Should rehash news blogs that don't link their news source be allowed on Plime : RSS 2.0http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/low.mtmen-usplime.com2009, plime.com.Plime/1http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rssShould rehash news blogs that don't link their news source be allowed on Plime : RSS 2.0http://www.plime.com/images/logo.gifhttp://www.plime.com/f/620/1/low.mtm<![CDATA[jaxomlotus @ 3/1/2007 8:41:50 AM]]>http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q36http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q36plime.com <![CDATA[RTCA @ 3/1/2007 2:22:43 AM]]>
Anyway, okay, I'll submit original content when it's worthy (and trust me, much of my stuff is not worthy of the trash can). So... don't look for any rehashes from me, because you won't get any. In fact, I have a few messages to send to some fellow bloggers today.]]>http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q35http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q35plime.com <![CDATA[donteatpoop @ 2/28/2007 4:54:10 PM]]>« RTCA : Amazing things, these notifications I receive by email that someone replied. Otherwise, I wouldn't be here.

In answer to your question, I like what's here and that's why I come here. You know, I didn't even know about Plime until someone linked one of my blog posts and I was going through my logs and saw Plime as a referrer. (Yeah, blame that guy!)

Plime is so much better than Digg and the others, it's ridiculous. The interface (with pictures) alone is worth the trip.

As far as other bloggers being honest, there's some really bad ones out there. I can't say I advocate blocking websites, but I don't see any other way to keep the bad ones at bay. Perhaps a blocking mechanism for all blogs as a start with only approved blogs being unblocked. Approval would have to start with a recommendation from someone with a lot of points. What do you think?But as far as the "To post a blog or not to post a blog" issue, as long as that isn't the only thing your posting, I don't have a problem with it. And as long as it's not just a paragraph, or some news article that doesn't include sources, the I say post it. The issues in question are a) is it spam (which it isn't as long as you are contributing to the site in other ways as well) and b) is it credible (which it is as long as you provide sources).

For now if you want to post a blog post, copy/paste the blog into a forum post and put it there. That's what I do with mine, anyway. But then mine are trivial and stupid, and definately not related to the news.]]>http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q34http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q34plime.com <![CDATA[TheBlueFrog @ 2/28/2007 3:36:11 PM]]>« RTCA : In answer to your question, I like what's here and that's why I come here. You know, I didn't even know about Plime until someone linked one of my blog posts and I was going through my logs and saw Plime as a referrer. (Yeah, blame that guy!)Sorry if I was a little knee-jerk yesterday. I kind of turned it into us vs. them, with you lumped in with the shameless self promoters, and content rehashers. I tend to play the devils advocate in debates and take a side and stay on side.

I really hope that you can understand where myself and others are coming from, in saying that some bloggers, have the intention of not contributing in a useful way.

I'm also sorry that you have been caught up in this, because some of your other posts from your blog are interesting (besides the one I said I disagree with yesterday =p). Also that the reason that there is even a discussion in the first place is because of bloggers like yourself, ones that actually generate content, not just rehashes. The discussion is where to draw the line. How do we determine who's blog to allow and who's do disallow? Who decides? How quickly does the decision get made?]]>http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q33http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q33plime.com <![CDATA[yoornotme @ 2/28/2007 1:25:02 PM]]>http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q32http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q32plime.com <![CDATA[RTCA @ 2/28/2007 1:20:05 PM]]>
In answer to your question, I like what's here and that's why I come here. You know, I didn't even know about Plime until someone linked one of my blog posts and I was going through my logs and saw Plime as a referrer. (Yeah, blame that guy!)

Plime is so much better than Digg and the others, it's ridiculous. The interface (with pictures) alone is worth the trip.

As far as other bloggers being honest, there's some really bad ones out there. I can't say I advocate blocking websites, but I don't see any other way to keep the bad ones at bay. Perhaps a blocking mechanism for all blogs as a start with only approved blogs being unblocked. Approval would have to start with a recommendation from someone with a lot of points. What do you think?]]>http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q31http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q31plime.com <![CDATA[Alton @ 2/28/2007 12:50:10 PM]]>« RTCA :  My account is staying open, I'm just not hanging out here to wait for the change (if it comes).Why? Is the possibility to submit your blog here the only reason you visit Plime? I don't believe it is, and nobody is asking you to be a poster child for bloggers. There was a backlash yesterday over the increasing stream of bloggers submitting their blogs/websites. As Jax said, you got caught in the middle of it. Plime is still new and developing growing pains. You can either take your ball and go home, or you can help develop a solution to the problem. Right now I'd say 5-10% of the articles submitted are from bloggers to their own site. One or two have been a problem and upset several members. Our fear is that number will increase as more people discover Plime, and you have to admit alot of blogs are not worth clicking on.

You know, I wouldn't mind if there was a blog category that all bloggers listed their links on, I wouldn't even have a problem with them running across the front page, as long as they were being honest about what they were linking to. If I knew they were blogs, I'd probably ignore the majority of them and read only the best that I knew from previous submissions and/or member comments. Perhaps there is an audience here for bloggers, but it would help if they were honest to what they were doing instead of deceiving people into thinking it was really a news story they were submitting.

And you may very well be a very interesting, intelligent blogger, but you can't tell me that's the case with the majority. For every exceptional blogger, there are hundreds of boring, self important people that believe what they have to say is interesting. As it stands now, we can't distinguish between the two, and we are tired of clicking on 95% of the latter to find the former. And it's getting worse. More and more bloggers are realizing they don't have to pay, wait, or do anything except link to their blog, and try to make the description interesting. They can even lie just to get traffic to their site in the hopes a small percentage of people will buy what in reality they are just trying to sell.

I would also suggest reinstating putting the website in the submission field. That way members could determine from it the source of the article.]]>http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q30http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q30plime.com <![CDATA[RTCA @ 2/28/2007 11:18:28 AM]]>http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q29http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q29plime.com <![CDATA[tundramonkey @ 2/28/2007 10:49:52 AM]]>
There are a few other Plimers who would ONLY submit their very biased/borderline offensive blogs, and that began to frustrate several members of the Plime population.

IMO, I think a blog category (as opposed to a buried blog thread) might be a solution to this, as Plimers who do have interesting blogs can have the opportunity to post [the uninteresting/spammers could be just voted down].]]>http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q28http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q28plime.com <![CDATA[yoornotme @ 2/28/2007 10:44:43 AM]]>« RTCA : Yes, I'm an outspoken blogger. I tend to submit original things, except maybe humor.

Until very recently, I didn't know just how anti-blog (I can't think of a better word) most of you are. Some bloggers probably rely on advertising to support their sites. I do not. In fact, I'm retired and don't need the money at all. I blog because if I didn't I would probably die of sheer boredom.

Well, as of a few minutes ago, I decided to pull the plug. I actually was doing other things on Plime besides submitting things. I won't be doing any of it anymore. I have better things to do with my time than plead the case for bloggers and I refuse to be a poster child.Aw, but I actually like you!

Can't say the same about FriedBrains though. I wish he'd go and you'd stay.

I have some friends in RL who are always self-promoting (darn DJ's). That's annoying. I'd hang out with them more if they'd talk about things that they *didn't* create. I think that's probably true for most people: we get sick of self-promoters. (And usually, it seems to only be one way. The people promoting themselves never want to hear about the people they're talking to. Just like door-to-door religious salesmen).]]>http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q27http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q27plime.com <![CDATA[RTCA @ 2/28/2007 10:40:09 AM]]>
Until very recently, I didn't know just how anti-blog (I can't think of a better word) most of you are. Some bloggers probably rely on advertising to support their sites. I do not. In fact, I'm retired and don't need the money at all. I blog because if I didn't I would probably die of sheer boredom.

Well, as of a few minutes ago, I decided to pull the plug. I actually was doing other things on Plime besides submitting things. I won't be doing any of it anymore. I have better things to do with my time than plead the case for bloggers and I refuse to be a poster child.]]>http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q26http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q26plime.com <![CDATA[yoornotme @ 2/28/2007 9:15:53 AM]]>« Bornbad : Punching up your blog on Plime should be cause for point status loss. I have a stupid blog I'm embarresed of (except for my son's stories).Agreed.

And I have a blog too. I've had it for over three years. Good luck reading it though-- it's password protected! Ha!]]>http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q25http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q25plime.com <![CDATA[donteatpoop @ 2/28/2007 2:17:50 AM]]>
But each time, I opened a forum thread, and my blog post was really just the introduction of a thread. The forums are there for opinion related content, or amusing antecdotes. What I did not do, however, is link my very entertaining and highly amusing blog that you all should visit and comment on frequently. So there was no traffic increase based on my post.

We have a "post your blog" thread buried somewhere deep in the forums. I believe I am the only one who posted in it. Perahaps if a new one was started, and maybe stickied under the FA-Q, this would be a good place for bloggers to post stuff in, while "advertising" their blog through interesting comments, discussions, and forum interaction.]]>http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q24http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q24plime.com <![CDATA[jaxomlotus @ 2/28/2007 12:15:19 AM]]>« bonsai1776 :RTCA, and friedbrains are the most outspoken of them. In my opinion that is definitely trolling.Hmm, I wouldn't group RTCA in the same category as Friedbrains... not even close. Yes, both are trying to get exposure for their blogs, but one is peddling hate speech (literally unnaceptable trolling) and the other is trying to promote their blog (which we still haven't set any firm ground rules on).

One thing I respect about both people is that they are taking part in the discussion. For Plime to really take off we need to hear all sides to every debate. Whether we agree with their answers in the end is not as important as the fact we gave them a chance to answer at all.]]>http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q23http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q23plime.com <![CDATA[Bornbad @ 2/27/2007 11:17:54 PM]]>« drStrangelove :  As far as people reaching a high enough level.. There are a number of folks here who are just wantonly copying stories from other sites.. they are getting HUGE karma points for some very lazy work... soon it may be enough duplication as to render this site useless. I know this is a tangential issue.... but I feel pretty strongly about it being wrong.

..that, and those crappy indy-music blog links.I agree to an extent. If a person just runs down the CNN, yahoo, AP 'weird news' page and submits everything, they should be chastised. Some things from those pages are good, just not all.]]>http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q22http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q22plime.com <![CDATA[Bornbad @ 2/27/2007 11:12:42 PM]]>http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q21http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q21plime.com <![CDATA[bonsai1776 @ 2/27/2007 10:44:06 PM]]>
I like the suggestion runninutes made to require level 3 to post articles. I feel level 2 is too low, but I must agree that 3 is too high. Is there any way to make it 2.5? Anyways, with a level restriction you must first tell the community that you are willing to participate and add to it not abuse it and take from it.]]>http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q20http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q20plime.com <![CDATA[drStrangelove @ 2/27/2007 10:35:56 PM]]>
..that, and those crappy indy-music blog links.]]>http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q19http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q19plime.com <![CDATA[runninutes @ 2/27/2007 9:54:39 PM]]>
My blog isn't quite like some of the others, where people write up big opinion pieces or talk about their baby. Mine tends to be mostly a collection of links to other sites I've found interesting. I have posted some of those same links here on Plime, but have always posted a link to the original article, even if I felt like my blog post was good. For example, I posted a link here about "stuff you never thought to use your cell phone for" that I had also blogged. I summarized the original article in my post, distilling it down to just the stuff that was actually helpful. I thought I did a really good job, but I still linked to the original article.

I agree with RTCA that an author has to promote their own work, because who else will? Even when people sell books to publishers, they still do things like go on book tours. However, my personal opinion is that Plime is not a site for people to make money from (don't know if that applies to anyone specific or not). If you want to make money from a link to your site, buy an ad on Fark.]]>http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q18http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q18plime.com <![CDATA[jaxomlotus @ 2/27/2007 8:59:15 PM]]>« RTCA : I feel insulted by the action of a mere one or two users. My post, Do You Like Spam?, concerning email forwards is indeed more relevant today than it was five years ago. More than 80 percent of email is spam (statistics have already been published elsewhere). The spammers get email addresses from people who do NOT know the facts that I provided. I'm sorry that I could not stretch the post to make it look like there was more substance.Honestly, your post was probably just made at the right place, wrong time. A whole bunch of blog posts got voted down right after this thread began. I am hoping for more discussion and a community affirmed stance before people took it as a license to downvote all blogs. I apologize if my post contributed to your article being deleted as a result.

I'm really, really glad we have the viewpoint of a blogger in this thread. I'd like to see more voices like RTCA's in this thread, as like it or not, everyone is welcome to be a part of the community and they have a right to help decide the direction of Plime.]]>http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q17http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q17plime.com <![CDATA[TheBlueFrog @ 2/27/2007 7:42:48 PM]]>« RTCA :

How do you determine what’s interesting for everyone else? Where do you think you are, Slashdot? Also, what do you consider ad-covered? Have any of you ever heard of Adblock or Adblock Plus?The point is not that we have to suffer through seeing your ads, the point is if a person has a blog, and all that they do to generate content is copy and paste whatever they read over the wire, without adding anything to the article. What do we get from the blog that we wouldn't get from the original article? How is that not plagarism?

This sentence, “I think personal character should prevent people linking to their own stuff.”, is obviously made by a person with no experience in professional writing. When an author writes a book, who do you think the first one to promote it is? The author, of course. How else is it going to be published?
The author first promotes their book to publishers. They then spend money to BUY advertising in newspapers, magazines, radio, television, and even on the internet. Notice I said buy, not spam everywhere there is a captive audience. This kind of thing is like running in a movie theater before the movie starts with a bullhorn and yelling about your new book.

Search engines can take weeks to properly index any website, even longer for new blogs. There’s no shame in getting their information out in front of as many eyes as possible. If the information is poor, user moderation will take care of it quickly. Whether their purpose for linking the information is for self-gain is irrelevant. Are you trying to tell me that you don’t gain anything from participating on Plime? If you are, you’re lying.
Going along with what you said about user moderation, yea, the good blogs have people who want to share something they found interesting. People meaning not the person who wrote it.

And what have I gained from participating on plime? I've met some interesting people, and read some interesting things that I probably would have otherwise missed. Also I've let a crazy person know that I live less than 5 mins away from their house ( /waves at Bornbad, Please don't drive up and down my street at night ;). I don't make money.

Some of you seem to think that Plime is a news aggregator. It is not. It’s a social website of which news is only one facet. Opinion pieces will and should be linked, along with other types of content. This is why Plime was designed with user moderation in mind.
Note you said opinion pieces, not plagiarized rehashes of everything Yahoo, Google, and CNN post.

While you have a right to your opinions about any of this is not debatable. Your opinions, however, do not give you the right to determine what’s suitable for Plime. Whether you know it or not, blogging IS replacing traditional news services and it’s happening rather quickly. The fact that blog owners, authors, and supporters are putting advertising on their websites should have absolutely no bearing on whether a posting is a suitable topic.
This is where you really start going off into imagination land. Last time I checked, pretty much everything to do with plime is debatable, right down to the color scheme for each category. Yes blogging is replacing traditional news services, but when a blogger just reposts the same stuff as the other guys, just with THEIR ads, that's nothing special. That's not replacing the traditional news outlets, that's making a buck on someone else's work.

I feel insulted by the action of a mere one or two users. My post, Do You Like Spam?, concerning email forwards is indeed more relevant today than it was five years ago. More than 80 percent of email is spam (statistics have already been published elsewhere). The spammers get email addresses from people who do NOT know the facts that I provided. I'm sorry that I could not stretch the post to make it look like there was more substance.
I read your post titled "Do You Like Spam?", for the record, I don't like either variety. The point is, it's just not very interesting, or too helpful. What you are suggesting is that there are sinister people at the end of every "FW: FW: FW: FW: FW: Lawlzzzz... this is funny... look at this picture" e-mail that sells the entire list of addresses to some spam house. That's just not how everyone's address gets out there.]]>http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q16http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q16plime.com <![CDATA[RTCA @ 2/27/2007 6:52:41 PM]]>http://www.untwistedvortex.com/2007/02/28/my-response-to-a-forum-topic-on-plime/ about this topic. I am repeating it here so that you don't have to go there to read it:

My Response to a Forum Topic on Plime

Yes, I have indeed read Should rehash news blogs that don’t link their news source be allowed on Plime and the forum comments following it.

I am not debating your issues with blogs that purport to report the news without revealing their sources. I agree with you on that. I do not agree with you on this:

“An ad-covered blog has what amounts to non-content (i.e. a few short paragraphs of text that doesn’t say anything that interesting at all and were obviously only posted here to earn the poster traffic/ad revenue).”

How do you determine what’s interesting for everyone else? Where do you think you are, Slashdot? Also, what do you consider ad-covered? Have any of you ever heard of Adblock or Adblock Plus?

This sentence, “I think personal character should prevent people linking to their own stuff.”, is obviously made by a person with no experience in professional writing. When an author writes a book, who do you think the first one to promote it is? The author, of course. How else is it going to be published?

Search engines can take weeks to properly index any website, even longer for new blogs. There’s no shame in getting their information out in front of as many eyes as possible. If the information is poor, user moderation will take care of it quickly. Whether their purpose for linking the information is for self-gain is irrelevant. Are you trying to tell me that you don’t gain anything from participating on Plime? If you are, you’re lying.

Some of you seem to think that Plime is a news aggregator. It is not. It’s a social website of which news is only one facet. Opinion pieces will and should be linked, along with other types of content. This is why Plime was designed with user moderation in mind.

While you have a right to your opinions about any of this is not debatable. Your opinions, however, do not give you the right to determine what’s suitable for Plime. Whether you know it or not, blogging IS replacing traditional news services and it’s happening rather quickly. The fact that blog owners, authors, and supporters are putting advertising on their websites should have absolutely no bearing on whether a posting is a suitable topic.

I feel insulted by the action of a mere one or two users. My post, Do You Like Spam?, concerning email forwards is indeed more relevant today than it was five years ago. More than 80 percent of email is spam (statistics have already been published elsewhere). The spammers get email addresses from people who do NOT know the facts that I provided. I'm sorry that I could not stretch the post to make it look like there was more substance.]]>http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q15http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q15plime.com <![CDATA[dork @ 2/27/2007 5:03:20 PM]]>« runninutes : I did that just this morning.



I agree with everything else you said, too.

The level requirement sounds great to me, but I'd suggest level 2. I think even level 3 is enough of a deterrent that it may drive people away that we don't want to leave. According to the new chart:
user level 1 karma 10
user level 2 karma 80
user level 3 karma 270

Getting 270 points takes a while for most folks these days.80 karma would be enough. many people dont get that much karma for comments and they can learn what is considered good or bad on the site. for real at first i was so interested in other peoples posts i didnt post my first article untill i while after i joined. (i was still level 1 but still)]]>http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q14http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q14plime.com <![CDATA[runninutes @ 2/27/2007 4:03:38 PM]]>« jaxomlotus : What if instead of downvoting we replaced the URL to a more credible source, if the story they are discussing is interesting enough.I did that just this morning.

http://www.plime.com/health/l/11716-history/1/


I agree with everything else you said, too.

« Wingnut : Users who are genuinely interested in contributing can reach level 3 easily enough just by their up-voted comments, but it would be enough of a deterrent that Joe Schmoe can't create an account just to generate traffic for his blog.
The level requirement sounds great to me, but I'd suggest level 2. I think even level 3 is enough of a deterrent that it may drive people away that we don't want to leave. According to the new chart:
user level 1 karma 10
user level 2 karma 80
user level 3 karma 270

Getting 270 points takes a while for most folks these days.]]>http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q13http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q13plime.com <![CDATA[Wingnut @ 2/27/2007 3:19:49 PM]]>« Alton :
One way that may help the ad ones, is to require a member to be a certain level, say 3, before posting a link. That would stop the people who create an account just to push their ware.I like this idea a lot. Let people visit and comment, thereby showing some active involvement in site before they can post their own links. Users who are genuinely interested in contributing can reach level 3 easily enough just by their up-voted comments, but it would be enough of a deterrent that Joe Schmoe can't create an account just to generate traffic for his blog.

I have found interesting stories discussed on blogs, but whenever possible I trace the story back to the original source and use that link on plime. Unless the blog is actually breaking the story (which happens very, VERY rarely), there is no reason to link to it. Let us see the original source for ourselves and form our own opinion on it.]]>http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q12http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q12plime.com <![CDATA[Bandit @ 2/27/2007 3:19:41 PM]]>
In the sense that the link you're posting is there because it's funny, not because it's a good source of news. I go to SomethingAwful because it's funny, not because it's good source of facts.]]>http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q11http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q11plime.com <![CDATA[jaxomlotus @ 2/27/2007 2:34:07 PM]]>
In other words, always link through to the original or most substantial source of content.

If a blog post is simply citing a gizmodo post, change it to the Gizmodo post. If a blog does not cite a claim that the Pope was assasinated, but you see it all over Google News, replace the link with one to a credible news source.

The blogger shouldn't mind, right? If they really are part of the community and the community stands to benefit from more qualitative articles on Plime than a rehash post, then how can they complain about this?

I think the line for exceptions should be drawn where a blog is genuinely informative or interesting in its own right. An example might be WWTDD.com, which I regularly read not for the celebrity news, but for the hilarious writing style of the author. So in other words, if there is substantial value in visiting the page itself, there's no need to change it to a more recognizable source.

Does this make sense?]]>http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q10http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q10plime.com <![CDATA[tundramonkey @ 2/27/2007 2:23:01 PM]]>
I usually don't bother even reading blog posts (the exception being really really funny ones - but I'll look at the comments first to see if it is), and it's frustrating to read blog posts with no links to the original article(s). I go to Plime to find news, not blogs [Maybe a blog category could fix this? Although I know I'd never use/visit that category]. Jax is right, it's plagiarism if these bloggers do not cite their sources, and I won't trust anything a blog says unless there's a source to back it up.

I've been downvoting some links to a user's blog for two reasons:
1. If something really is that freakin' interesting, it'll be elsewhere, and usually somewhere credible/official.
2. I read the 'comments' for people's opinions; I don't need to read a whole article on an opinion.]]>http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q9http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q9plime.com <![CDATA[jaxomlotus @ 2/27/2007 2:22:04 PM]]>
Spam is about content, not authorship.]]>http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q8http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q8plime.com <![CDATA[MaskedWriter @ 2/27/2007 1:26:44 PM]]>http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q7http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q7plime.com <![CDATA[makri @ 2/27/2007 1:18:04 PM]]>
From the point of view of the community, allowing self-promotion does not benefit it in any way. A page (news, blog, whatever) that is interesting enough to be linked here would get linked by someone anyway. If it doesn't, well, it probably wasn't all that interesting to begin with.

Some bloggers who shall remain anonymous (such as FriedBrains) seem to think that every single article they write is interesting enough to be linked. Would they get linked if he didn't do it himself? No. And it's no for a reason.]]>http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q6http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q6plime.com <![CDATA[Hoosker @ 2/27/2007 12:30:39 PM]]>
If you vote down a submission for this reason, it would be extremely helpful to add that in a comment. I can almost guarantee more of a response from other plime members.]]>http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q5http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q5plime.com <![CDATA[Alton @ 2/27/2007 11:35:27 AM]]>
Personally, I'm tired of visiting blogs for news. I also feel these blantant attempts to get more traffic to their sites by linking their blogs as "news", will only increase with time unless it's nipped in the bud.

I don't know if there is a way block or not allow links to blogs, but it wouldn't hurt my feelings to end all of them. We may miss out on the occasional interesting blog, but they are far and few between.

As far as downvoting them goes, I'll give it a shot, but sometimes they can be hard to distinguish from real articles. I also believe any traffic, even negative, only encourages these people. Plus, as one person has stated, they can just add multiple accounts to upvote their own links. Depending on how devoted they are, they could be difficult to counter.

Edit to add: Looking at the current front page, there are several links to blogs, and one article linked by the writer himself. The question is are they worth linking? Some our informative, some aren't. We don't make a habit of downloaded uninteresting links, just ignoring them, but they will still get many hits as people find out for themselves that they aren't worth upvoting.

One way that may help the ad ones, is to require a member to be a certain level, say 3, before posting a link. That would stop the people who create an account just to push their ware.

Also, if possible, I wouldn't mind everyone's stat page showing when they became a member. That would give us an indication if someone recently created an account.]]>http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q4http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q4plime.com <![CDATA[MaskedWriter @ 2/27/2007 11:09:38 AM]]>
Also, I'm tired of links to opinion articles. Give me whatever else you want, but hold the "opinion" posts, please.]]>http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q3http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q3plime.com <![CDATA[Hoosker @ 2/27/2007 11:06:04 AM]]>do down-vote. I think as others find their footing here you will see more "Voting" both up as well as down.

Have these blogs been getting up-voted?]]>http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q2http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q2plime.com
Should rehash news blogs that don't link their news source be allowed on Plime
 < 1 2 >
<![CDATA[jaxomlotus @ 2/27/2007 10:53:05 AM]]>
But there's a special group in particular that is disturbing my use of Plime and I think we need to discuss it as a group.

There are two types of blog posts that irritate me:
  • An ad-covered blog has what amounts to non-content (i.e. a few short paragraphs of text that doesn't say anything that interesting at all and were obviously only posted here to earn the poster traffic/ad revenue).

  • A blog has a more in-depth article, but in the case of intended factual data, does not quote sources explaining where it got its information from.

    In the case of the non-information, it's simply a case of adding noise to Plime. In the case of unsourced news, it's a case of encouraging both disinformation and plagiarism. I'd like Plime to be as informative and substantial as possible. When a blog post reports that the Pope was just assassinated and rehashes what was reported in CNN (without bothering to mention that CNN did all the reporting) leaves the reader of the blog with no way of verifying the truth of a claim.


I think it's time we started down-voting those types of posts.

Thoughts?]]>http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q1http://www.plime.com/f/620/1/rss2_0.rss#q1plime.com