Menu



error This forum is not active, and new posts may not be made in it.
RE: Vote for the 253rd POTW
10/18/2010 8:26:16 PM

No Roger, you were not the one going into other peoples forums and harassing them over the business opportunity they were advertising.

Roger another thought- If we initiate the contact through a PM and we get a business offer back in return, can this be termed SPAM? After all we did send the first PM. Hmmm I wonder after looking up the meaning of SPAM.

n.
Unsolicited e-mail, often of a commercial nature, sent indiscriminately to multiple mailing lists, individuals, or newsgroups; junk e-mail.

tr.v., spammed, spam·ming, spams.
  1. To send unsolicited e-mail to.
  2. To send (a message) indiscriminately to multiple mailing lists, individuals, or newsgroups.
This says unsolicited and if they are responding to our PM it isn't unsolicited is it?
So does that mean it isn't really SPAM? Just a thought.
+0
Peter Fogel

1470
7259 Posts
7259
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: Vote for the 253rd POTW
10/18/2010 8:40:33 PM
It's interesting to read through all the posts in this thread and to be perfectly honest I found some of them quite amusing.

On a personal level I must be honest and admit that I stopped supporting the POTW for a variety of reasons some of which I'll explain and some I won't.

To state what I've said in the past the objective of the POTW was to award members for their participation in the community. Having your own forum was a plus but not necessary to be eligible. The important part was community participation. The criteria that John Sanchez created was set up in such a way that only members that were active in the community, participated in different forums, had a certain amount of posts (350 if I remember correctly) that were community related and not advertising posts and were members for a certain amount of time were eligible to be nominated for the POTW contest. A member was eligible to win the award once only and the exception to that was the POTY where it was possible to win more then once even though that never happened.

During the period AnaMaria, Jim and I were the admins of the POTW we carried on with the same eligibility criteria. When Kathleen took over she changed the criteria and opened it to the general Adland membership including those that never participated in the community. She also changed the format and as you all know it never took off as she thought it would. There were a few other changes that the current admin incorporated them in the present criteria and the heated discussion in this thread is a consequence of that.

Here are some of the reasons I stopped supporting the POTW.

1. I believed it was nonsensical to have members with multiple POTW awards. This started during Kathleen's stewardship and continued with the present admins.

2. I thought Adland members that didn't participate in the community shouldn't be eligible.

There are more reasons but these 2 are the most important.

That said the witch hunt in this thread is a bit funny, ridiculous and definitely not acceptable. I can understand the dismay of some that the candidates are mainly advertisers and as you can see from above it's one of the reasons I stopped supporting the POTW. BUT and this is the big but; according to the present criteria these people are eligible and certainly don't deserve to be vilified as they were here. Especially one candidate who from what I saw did not spam but used the tools Adland supplies paying members to the utmost. Where is the sin in that? Many of you use email broadcasts for different reasons and when they hit my email inbox or Adland inbox I decide which I'll open and which I'll delete. That my friends is not spamming but utilizing Adland to the utmost and more power to them for doing so. Some of the posts vilifying the one member were more ego based then anything else and it seems that they are on a power trip more then anything else.

I thought it right and proper to add my thoughts here and hope that the criteria will change and if they don't that's fine but know and understand that the bashing in this thread is out of line since they have as much right to be a candidate as any one else according to the current criteria.

Shalom,

Peter

P.S. Some of the offensive posts have been deleted and rightly so but I'm confident most of you know who I'm referring to.

Peter Fogel
Babylon 7
+0
Georgios Paraskevopoulos

2644
5965 Posts
5965
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 50 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: Vote for the 253rd POTW
10/18/2010 10:24:56 PM

Hi POTW and friends!

I have followed carefully this discussion and I read all posts. I voted first day amongst the first five. Normally I use to point out who I cast my vote to! This time I did not write anything because I saw what Roger wrote so I decided to stay low and not to give any reply at that time.
Hmmm! For first time we have more replies here than votes. It is nice to see our old friends who don't vote, sharing their ideas to advice us. It seems that those friends care a lot always when there is a problem. I wonder what they suggested to the Admin before they jumped in here. They did probably nothing.

There are rules and criteria to be followed, good or bad rules and criteria have been discussed and there was an acceptance of them. Now to bring the discussion back refering to John Sanchez and Kathleen Vanbeekom and others that doesn’t help. That is ALP History with good and bad sides there too. This kind of critics are also a kind of spamming because those don't add anything positive and there is nothing new or anything to catch on to make a step forward. Always same background of same persons. I am sorry but this idiosyncrasy leads to idiocy and I am not stupid enough to accept that.

Honestly I don't give a cent to those critics because deniers of a any kind of work will never accept to recognize anything good and they will always come in to tell us how right they were the other day, or to tell us that every yesterday was better day. I stopped all direct contacts with AdLandPro members. Not to make my few enemies happier but because of their repeating of same history, besides all old active social workers left AdLandPro and meet in other communities.

Strangely all this kind of confrontations happens always after the autumnal equinox and this time every year. Maybe October is a bad moth for AdLandPro.

Life goes on and everything moves forward. It is like economy, one day the pointer shows upwards and next day it goes down. My intension with this post here is to let you know that all this speculation could be avoided by a PM to the forum Admin or the ALP Administration. They are capable to correct a failure or a mismatch as good as you do in your own homes when you see something bad.

I read and saw some offensive posts being deleted. Maybe this one will be deleted too. Anyhow I repost a video clip I sent some years back to show you that a united community is strong and happy able to solve any kind of problems.

KONX OM PANX
Click above and watch to the end.

Now take care all of you friends and enemies, a cold winter is coming and we have to make it comfortable for all of us. Who knows, we may not survive the winter.

ETERNAL WISDOM-Know ThySelf, PHILOXENIA MetaCafe, Adlanders In Facebook
+0
Roger Macdivitt .

3169
7333 Posts
7333
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: Vote for the 253rd POTW
10/18/2010 11:55:09 PM

Whatever else Georgios,

I'm always pleased to see you.

Your beautiful forums are missed.

+0
Roger Macdivitt .

3169
7333 Posts
7333
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: Vote for the 253rd POTW
10/19/2010 12:11:22 AM
Quote:
Roger dear, that might make him a SPAMMER in your eyes but this is a far cry from a SCAMMER. A SCAMMER is much more serious. Do you have proof he is a SCAMMER?They are two entirely different things.
He could have had you mixed up with several here in our community who go around offering free help when in reality what they are offering is a lead generation system to get leads for their opportunity. I get more of these offers in my PM inbox than any thing else and I would say he has too and in all likelihood he could have thought you were one of them and just retaliated with his own deal. I don't remember ever getting any SPAM from him although I could have and just don't remember.
When someone accepts my friends invitation I always send a short thank you note and a lot of times the person will respond with the latest greatest offer and some will even write "thanks for the ad" to which I will reply and say "Ad? What ad? I didn't send you an ad. I guess they had gotten so many they just came up with a generic answer. :) And then a lot times I get a note back thanking me for not blasting them with an ad and telling me how much they appreciated my not doing so. As I said I don't respond to SPAM (except in the afore mentioned example) and delete all such messages. I have noticed that usually the ones SPAMMING don't stay around long.

Mary,

With respect,

without going back and checking I don't know if I called the person a scammer, if I did that was not my intention, however I did call him a SPAMMER. Technically you may be right about the terms. What I know is that when you try to help and then get no reply other than an advert you don't want to help again but then the adverts keep coming.

What I think IS SO VERY SAD is this.

About a year ago I had an offer to take part in a legal and exciting venture with near enough guaranteed returns. I CAREFULLY selected a few Adland friends and invited them to LOOK (nothing hidden, no sign-up find out later stuff). My only contact was through PM's. NOT ONE even looked. Why? Because we have been so conditioned NOT TO TRUST that when something good comes along we don't look.

I am VERY SAD that this program will finish soon AND PAY OUT BIGTIMEand my friends here missed out. I shall not gloat. I probably won't even tell them. It's still sad though.

Let's try to build a community where we can trust each other. We might get hurt occassionally but that's life. Cyberworld is dangerous but so is the average city. We still have to venture out for bread.

Roger

+0


facebook
Like us on Facebook!