Changes in signature rules

[4 of a kind]

A website is a lot of hard work and it's not something that you do once and you are done.

As you could see I certainly have no clue. Besides if I'm on my computer, I'm usually busy pissing my money away.

 

[JHV]

Would it not be good idea, though, if ALL links in signatures were banned, including those of the moderators?

Surely it would be great for visitors to be reassured that the moderators were not just posting for marketing reasons too?

Whilst we agree on the core issue, I strongly disagree with the above. Look at Bryan's sig links above - or at Max's - they're the links people come to this forum to find.

Bryan would be a mad St. Francis of Assisi type (illogical) saint for doing over a decade of work like this without any form of reimbursement for effort. I personally think he's mad (from a business point of view purely) to allow posters any links at all that aren't nofollow - but I admire him for it. It standing proof right in front of our eyes that the $$ is not his primary motivator - if the $$ were, not a single link that wasn't his would be on this site, and we wouldn't be discussing this issue now. On my poker forum, a link that wasn't ours lasts as long as a green 2nd Lieutenant straight out of West Point leading his men into his first contact (firefight) in the Vietnam War. (You can google it if you're interested in military stuff - someone did a fascinating study on it.)

-------

People come here because they need Bryan's help (my hand in is the air for that being my only reason for first posting here)....or they are tired of getting ripped off and they want someone they trust to tell them which casinos are safe and which are not....or they care (on some level) about the shocking (current) nature of the industry and want to do something to maybe change it.

Or they're here for commercial reasons. Which I have no personal problem with at all! I only care if their advice to new players is...or their stated opinions are....unfairly influenced by their partnerships with various casinos. I care about THAT!

 

[jas2587]

Ah Cindy, I don't dislike KK! Actually, it's very unfair on KK for me to use this particular example when really I just saw so many examples of what I (at the time) thought was evidence that the CM forum was just a bazaar of vested interests (I no longer believe it is what I believed it to be - if I still did, I'd never post here again - what would be the point, right? I got nothing to sell and not looking to buy - so have no business in a marketplace.)


If I thought the forum had become merely a marketplace (as I did briefly), I'd just leave everyone be. I misread the mood of the forum initially - as I likely misread KK (when Rusty responded and he didn't, I was like "boom - there's the reason right there in his links") - but, like you say, he might not have seen my question, or if he did see it, he probably felt I wasn't worth responding to (completely valid position and CORRECT way to treat someone who you believe is a troll, as KK may have believed then, and might still believe me to be).





I
ok I will give ya that 1 an ty 4 answering in a very polite way
I will go with he just didnt see it

Cindy

 

[dendrite]

Look at Bryan's sig links above - or at Max's - they're the links people come to this forum to find

Hi JHV,

Are you talking about the internal links in the signatures? I'm referring to the external links - the ones to unrelated portals that take the visitor away from Casinomeister...

I'm just wondering whether when a visitor sees some advice in a post, but also see a link to an unrelated online casino portal in their signatures, whether they see that post in a different light?

Do they trust someone as much if the signature contains an advert to an external, unrelated portal, or is there a feeling that the posts could have an underlying marketing aim (especially if they have made thousands of posts), no matter how good the advice being given?

I don't know the answer, just interested.

The main reason I'm interested is that I'm invested in a web2.0 'build your own social network' technology start-up (unrelated to gambling) and these questions seem quite important

 

[Jasminebed]

I'm sorry I'm not sure where to find it, but I am sure that I've read that Casinomeister revenue comes from advertising, not as an affiliate. So I don't think that the move away from links in signatures is related solely to that.

We now have webmasters listed in green, a move I think is great. I've visited the websites of most of the long term posters here at one time or another.

Brian put forth the suggestion to add "Click on my profile to see my cool website" or something to that effect. Webmasters might consider adding something like that as their custom user title, right under their name.

Most of the webmasters and affiliates here participate beyond just increasing their site traffic and SEO placement. I trust that will remain true.

 

[JHV]

Hi JHV,

Are you talking about the internal links in the signatures? I'm referring to the external links - the ones to unrelated portals that take the visitor away from Casinomeister...

I'm just wondering whether when a visitor sees some advice in a post, but also see a link to an unrelated online casino portal in their signatures, whether they see that post in a different light?

Do they trust someone as much if the signature contains an advert to an external, unrelated portal, or is there a feeling that the posts could have an underlying marketing aim (especially if they have made thousands of posts), no matter how good the advice being given?

I don't know the answer, just interested.

The main reason I'm interested is that I'm invested in a web2.0 'build your own social network' technology start-up (unrelated to gambling) and these questions seem quite important

I'm confused about which links you're referring to? The only links I see in Bryan's sig are these:

Useful links: ~ Accredited Casinos ~ I-Gaming Representatives ~ Evil Section ~ My Wish List ~ Donate Now! ~
Mission Statement & Player Philosophy

Apart from the Amazon link, all those links are internal.

Max only has internal links in his sig.

---------

As to what a new player is likely to think when advice is coming their way from a source which is covered in links - one can only speculate.

I would say the vast majority of players would not even see a conflict-of-interest situation. The vast majority of people just don't really think in those terms, I think. I would guess they'd be more likely to think:
"This guy (or girl) is really nice and helpful and welcoming - I like him (or her)!" (then they click on that poster's links, see some suggestions for casinos to try, and they're off to the races....)

My main problem I guess with the links in signatures thing, is....THAT. If done correctly, you could make a hell of a lot of money doing this with relative ease* (if you had the industry experience to give advice those new players are after, and various other skills / connections / etc). And, being a cynic, I am very much the kind of person who knows how lines which are clearly black to white to one person can become miraculously grey or even invisible to another when $$ comes into play. And I guess (because I'm personally not here to make money) I don't want the CM forum to have much "grey" at all - I'm a realist at the end of the day, but for some things, Black and White positions are really ideal - and I think 'aiming' for idealistic goals and settling for 'realistic' ones is optimal, imo.

*Before bb28 throws her popcorn at me, when I use the word 'ease', it's with the obvious caveat these things are VERY relative (ofc). I fail miserably at things most people find easy, but succeed at others things most people would find very challenging. I've worked directly with online casino affiliates for years, am now directly involved in online poker rakeback (rev share affiliate, effectively), and I own some advanced (in terms of coding) websites and stuff. But I seriously spent about 40 minutes trying to get my TV to display to my eyes pictures of an F1 race a couple months ago (with zero success), before I had to call in a specialist - who (ahem) plugged one cord into a socket at the back of some unknown aspect of the complicated puzzle of unknown components attached by cables which are foreign and mythical to me and all my remote controls (who were facing imminent punishment / destruction / possible death - under suspicion of Traitorous Organised Mutiny disguised as Fail) all magically started working again. I'm sure these kinds of succeed/fail comparisons are true for all of us.

Whilst bb28 is not incorrect in saying a website isn't a "wham bam thank you ma'am" knock-up job, she's kinda implying it's harder than it *really* is (imo) with her popcorn comment - I could have a few guys I know from sedo(dot)com create a better website than almost all of the ones I've skimmed over here in the last month in a couple weeks for relative chump change. And I could write better content than a lot of the sites have (or pay content writers to pump out better content) in about the same period of time. I'm not going to be able to compete for many of the top 500 online gambling search terms because I don't have the money to throw at it, or the expertise or the personal moral code which would allow me to employ black hat techniques (but I have other ideas which are potentially genius / potentially retarded about about how to solve that particular marketing problem [intentionally coy here for, should I ever get out of my life funk, I'll be experimenting with these ideas]) - but if my marketing target is online casino players in the CM forum, the SEO game can be left to the PN's/PL's of the world fighting the Black Hatters for all I care - success or failure in marketing very much comes down to...basically...avenues you have available to market and how skilled you are at converting those avenues into $. And it doesn't take a genius to realise that the CM forum is a wonderful place to market online casinos, or that new online casino players are NOT a tough crowd to 'sell' to, particularly if they've had some bad experiences - who frankly, who hasn't in this industry...

I guess what I'm trying to hint at, without offending anyone, is that it would be fairly easy to make a VERY good living doing just that - and that I know some people are making a very good living doing just that - which is totally cool imo - so long as they remain objective and ethical. Which is extremely hard to police, as who does the policing because *that* job would get about as tricky as a job gets.

So I'm sorry to respectfully disagree with you bb28, but when we're talking how 'easy' something is, we must talk in relative terms, and the 'ease' of making a fantastic income just working the CM forum crowd as an online casino affiliate....blows 99% of other jobs out of the water. When people are making a living out of doing something, hell yes, some might get really annoyed if you even bring attention to it, let alone potentially threaten their livelihoods. I think I would need 1000's of posts here before it would be possible to even contemplate achieving *potential* positive results attempting such a mission (in terms of bringing specific names forward for group discussion). And even then, it would be a drama nightmare reaching levels of chaotic proportions.

 

[KasinoKing]

If I thought the forum had become merely a marketplace (as I did briefly), I'd just leave everyone be. I misread the mood of the forum initially - as I likely misread KK (when Rusty responded and he didn't, I was like "boom - there's the reason right there in his links") - but, like you say, he might not have seen my question, or if he did see it, he probably felt I wasn't worth responding to (completely valid position and CORRECT way to treat someone who you believe is a troll, as KK may have believed then, and might still believe me to be).

I only used it as an example because I was reading KK's website and he's asking for feedback CLEARLY dated as posted in 2006 - he's OBVIOUSLY not still looking for feedback! Come on, it's obvious I'm being cheeky - hell I think I even clarify I'm messing around.

Everyone hear knows how I feel about InterCasino. I'm making jokes about it now rather than ranting - surely that's better, no?

Just a few responses;

I can not get the link Jas posted to work, so I don't know which question I didn't answer...
But I trust Rusty to have answered it OK for me!

Yes I am always looking for feed-back, even though that was posted in 2006. There are a lot of 'background' pages on my site which I know are way out of date - something I keep meaning to update, but never quite get round to - you know how it is!

As to the rest of your postings; I'm not offended at all. Everyone is entitled to their opinions and you haven't been rude or insulted me, so no problem.

Unlike you, I am not a "trained webmaster" - I know pretty much zip about HTML. If you look closely you will see that my two main websites are literally just Word and Excel documents uploaded to the web!
I'm just a player turned webmaster who wanted to share my winning experiences with other people and provide casino & bonus information in the format I would want to see myself, but I couldn't find on any existing websites.
So I just learned the absolute minimum basics needed to get a website up & running.

Of course I am interested in making money from it - but not at the expense of players getting ripped-off or cheated in any way. In my ideal scenario, players who sign up through my sites would do exactly the same as me; e.g. they would play 6 casinos per month, lose at 3 and profit at 3. The total profit would be higher than their total 6 deposits, so they'd be happy. I'd get some income from their 3 losses, so I'd be happy. The casinos... well tough titty!

Cheers!
KK

 

[JHV]

The casinos... well tough titty!

TOUGH TITTAY CASINOS!!!

I'll drink to that. Every day of the week. Sometimes twice a day.

-----

Oh, I should clarify I suck at HTML and any form of programming. I just like hiring experts at $6/hr who have good work ethic.

 

[lots0]

JHV - You have said several times you own websites... Hire programmers and writers...

Isn't this your site...
xxhttp://www.rakebackstat.com/

Why not have Bryan add you to the webmasters list?

 

[WagerWitch]

OK about the signature thing... I'll finally throw my 2 cents in.

I'm a webmistress to a boring affiliate site that ranks high in some Google SEO words. I make VERY LITTLE money off of this site - But I have put a TON of work into it. Hmmmmmm....

When I come to Casinomeister - I come as ME... And most of you know me. Over all the forums I've shared with you - through the last decade of gaming that I've shared with you. Most of you know me.

I think my link - which is rather unobnoxious (I hope) is not NECESSARY - but I DO like it being there. I don't think of it as being something that DRAWS away from Bryan's site. Because as an AFFILIATE himself (and YES - Bryan draws affiliate revenue) - a lot off us affiliates are SECONDARY affiliates to Bryan's affiliates.

So "IF" we make money on affiliate links that we got from Bryan's links - then BRYAN makes a percentage (or should) of what we make.

So - it is in his INTEREST for the secondary affiliates to actually make money...

And as we all know as players - we don't always pick the FIRST link to download a casino that we see... Sometimes we like to visit many sites until we are either sure of the site/casino or we are in the mood to download it.

AND - we all know that NOT all of the casinos listed on the other affiliate sites are listed here on CM.

So - with that being said - if an Affiliate is a smart affiliate - they will have gone through Bryan's links - and signed up through Bryan's links.
And If Bryan is smart - he will leave basic links to affiliate sites out there - as long as they aren't grossly annoying.

(AND THIS IS JUST MY OPINION - DOES NOT MEAN IT HAS TO BE THIS WAY).

I also think, because I know that I do, provide RECIPROCAL linkage back to CM - then it is a fair allowance to allow my link to stay.

(in just my way of thinking)

I don't think that people often click through my link on this site - but occasionally a few do.

When I am on CM - I do NOT promote my site actively by pointing people to it... And I feel as though I am a part of a community and group.
And I am only showing MY brand - to this group. I am not flaunting it - I am merely saying - HEY - this is me.

BUT - I can see the points - that if you are displayed here a lot on many different pages that you may achieve higher PR... I hate to tell you this - but UNLESS you have MULTI links from MULTI places your PR is NOT going to get higher. The CM link --- no matter how many pages of it - is only going to count as ONE. The googlebot is not stupid enough to say - OH lookie - JOEBLOW is on 50 pages of CM --- that's 50 points. NOPE... If you're listed ONCE - that is enough.

Look at WHO LINKS TO ME.

It will help you make more sense of your SEO point --- SO if you ARE only answering a million posts just to get your link posted a million times - give it up - you are absolutely wasting your time.

If you are here to help the community - GREAT - be proud of your site. But don't OVER DO your link. It shouldn't be loud or glaring - that is DISRESPECTFUL to Bryan or the other members who have to read your stuff - AND YOUR damn glaring link.

I say that by being listed as a webmistress - I am VERY proud. It's not a downfall... I learn a lot - share a lot - and teach a little by being here.

This IS not my marketing spot tho - and anyone who thinks that AFFILIATE links draw people to other people's sites - they need to look at the sites... And again...

As most of you already know - the gambling world is small.

MOST OF US HAVE ALREADY SIGNED UP TO ALL THE CASINOS AVAILABLE ALREADY _ so its not like there are a lot of new places to go to.

Yanno?

The affiliate juice has already been spread out.

Anyhow - I guess my main thing was - an APPEAL to Bryan to NOT destroy the HTML hyperlinking - but to instead enforce a rule where that is ALL that is allowed - a VERY discreet link to offsites.

I agree that any other SIGS are annoying... But I see it as an important function of who each person is - and where they can be looked up --- I see it as a badge - and nothing more.

But I'd hate to see it be taken away from everyone.
And maybe...

An idea would be to get a report button for every post - that would send a report to whoever moderates - for (SPAM) (EXCESS LINKING) (TOS VIOLATION) (RUDE BEHAVIOR) (BAD LANGUAGE) (EVIL PERSON) (EVIL CASINO)

LOL - or more... yanno?

But still again - I appeal to Bryan and staff to please not lose the discreet linking in the signatures.

WW

 

[Alexandre]

Hi people,

As some of you may already know, I'm an SEO and I've seen so many forums polluted by spam, autopromotion, link droping posts that I've always asked myself how CM could handle that in this kind of industry.
I always visit the website in the sig of a good poster, it's like to click on the About Us link of a website but it is very hard to handle for the admin of the website.
Maybe sig should be OK for webmasters with more that X posts, X reputation points, X days of running account, etc...or a mix of these metrics.
At the moment, I've removed my sig and I think it's a good thing.
Let Bryan take a decision, quietly, without putting on him to much pressure.
If we keep sigs, I'll be more than happy, if not, it's OK for me.
I'm just afraid that without sigs, some of us are going to start promoting their website in a more heavy fashion.

 

[JHV]

JHV - You have said several times you own websites... Hire programmers and writers...

Isn't this your site...
(URL removed)

Why not have Bryan add you to the webmasters list?

It's one of them, yep. I'm not an online casino affiliate. I may become one at some point. I haven't really felt like working at all this year, though.

 

[dominique]

Ok, I missed something here and I don't have time to read this whole thread right now.

I received a mail telling me to remove the link and so I did - but I see others still have working links.

What happened?

Personally I think signatures are positive - they are a sign that you stand behind what you do and don't mind everyone knowing and scrutinizing.

But, being a forum owner myself, I totally understand the frustration that comes with spammers and people who have nothing to say and post just to display the signature.

I figure signatures can be earned, that's the way I handle it on my message board. If someone contributes useful posts and over a period of time, then I allow the sigs.

Anyway, until I hear it's ok to keep a sig, I have mine removed.

 

[Webzcas]

I don't think Bryan has got round to disabling them yet, what with getting ready for Copenhagen.

 

[WagerWitch]

I would still ask - implore - beg - plead... That Bryan consider allowing very small unobtrusive links to stay.

Bottom line is - tho - it is absolutely his choice as this is his site.

 

[BingoT]

I do have to say Bryan did this and all should follow his rules until he decides what is best.
This is his house.
What is good for one is good for all until than.
~T~
I do have to agree with WagerWitch
"Bryan consider allowing very small unobtrusive links to stay."
This all reminds me of the Promo area you had a few years back and you took that away too.

 

[Punters Choice]

Never had a chance to place a link...but I think its for the best.

 

[maxd]

I would still ask - implore - beg - plead... That Bryan consider allowing very small unobtrusive links to stay.

I remind you that Bryan sent this out last week to all members:

Dear member,

*disclaimer - this is a mass PM

Recently there has been an issue about signatures and how some members are exploiting the board with their usage. There are rules that govern the use of signatures, and one in particular 4.2 - Content Restrictions You may have a link to your own website or services, but there must be no promotional language like "Best Casino" or "Fastest Payouts". Affiliate links are NOT permitted.

Unfortunately, It's virtually impossible to monitor everyone's signature, so beginning tomorrow hyperlinks will be disallowed from signatures except for Moderators, i-Gaming Reps, and Managers of Affiliate programs.

If you have hyperlinks in your signature, please remove them as soon as possible since it will appear as code shortly. It will look yucky.

Please don't forget that you are allowed to list your website (or websites that interest you) in your profile - check your User CP for this. Thanks!

Sincerely,

Bryan

I don't mean to be picky here but unless I'm missing something that request of his should apply to you too, no? AFAICT you are not one of the exemptions: "Moderators, i-Gaming Reps, and Managers of Affiliate programs".

Until you hear from him that his policy _has_ changed I would think it only respectful to comply.

 

[WagerWitch]

It has been fixed.

Thanks Max...

I thought I had fixed it last night. Must have retarded out.

But I still IMPLORE and beg, ask, plead, request, grovel, send ice cream, beer, cherries with whip cream...

Or how much do I have to pay to become someone who can keep a very small non-obnoxious link at the bottom?

 

[maxd]

But I still IMPLORE and beg, ask, plead, request, grovel, send ice cream, beer, cherries with whip cream...

Thanks for the fix. But sorry, B's call on this. I'm sure he'll chip in when he's back from EIG/WPC.

 

[WagerWitch]

Thanks for the fix. But sorry, B's call on this. I'm sure he'll chip in when he's back from EIG/WPC.

Awwwwww... come on - I got a fiver here for ya...

 

[maxd]

Awwwwww... come on - I got a fiver here for ya...

Nice try.

 

[Webzcas]

I also removed my signature links pointing to my sites when Bryan brought this new rule in. Hence I am now only linking out to parts of CasinoMeister which are helpful for new members here.

I believe Bryan has a links directory on the site or did have, whereby he would consider link exchanges with webmasters. Might be worth asking him for a link trade if this is still running.

Signature links are not worth much seo wise. However with a site with the volume of traffic that CasinoMeister gets they can prove useful in getting traffic from your posts.

To this extent I can fully understand why Bryan brought this new rule in. As unfortunately there are always some people who will abuse the ability to link out in their sigs to less reputable sites.

BTW BingoT if you want more links I can do a recip with you

 

[lots0]

Signature links are not worth much seo wise.

Very true, especially when Bryan has the sig links 'no-followed'.

WW you might be best served doing like someone said earlier (Sorry I forget who) Put a message under your name something to the effect... "To Visit my cool web site, click my name" or something similar.

 

[Casinomeister]

Well I'm back and rather p.o'd.

I had no idea that this would be an issue worth discussing - yet here we have a multi-page thread - webmasters up in arms over a policy that changes the sig rules. So in short, you are participating here just to boost your site or gain some traffic? This long and hard about that - that is extremely self-serving in my opinion.

And even when I changed the policy over a week ago, a number of you decided to just drum your fingers, roll your eyes and wait, some even changed the link to a pseudo link - WTF?

Tell me why I shouldn't just shut off the sigs globally, or a least just for the webmasters.