Need clarification on "No Retailer Links" rule

[Morrus]

While we are clarifying, obviously we cannot have links to off site pdf vendors, but can we reference them by name?

Just so I don't step on any toes

For the moment, I'll say no (not in a press release, news item or sig), although I may come back and revise that at some future date. This doesn't apply to general conversation on the boards, of course, where you can say whatever you like.

 

[Keith Robinson]

Yep, it includes sigs. Thanks!

Okay, done. The sig links now point to our own website, where links can be found to the various e-retailer sites. I think this is okay Let me know it it isn't.

 

[GMSkarka]

For the moment, I'll say no (not in a press release, news item or sig),

:\

Wow.

 

[kingpaul]

Hey, thanks for asking for the clarification. I missed the new sticky COMPLETELY. Morrus, having two stickies that say "New Rules" makes it real easy to ignore both of them thinking I've already seen the "new rule" on this board.

Yeah, I missed that as well. I see that the announcement is for publishers only. What about those non-publishing folks throughout the site that point to various products when asked about them?

 

[Steve Conan Trustrum]

I posted this elsewhere but I'll repost here for consideration:

I think a wiser course of action would be, at the very least, to allow publishers who are paying members to continue to post non-EnWorld links in their press releases and signatures. The incentive for publishers such as myself who have not yet purchased a membership (I don't use EnWorld to email, PM, or the like) just dropped down from "I think about signing up now and then" to absolute zero, and this current policy will likely see a large number of publishers not renewing membership considering the value that EnWorld has for them has dramatically dropped.

 

[DanMcS]

This seems abusive. Enworld got to be a popular source of news, so many publishers send their press releases here, helping the site gain popularity. Now you're saying, "feel free to advertise here, but only if you sell at my store".

Linking is how the web works, and is what makes it overwhelmingly more useful than TV, newspapers, or really any other kind of media. What kind of policy disallows links?

 

[direpress]

For the moment, I'll say no (not in a press release, news item or sig), although I may come back and revise that at some future date. This doesn't apply to general conversation on the boards, of course, where you can say whatever you like.

i'd ask you to reconsider. some time ago, you were adamant on not deleting a thread on these boards (the rpgnow split leak) because enworld was a news site. if you prohibit news from referring to other sites, even competing sites, in a context where it is very clearly relevant, then this is no longer a news site but self-advertising with some frilly bits. it would be sad to see such a valuable gaming resource go that way for so little gain.

 

[Bardsandsages]

Query: What about pointing to non PDF stores, like Amazon? My products are available in both PDF and print, and are available at just about every online retailer. For future print releases, is it acceptable to refer to more traditional booksellers' sites?

 

[Morrus]

This seems abusive. Enworld got to be a popular source of news, so many publishers send their press releases here, helping the site gain popularity. Now you're saying, "feel free to advertise here, but only if you sell at my store".

No I'm not. Read it again, please.

 

[Morrus]

Query: What about pointing to non PDF stores, like Amazon? My products are available in both PDF and print, and are available at just about every online retailer. For future print releases, is it acceptable to refer to more traditional booksellers' sites?

'Fraid not. That's what http://enworld.rpgshop.com/ is for.