Off-site linking information!

[Geonosis]

The recently implemented off-site linking rule has been temporarily reversed. The mod team are currently reviewing options on how best to address this issue and expect to clarify any changes within the next few days.

Worth noting is that our review team works diligently to deliver compelling reviews that are in-depth and thorough for our members. While we are an open community that promotes discussion, I want to remind you that attacking reviewers is against the rules. Therefore our existing rules will continue to be enforced.

Thanks!

[Blu Titan]

I would like to share the perspective of someone that visits here once in a while. The reversal of the linking policy is the only rational way to proceed. Believe me when I post that said policy made this site look "desperate" in the eyes of HD enthusiasts. Although, I don't usually contribute here, I believe that every HD site has something to afford. It is always beneficial when there are many sources of information for interested parties to consider. Thus, it is best when information is transparent and shared by all. Of the mods here I am only familiar with Geonosis who, in my opinion, is a very nice and informative person. I am a regular contributor in another site, but I have nothing against this site, the people, the mods, or those who contribute here. We all might have specific preferences for the sites we visit, but the online HD community is one. Thus, I am happy to see that the opinion of the HDD members was taking into consideration.

[Arkadin]

unfortunately it has become apparent that HDD has completely lost its way, and doesn't even know it.
a very sad situation, but unfortunately that's the reality.
I know I'll be taking a break from any type of contribution as far as threads while HDD tries to somehow sort itself out.

[GizmoDVD]

Any sites that blocks HDD's links should get blocked here.

[AV_Integrated]

Originally Posted by GizmoDVD

Any sites that blocks HDD's links should get blocked here.

What about sites that don't block links and/or don't have forums? A policy is necessary not to take revenge or action against sites, but to help ensure that when HDD posts a new review, which is typically a VERY popular thread, that someone doesn't come in and go: "Hey, that review sucked, you should read THIS one!

It seriously takes away from the work of the reviewer and encourages people to leave this site and gives free advertising to a site which is just raping HDD for their work.

So, it probably should be more of a global policy to help better HDD, without over emphasizing specific sites. It may not end up that way if some sites deserve flat out censorship.

[KYThrill]

Originally Posted by AV_Integrated

What about sites that don't block links and/or don't have forums? A policy is necessary not to take revenge or action against sites, but to help ensure that when HDD posts a new review, which is typically a VERY popular thread, that someone doesn't come in and go: "Hey, that review sucked, you should read THIS one!

It seriously takes away from the work of the reviewer and encourages people to leave this site and gives free advertising to a site which is just raping HDD for their work.

So, it probably should be more of a global policy to help better HDD, without over emphasizing specific sites. It may not end up that way if some sites deserve flat out censorship.

First, as far as people raping HDD for their work, isn't that the pot calling the kettle black? Aren't many of the news articles on the front page just news from other sites, HDD paraphrases the article in a couple of paragraphs, and then posts a link out. However, you get the meat of the entire news bite in HDD's summary and don't need to link out. Is linking out to an alternate review any more "raping" of HDD, than what HDD does with their news? I think it is less so, because it is occuring buried in some message board. What HDD does with their news is blatant and on the front page.

Second, shouldn't people be allowed to disagree with a review? Just as a hypothetical, let's say HDD reviews Gremlins (which they did). Now, some people will agree with it exactly, others will think HDD was too harsh, and others will think HDD wasn't harsh enough (where I stand).

But as someone who does read HDD for the reviews (and thus brings click revenue), I shouldn't be forced to be a HDD bot and agree with every review 100%. Now in the case of Gremlins, I read many conflicting reviews, and finally watched a friends copy and made the decision to pass on it. Some reviews I read were even more glowing than HDD's. Others raked it over the coals (and I was inclined to think along their lines).

Now, if a user wants to come and say, "Hey. From what I have seen of the movie, I disagree with the review. You may want to read the review here (posted link) as it sums up how I feel about the release)." I think that should be totally allowed.

I don't think someone should be allowed to bash the reviewer, tell them they can't tell the difference between HD and iPhone video, etc. That is abusive. But I think you should be allowed to disagree and point to places that give alternate reviews, so others can make a more informed decision.

If HDD doesn't want anyone posting anything contradicting to their reviews, then they shouldn't allow discussion of the review. Post the review and lock the thread and don't allow discussion. But then that would be bad for click revenue wouldn't it? Just like reproducing someone else's news (in enough detail that I don't need to link out to get the meat of the article) takes click revenue away from engadget, video business, etc. But HDD is fine with that... pot meet kettle.

[project-blu]

instead of (insert link here), you could easily say a name. it's not like that's difficult, and is much easier, ky.

pot and kettle aren't applying here, as when mike links to a random article for an article, they aren't competition. we're giving them hits. when WE cover a movie, which is one of our most read features, then other sites WOULD be.

we're still working something out. this thread is currently a "hey there was a policy, it is currently under review so we can ensure the best for readers and staff alike" notification, not a policy in and of itself.

[KYThrill]

Originally Posted by project-blu

instead of (insert link here), you could easily say a name. it's not like that's difficult, and is much easier, ky.

pot and kettle aren't applying here, as when mike links to a random article for an article, they aren't competition. we're giving them hits. when WE cover a movie, which is one of our most read features, then other sites WOULD be.

we're still working something out. this thread is currently a "hey there was a policy, it is currently under review so we can ensure the best for readers and staff alike" notification, not a policy in and of itself.

I personally don't link out, but I am opposed to policies that oppose it. I didn't insert a link, because I don't link out, and I don't remember where to find the link from the UK review I read that summed up my feelings on Gremlins, even if I did.

I disagree. You are competition for the very sites you cop your news from. I rarely ever follow up with the full article unless it is some aspect of HD that I am greatly interested in. Everything else, HDD's summary is all I read. And then when I go to Engadget, or even Google news, and I see that same article again, I skip it. So HDD stole a click from another site. That makes you competition.

There is also no policy (or no enforcement of it if there is), of people quoting entire news articles and then giving a link out at the end. Everyone just reads all the quoted material and have no need to link out. That is a slam dunk that the HDD site is robbing clicks from the source site. Probably dozens of clicks robbed every time HDD allows that to occur. Meanwhile HDD profits from all the traffic that results from that rob.

I'm sure you do drive some traffic, but you also rob some as well. I have no idea (and I doubt HDD does either) of whether the net effect is positive or negative.

Also, why isn't HDD getting upset that people are posting links on other message boards driving traffic to HDD's site? Basically what I hear you saying is that it would be fine for people to link out HDD on other sites and drive traffic here, but the same policies on other sites that would allow that, are considered against the rules here. You are pro link out, as long as it isn't on your own site. Again pot meet kettle. It's a double standard. You want all the traffic coming in you can get and anyway you can get it, including link outs on other sites to HDD.

[ragebot]

Originally Posted by KYThrill

Second, shouldn't people be allowed to disagree with a review? Just as a hypothetical, let's say HDD reviews Gremlins (which they did). Now, some people will agree with it exactly, others will think HDD was too harsh, and others will think HDD wasn't harsh enough (where I stand).

I think one of the problems is that there have been way too many times when trollish posters have engaged in hateful bad-faith retoric. The HDD staff are trying to clean up the forums and make them civilized. I can't say I blame them.

[GizmoDVD]

Any update to this rule?

[Arkadin]

yeah it would be nice to get the final policy decided regarding this so people that want to can start making new threads without having to worry about the links being deleted later.
I mean I would think that HDD has now had plenty of time to decide what the policy will be.
not really sure what the delay is, but it would be nice to get this issue finally put to rest so that one can feel comfortable making threads without having to worry about somebody on staff having some sort of problem for whatever reason.
this whole thing continues to drag down HDD imo because there seems to be no final resolution.

[AV_Integrated]

There is final resolutin coming shortly, instead of jumping ahead and making it policy without mods/staff in agreement I would like to make sure that everyone is on the same page and that we have a defined policy.

I can say that I believe the one thing which is guaranteed is that a simple post with just a link and no discussion to go along with it will be considered site pimping instead of discussion of a subject. Links aren't discussions, which is what the forums encourage.

But, it doesn't look like it will be a policy of censoring links at this time either.

A statement (final) will be made here, and likely in the Blu-ray forums as well.

[Arkadin]

thanks for that update.
nice to know that a resolution is near.

[Geonosis]

Exactly, and no on link censorsing. It will be a fair policy.

[project-blu]

lol, super mod badges. how cute, geo!

here's hoping, that no matter what, people will not complain about what policy is put into place. sometimes things change, and we just have to roll w/ it.