitely not saying "We deserve it!" The overwhelming majority of folks haven't put a single penny or a single minute of productive time into the forum, and none but two of us own it. I am under no illusions.

That said, I think the continued advertising value of the mere existence of a former affiliate thread is minimal; it seems to me the larger benefit to an advertiser is the high visibility of said thread, gained through advertorial references (ROBOT), link placement, and banner placement. I think the suggestion to simply make it a regular thread (no longer titled as an affiliate thread) accomplishes the goal without giving up much. Wiping the content seems actually to harm the forum as well, in that perfectly good content that might attract future users is also gone. I find wiping the content to be a little bit overly coercive for my tastes (e.g. keep paying or we will pretend you were never here), though I reiterate I am aware my business tastes are ultimately worthless in someone else's business, and that how to handle former advertisers in an evolving medium creates a difficult environment for balance. I'm also 100% aware that every affiliate ought to be well aware of this state of affairs as it's no doubt in the affiliate contract.

I do think having this discussion is valuable, because people may now be less inclined to post real issues in an affiliate thread.

As for me, this came up as I've wanted to post a positive experience with and a question about a former affiliate. One example is never a reason to do something, but this particular affiliate gave a lot of his time and energy in excellent how-tos and pictorials... but most of the stuff with his actual products got stuffed into one thread, now gone, and there's nowhere to put it. I will probably start a new thread about it; he'll still have an SF presence as a result (I am not associated with him in any conflicting kind of way), yet all that content will be gone. Not sure anyone wins there.

And that's pretty much all I'll say about it. Sorry j and Fok if this is too much of a sidebar shitstorm I've created.
post #13499 of 15049
Goodb
Quote:
Originally Posted by itsstillmatt View Post

Not that I am not entitled, but in this circumstance, as in others, what you say makes no fucking sense.
I don't disagree with you about the content of your post, but I think it is important to understand the multiple goals of SF not only from the point of view of the members, but also from the point of view of the owners. There is some serious business risk involved in allowing perpetual advertising for a one time payment and most of the alternatives are so inelegant as to be impossible. Take for example the idea of locking the threads. At that point, two things can happen. First, the thread can be a historical artifact which acts as advertising without information, and in that case does good for the merchant who has left but not for the site owners and the value to the members quickly diminishes as the information becomes old and stale. Otherwise, the thread can be continued by starting a second non-official thread about the product, which is OK for everybody except for the fact that it encourages the advertiser to buy once and then rely on the follow up. Big deal? Probably not, but whatever. I can see why the complaints come up, and can understand why it may be good policy to soften the SF stance, but it isn't because "it's so unfair, we deserve it!!!" which is what a lot of people are basically saying. If there is a better way to deal with this issue, it should be found, but the ones being bandied about are really just people asking for what they want, or worse deserve, which is fine, but it is not a very nuanced look at a complicated situation.

As for me, I never really liked the official threads and never used them. On top of that, I detest the writing style and point of view, and overall lameness, of some of the major contributors to the advertorial side of the business so I avoid them. Those are my complaints, but they should fall on deaf ears because I am a minority here. I just wanted to complain too.

Goodbye Norma Jean
Thorough I never knew you at all
post #13500 of 15049
Quote:
Originally Posted by noob View Post

Serious Miran infestation in swd waywt again.

So? He's great in his limited context. Why would you want him to go?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Chat
Styleforum › Forums › General › General Chat › Site Topics - Part II