Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="The Sigil" data-source="post: 2680898" data-attributes="member: 2013">Ah, you are correct.  I had to go back and re-parse your post to pick that up.(Emphasis in Morrus' quote above mine)Okay, I gotcha - when I first read that exchange, I read:"can we reference (off site pdf vendors) by name?""For the moment, I'll say no."And I "full-stopped" there.  That's my fault, not yours.I thought that meant some weird new rule that publishers (and only publishers) couldn't mention them at all (which struck me as odd).  With the re-reading, it looks as though you're saying (correct me if I'm wrong here) that publishers can't use a link in a press release, news item, or .sig (where, presumably, it is something of an "unsolicited placement" on the site - I'm putting it up without anyone asking for it) - but if some third party were to say in the General Boards, "hey, I was looking at the ENnie nominees and saw this "Buy the Numbers" thingy - what is it and anyone know where I can pick up a copy?" then I would be permitted (if nobody else had already done so; Crothian seems so quick on the trigger to offer up such things it's unreal) to pop into the thread and offer a "hey, I wrote it, glad you're interesed, here's a link to buy it RPGNow."  (i.e., in the course of general conversation).That seems more reasonable than the way I initially read it (though I still think that #1 above applies and simply by telling publishers, "you can't do this here" - even if justified - it's going to ruffle a few feathers... again, despite the hue and cry over the "d20 Standards" I have yet to see any books similar to the BoEF since, so it seems more of a "general principles of no limits on speech" thing than a "hey, we had a book in the works and this ruins it" thing).  It seems to work out to "no unsolicited pimping with a link" - pimping (sans link) is fine (I mean, that's all a Press Release is, really... right?), and solicited linking is fine (if someone asks, I can direct them), if I am reading this right.   Is that a fair read?In addition, talking about/linking to examples of the pros and cons of a competitive site's services, layout, etc. is permitted (because this is not pointing a press release or other "buy this product" type of post in the direction of a competing site), if I am reading you correctly (if I'm not, please let me know).I also should point out that I agree with several of your points earlier in the thread... while the community that is ENWorld is the happy result of a conglomeration of Eric Noah, ENWorld, Publishers, and fans all kind of "being in the right place at the right time," nobody owes anything to anyone else.  Any contributions I may have made to ENWorld (over 2000 of them, and most of them wordy at that) have been amply repaid by driving my modest sales.  And I would hope that you feel that the sales you've driven my way have been repaid by my attempt to add something positive (if verbose) to the boards.Like I said before, I'm not mad, and I'm not stomping away from ENWorld in a huff (I have thicker skin than that).  I'm not even one of the blokes that is going to get all up in arms about the "Free Speech" thing (I decided to go from d20 to OGL-only on the bare fact that I'm too lazy to keep abreast of every change to the d20STL - things like required "Players Handbook" wording, etc. just weren't changes I wanted to make to every one of my products every time WotC decided to change things - it was a "laziness" consideration instead of a "Censor" consideration).Also, I noticed that one of these days I really need to get around to writing more product reviews. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue    :p"  data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" />--The Sigil</blockquote>

Verification