Topic: Is this against the rules? Indirect referral link spamming. (Read 522 times)

If I believed the user was abusing this fact I'd likely seek a global moderators or admins opinion unless it was absolutely obvious. If it was borderline, and there's varying factors to consider I probably wouldn't ban them myself even if they were a newbie. This is a highly subjective situation, and I believe having a second opinion would be beneficial in borderline cases. I would probably remove the posts, unless either theymos states otherwise or another staff member presents compelling counter arguments to my reasoning.

You can report the posts, and see what sort of feedback you get. If you report enough of them, then its likely not going to just be one moderator handling it, and you could probably gauge whether you want to continue to report them. I can't really give you an example of my interpretation of this act as its very much so on a case by case basis.

Thanks, Welsh. Your explanation and examples are along the same lines as my feelings on the matter, but it's good to have confirmation that I'm on the right tracks (appreciating that staff opinions may differ).

I think this is the important point. I have no problem with odd link to their own site, even if it is filled with referral links, provided it is on topic and not entirely useless. My problem with the user I have discussed in this thread is that >90% of his posts contained links to his site. It's obvious he's crossed the line and is just spamming the forum as free advertising. The same applies in the Press Board, as is being discussed here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.53538356. These users obviously have no interest in discussing - they just post their advertising link and move on. I'll be sure to mention in future reports for these kinds of issues if the user in question is repeatedly engaging in this spammy behavior, as opposed to it being a one-off.

My only other gripe is that it seems to take an awful lot of this kind of behavior (thinking particularly of the Press Board spammers) before we ban a user.

This is my take on it, but other moderators will likely have differing opinions; Only substantial posts should contain a advertisement. There is a difference of linking to a source, and linking to an advertisement. If the user owns the site then its far more likely to be an advertisement, and not a genuine source. However, this should be determined on a case by case basis, and factors that would contribute to determining whether this is okay or not is by quality of their content within the post on the forum, and how often they link to this resource. As linking semi regular would indicate that they're the owner of the website, and they are merely posting to advertisement, although if its a substantial thread then this may still be allowed. It entirely depends on the individual case that we are presented with.

For example, Sally posts a link to a website which contains referral links, but is not a direct referral link, and does not continue to do this multiple times, and is a one off. I would consider this fine as long as its relevant to the discussion, and they offer insightful information within the contents of their post and aren't just linking to a source. At this point, it doesn't matter to me whether they own the site or not. If its useful, and isn't a direct referral link then its fine. However, it needs to be a substantial post for this to apply. To give you an example of my example; If someone posts within the service discussion section asking for reviews of the top exchanges. A user gives their own constructive opinion on it, and then links to another source which provides reviews from another source on the internet, which happens to have indirect referral links. Using my discretion I'd probably allow this if first of all the post itself was substantial, and it wasn't a direct referral.

However, I believe this should change as soon as this is a regular occurrence of a user, and they're offering low quality posts while plugging a certain website every chance they get. I treat linking to news articles the same, as a lot of users are now trying to get traffic to their website without posting on the forum for discussion. They simply quote a small bit of the article, link to it, and then never return to the discussion, and start the process all over again for their next article. I usually remove these types of threads, especially if there's alternative discussion on the forum already.  

Although, this will be entirely at the discretion of the moderator handling the report as we all have different interpretations of post quality, and determining a users intentions when posting a link.

Before I proceed with my explanation, my personal interpretation from this quote is that theymos is talking specifically about threads that the user created themselves that contain advertisements.

This is the policy that I try to abide by when it comes to these types of posts. Note that, theymos talks about hosting content on the forum which requires the post itself on the forum to be significant, and substantial. However, I'll admit that indirect referral links can sometimes be tricky. If a user replies to another user trying to help them, and links to a resource which includes a referral link within the page then it should probably be removed. However, if they have posted a significant thread of their own, then it should probably be taken on a case by case basis.

If the post is useful, I think it's fine to plug once in a while. Of course not every post must be accompanied with a link.

I put ref links on most of my sites, and it helps to pay for the domains and hosting. I host my own images, and I put links on the gallery sites as well. Hopefully my posts are useful, and I'm not considered to be a link or banner farmer. I'm not sure where the line is drawn,

There is a far more blatant tactic, and that is to post a Bitcoin wallet address and to ask for tips in a signature. I'm not against that either, as it is up to the reader to decide if the poster should be rewarded.

Honestly I didn't notice the referral links hidden in gocryptowise's articles but if we are trying to understand the rules here in the forum, it is saying referral links directly posted in the forum not from the websites being promoted here. It's a hard thing to say but he had a brilliant way of showing the ref links by not violating any rule and that is really a bad thing to see. So we either wait for him to refer scam/hyip sites for him to get tagged or take our chances on him doing illegal advertising.

I agree with this, but there is an exception to the Press board where news should be posted (related to Bitcoin only). I also don't see anything wrong with sharing a quality article from time to time, but those who do it constantly with the intention of promoting certain web pages should be punished in an exemplary manner.

Let's take an example of a user cheezcarls and let's look at his post history, does anyone see anything strange? I see a person who is paid to promote a specific web site. I try to report it as advertising, and as content that should be posted in Press board, but all my reports stay unhandled.

Also, the user in question is rewarded with merits from some prominent forum members, which just gives him the incentive to move on with what he's doing. Should I mention that this user does not participate in the discussions he initiates at all.

Exactly. He obviously knows referral links are against the rules, so he's taking deliberate steps to evade the rules and trick users in to unknowingly click on his links.

Anyway, I reported a bunch of his posts for breaking the "advertising in other users' theeads" rule, and they were all trashed.

I also reported one of his topics for being both insubstantial advertising and linking to referral link spam, and it was also trashed.

So it seems there is at least one mod out there who agrees with my initial post. I am therefore going to continue to report this kind of nonsense when I see it. Hopefully other mods also agree; wouldn't want to lose my 100% reporting score.

But that's the thing... he is using referral links... they're just hidden via redirects. I'm always a bit suspicious of any site that appears to be "linking" to an external site, but the initial link is on the internal domain.

For instance... on this page:

There is a list of exchanges:


And the URLs look "innocent" enough:

Until you click on them and then look at the redirects:


The same thing happens further down, with the list of "Coin Tracking/Tax" Tools:


In light of this, and having had a good sleep, I've reconsidered my opinion... this sort of shit is even worse than direct referral linking... especially given that the user is basically just posting it everywhere where they think it is even vaguely relevant...


^--- THIS

I'm leaning more to our 24th rule which is about illegal advertisements in posts rather than the rule about ref links since the websites gocryptowise is promoting are in his own and I wouldn't consider that as a "referral" if he owns the websites he is promoting such as gocryptomarket and he isn't promoting it for someone else. 


Visiting the links he also provided doesn't show any kind of referral links under it just the website's url itself with no additional characters hinting to a referral link.

gocryptomarket

Beginners guide to crypto

So really this isn't about violating the no referral link rule since he owns the website and what he could be breaking is more about our 24th rule about illegal advertisements where he just post links to websites/articles directly affiliated to him.

I see many refcode threads located in Off-Topic, with someone recently promoting free 15 Euros by purchasing 15 Euros worth of Bitcoin.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/crypto-exchange-giving-bonus-5210287

I feel that this kind should belong to the Micro Earnings subforum though.

Yes, you are right. If LTU_btc had made that post in others threads, it was against rules.
If someone creates a thread and make an announcement for a website or a service, it's against rule to post a link of another service or website in that thread.
Here I was talking about the user you referred to in the OP. In my opinion, there is no difference whether those posts are the first post of a thread or are replies to other threads. In both cases, they are against rules because they are posted in boards that are not for announcement of services.

Almost all the topics that include "Read the full article at...... " deserve to be deleted.

You and me are doing that in only one board, and we respect the rule of bumping our thread once per 24 hours. The user in question is without question using the forum to promote his site, and it is only doubtful how many of his posts are against rule number 24. I personally don't see anything substantial and useful which would justify his links.

Direct referral links are also allowed in at last one part of the forum (Gambling), and a concrete example is this user who has no problem with posting direct ref links in few threads.

---

Personally, I find that there are users who are working for some web-sites and get pay for posting their links on forum. They are aware that moderators do not delete such posts if they write several lines of text and add a link, but let's be honest, such things are very irritating and should not be allowed.

There is. Plenty of people start threads with links to their own sites or services, and these are only deleted if they break another rule, which is kind of what I was trying to determine here: Is a link to a site which exists only to list referral links against the rules in and of itself. The consensus seems to be that no, linking to such a site does not break rule 4 which I quoted in the opening post.

However, linking to such a site in someone else's thread quite clearly breaks rule 22:

I'm going to report the relevant posts in others' threads and see what happens.

I don't think there is any difference between making a new topic and posting in other threads. Rules are rules.
There is a big difference between the post made by LTU_btc and posts mentioned in the OP.
LTU_btc has made that post in micro-earning which is sub-board of service Announcement. As a service is announced, so no rule is broken.
gocryptowise is posting links to his/her website everywhere in the forum. He is advertising his/her website in Beginners & Help, Trading Discussion, Altcoin Discussion, Service Discussion (Altcoins), etc.
In my opinion this user breaks the rules, even if his website doesn't include referral links.

I usually report these kind of posts with this comment. "Advertising using external links."

And when the post history is full of links: Advertising using external links. Please check the post history of this user too.

Fair enough. Thanks for an answer.

I think that's my issue here, in that he is being disingenuous and dressing up his referral links as some sort of useful newbie guide. In contrast to LTU_btc above, who is completely up front that he is sharing a page full of faucet links, this user is stating he is sharing a "Guide for newbies" or a "Guide for the best altcoins to buy", when in actual fact, he is just sharing a list of referral links with some plagiarized text thrown in. He's also posting these links in other people's threads, which probably falls foul of the "Advertising in others' threads" rule.

So it would seem that starting his own threads with these links seems to be allowed, but we should be reporting his links in other people's threads?

gocryptowise in each post is indeed always pinned its own website link. But we must see the posts that he made useful or not for forum users.
in my opinion if the post has benefits and does not directly include a referral link on the post will not be a problem.
Although in the article he spread a lot of referral links. But there is no encouragement or coercion to follow the link.
the articles he made are also good and not spam articles.

Theymos has also talked about the Ads Link in the post:

this is a blogger way to get backlinks from bitcointalk.

I see this so much in crypto. You find a "review" that seems really really basic, or factually inaccurate, that's basically only there so you click on the referral links.

Kill it with fire.

Yep, I'm pretty sure that's the only reason that member is on the forum.  I've seen some of his posts, and the way he's spamming is devious and annoying at the same time.  I've seen crap like this before and have had the same reaction--except I've always reported posts like that, since they're basically advertising spam no matter how much you dress it up to look like a regular post.  It's like putting lipstick on a pig.

Nah, I wouldn't go that far--but it's obviously not my call to make.  I don't envy the mods and the kinds of decisions they have to make about this stuff.  But news links are generally pretty valuable, regardless of how much advertising they contain or the intent of the member who linked to a news source.

I've been doing similar thing for years, so I think it's not forbidden. On Micro Earnings section I promote my referral links indirectly. I have created topic (https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/bitcoins4free-over-700-faucets-btc-eth-bch-doge-dash-blk-btx-pot-1711002) where I advertise my faucet list. Many other users are doing same thing without any problems. Simply rules doesn't forbid to promote affiliate links in such way. If it wouldn't be allowed, such kind of threads would be trashed long time ago.

The problem is... where do you draw the line? For instance, what about people linking to news stories on news websites that contain advertisements (and/or referral links)? Should we prevent people from doing this too?

I don't think it is something that we can (nor should) actively police. As long as the initial link isn't a referral link and the site isn't an obvious scam/malware site, then I personally don't see any issue with it... if people want to click links on external sites once they're there, that's their problem.

A signature is not within the post area. This rule is saying you can't manually append a signature to the bottom of your posts within the post area, as one might to bypass signature bans or display signatures above their rank allowance.

He also isn't advertising a service, just linking to referral links.

Anyway, back on topic please. I would be keen to hear from a mod regarding my initial post.

I just re-read the rule book. Isn't rule 24 (and rule 22) has something to do with what he (and most of us) is doing.

Maybe I need to clean my glasses but am I getting this wrong? Because "rule 24" clearly says "Advertisements in posts aren't allowed."

It even says including signatures... I mean... bruh...

Well, referral is much more than just posting a link. To earn form referral links you'd have somebody to visit and take a series of actions. While ranking a page just by posting a link is very much more indirect. For both reasons though, I have suggested to remove the privilege of posting links form new users.

A lot of member here spams here for getting backlink. I guess that's what he is doing as well. The referral link he shared in his article is common practice for most of the bloggers.
Most CPA marketers either do guest posting or forum posting to have some backlink for ranking up a keyword. That doesn't mean he is sharing the link for having leads.
The guy you referred are having backlink as well, so that's can't be marked as spam; although it is. If it is marked as spam by mods, I guess a lot of articles will be deleted.

I never mentioned a ban, but the posts are purely designed to lead people to his referral links, so should be trashed in my opinion.

Trust feedback, even if neutral, is not appropriate. This has nothing to do with the trust system, unless their evidence he is linking to malware or phishing sites. All I've seen are referral links.

Yes there are worse signature spammers, and I report them too. Doesn't mean this guy should get a free pass just because he's not the worst.

I dont know to see that as an Ref Link directly but i saw something similar in the Mining Board too !

Its not directly an ref link and its getting you to some Amazon page where you can buy hardware things for Mining Rigs .
The Ref Link gets just activated when you realy buy this product there .

This is the thread for i have seen it lately https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/how-i-increased-my-mining-profits-by-10x-mining-veruscoin-and-monero-randomx-5210557


Guess its maybe the same thing here but dont know , just have seen it and its not an direct Ref Link so should be not a reason for a ban.

It's uncertain to me if BTCtalk has a clear policy on the issue. It seems like it's one of those things that would be under each mod's discretion, no? On some boards maybe moderators would tolerate a referral link if it was disclosed and the user actually offers valuable content aside of it. But if it's posted by someone that does nothing else other than posting referral links, I think that the rule should definitely not allow such behavior no matter how relaxed interpretation would be otherwise.

The referral link spamming isn't directly happening in the forum so I don't think it is a reason for a ban.

I checked the website for a few minutes, it didn't look like it is completely filled with referral links.

Plagiarized or not (didn't care that much) I think the website provides some information.

Is he promoting his website? Yes he does.

But every signature wearer promotes some website... So... I don't see a problem here. There are far worse spammers who post complete non-sense. His is a far better poster than them. Click ignore, problem solved.

I just had a quick glance through the user's post history and also a landing page on their website. The account seems to have been made solely to promote their website, evident from their first post on the forum and while it's not against the forum rules, I also think it may be tricky for beginners as their website is spammed filled within links to different websites.
Following links to financial websites from a third-party source is unadvisable but newbies can make such a mistake and possibly fall victim to phishing sites.

I am for reporting the posts with sufficient information or the mods to decide what action to take.
Would leaving a neutral feedback to serve as a deterrent be appropriate?

Quick question for any mods or users who have reported this kind of thing before.

We all know that referral link spam is against the rules:

My question relates to users who post links to third party pages or sites which are solely designed to lead people to clicking on referral links. The most recent user I've seen doing this is gocryptowise, but he certainly isn't unique in this behavior. He's started multiple topics in the last few days, and made many more posts, containing links to various pages on his site which shares his name (I will not link to it here, but you can review his post history if you are interested).

The pages he links to are disguised as a variety of "helpful" guides for newbies - "How to make money from cryptocurrency", "Best cryptocurrencies to invest in", "Beginner's guide to crypto", that kind of thing. Every single page contains link after link to sign up to various exchanges using his referral code, or buy hardware wallets using his referral code, or buy some tax software using his referral code, and so on. It's also worth noting that large parts of many of the articles seem to be plagiarized.

Even ignoring the plagiarism since it is off-site, to me linking to a page entirely designed to get people to click on your referral links is no better than just posting the referral links themselves, and these posts should be trashed. Am I accurate in my thinking here?