2017-02-15 FINAL REVIEW: user has made three more links (four posts) linking content he has authored since last review; submsn archive: https://archive.is/B41bD.
Final Reminder @trentlapinski - a review of your submission history again reveals that the majority of your posts are to your authored original content; it is clear from the FAQ guidelines that everyone is asked to submit a variety of content, to a ratio of 5 Original Content links for every 10 total links to Voat. We look forward to your following our guidelines; thank you.
Once again, I don't agree with your assessment. I am not spamming a blog, these are just ideas, tech news, and political analysis.
There is no logical reason why I have to have a submission tax, and be forced to use Voat in a specific manor.
Please get me in touch with whoever created this rule so I can speak to them about this.
If you delete my account I will fight this and contact the founders of Voat. I am posting under my real name, my submission history is public, and again I'm just spreading ideas. I am not monetizing this, nor do I have any intention to make money from my writing. If people don't like what I have to say they can downvote me. I am creating high value content that Voat readers enjoy reading, and I have over 20,000 followers on social media.
2017-01-31 Review: user has made three posts since rules message of 01-11-17; one linking to BBC, and two more to a single article he authored and published on Medium.com. Continue Watch|Hold to see if user will comply with User Content guidelines.
*Member for: 12 months (joined on: 1/14/2016) | This user has so far shared a total of 37 links, started a total of 2 discussions and submitted a total of 95 comments.
Attention Please and Hello @trentlapinski - your account has been posted here with a concern that there is the appearance of spam. Some users appear to be enjoying your content so I wanted to reach out to you here, and to also let you know that admins have begun to enforce the content submission rules here on Voat.
A review of your submission history shows that most/all your links were to domains with which you appear to be significantly associated. Please note from Voat's FAQ's:
Can I submit links to sites I operate?
Submitting only links to sites you operate (or are associated with), without submitting other, unrelated links, is considered spamming. If you submit niche content (for example gaming videos from your own YouTube channel), you should create your own subverse and submit the content only to that subverse. If majority of the links you submit are to sites you are associated with, your domains may be globally banned from Voat. To be on the safe side, if you submit 10 links to various subverses on Voat, at most 5 of the 10 submitted links may be to the sites you are associated with.
It is important that we all comply with Voat's rules. Should you choose not to, some of the other rules here state that your account may be banned by the site Admins. I'm happy to provide you with some links to these, or you may find them at the bottom of every page in the FAQ and User Agreement. Please consider this to be the only rules reminder message you will likely receive. Voat is designed and supported for Personal Use Only.
Please let me know of your understanding by replying here or with any questions you may have; thank you.
I don't own Hackernoon, or Medium. They're both publishing sites, and I don't believe either of them display advertising. They're mostly just political analysis pieces I write for fun, and occasional tech posts.
I don't really see the point of this rule, it doesn't serve me or the community. Why should I have to post low quality content equally to post my own high value content? Isn't the point of the voting system to let people decide what they want to read? If no one upvotes my content then fine. If they do, then I'm obviously creating value for them.
In theory, you're actually asking that I start spamming when that isn't my intention. If the only way I can continue to post my own high value content is to start posting other people's low quality content that contain advertising isn't that worse?
My only intentions are to educate people, create high value discussion, and inform others of world events. I'm not making money doing this.
Just trying to help people, if rules exist that prevent me from being able to do that I will either be forced to leave and stop creating value for others, or risk getting other people's websites banned which makes little sense.
Can I please have the contact information for the person who created this rule? I'd love to discuss it with them, and see if we cannot figure out a better solution.
The rule has always existed on the site, but only recently has it begun to be enforced; the rule was updated at the first of the year to allow for additional submission of original content. While you may not own or have an interest in the domains, the articles are all yours, which then makes your account then possibly subject to a ban.
Your articles are informative and many have obviously enjoyed your content, but hosting your articles isn't what Voat was designed to do. No one wants you to post anything you don't want to, but only posting your content, regardless of the domain used, isn't fair either; all users to the site are equally subject to this guideline.
All of the rule/guidelines are accessible at the sidebar or at the links found on the bottom of the page.
Voat isn't hosting anything, Voat is an aggregator of content. If I'm not allowed to submit high value content because there is a rule I must also post low value content 50% of the time that in itself is not fair to both me and the community who has to suffer through low value content to get my high value content.
Posting high value content should be the purpose and intention of Voat. The source shouldn't matter if the value of the content is provided and transparent. I am not misleading anyone here, or making money from any of this, and my account isn't even anonymous. I'm simply trying to inform and help people. Any rule that exists that prevents people from informing and helping others is a bad rule.
Again, who made this rule and why? What is the intention of the rule? Who can I speak to about this? This rule has the potential to chase away many content creators and turn this site into another Reddit which is nothing but corporate content.
Clearly @Disappointed does not understand what Medium is. Medium is a publishing platform where anyone can submit content. They allow for custom domains of certain publishers which have their own following such as Hackernoon and Extranewsfeed. I do not own Medium, Hacerknoon, or Extanewfeed. Furthermore, my account isn't even anonymous and I'm not hiding anything, I'm merely a content creator submitting high value content to Voat, and Medium (mostly for fun and to help others).
Both Medium, and any of the publishers on Medium do not display advertising, the whole point of the platform is to create high value content for others. I was invited to publish on both Hacernoon, and Extranewsfeed to syndicate my content to larger audiences because their editors liked my content.
I am not making money by doing this, and they are not making money by doing this. This fact alone means I am not spamming as there is no financial incentive for me or the websites that I'm linking to unlike most of the crap posted on this site.
As for the link in question, yes there are links to the startups I'm working on in my profile, and there is a single link at the end of this article linking to free automation software for developers to try. Once again, I'm not making money from any of this, and the intention of the article was to teach people how automation works.
I'm not doing anything shady here, and I'm being extremely transparent, and only submitting high value content that is clearly getting upvotes and starting authentic conversations on this site.
It use to be that you needed 100 engineers and millions of dollars to be able to scale a software company successfully. However, thanks to container automation solutions like the one I’m working on, Stratus5 Cloudware, that is no longer true.
Then stop mentioning your product in the articles you link to. Just because you wrap words around that product placement doesn't mean its not an advertisement.
The article in question is about automation, that's the field I work in. Why shouldn't I be allowed to mention the free automation solution I'm working on in an article about automation solutions?
The article creates plenty of value for the reader, and there is nothing forcing anyone to use my software or read my articles. Even if they do use my software it is free to try, and we don't charge unless someone uses it to make money, and even then we only take a small fee to cover our costs.
Spam is when you're promoting a product or service that makes the person spamming money. There's a financial incentive. That's not what I'm doing, I'm writing about new concepts and new ways of doing things technically and trying to educate people on the solutions available presently and in the future. I reference what I'm working on as one of those potential solutions but it isn't for financial gain, it's merely an example of what technology is available.
You're simply on a witch hunt and clearly don't even understand what Medium is, or how it works. Let alone the content of my article.
Just because you don't understand what I'm talking about doesn't mean it's spam.
Links are not by default spam. Again, the content of my articles provides value to the reader, and either informs them or educates them. That is what matters and distinguishing me from spam. Context matters. I am not forcing a product or advertising upon them.
Disappointed ago
https://archive.is/KP9c2
Cynabuns ago
2017-02-15 FINAL REVIEW: user has made three more links (four posts) linking content he has authored since last review; submsn archive: https://archive.is/B41bD.
Final Reminder @trentlapinski - a review of your submission history again reveals that the majority of your posts are to your authored original content; it is clear from the FAQ guidelines that everyone is asked to submit a variety of content, to a ratio of 5 Original Content links for every 10 total links to Voat. We look forward to your following our guidelines; thank you.
trentlapinski ago
Once again, I don't agree with your assessment. I am not spamming a blog, these are just ideas, tech news, and political analysis.
There is no logical reason why I have to have a submission tax, and be forced to use Voat in a specific manor.
Please get me in touch with whoever created this rule so I can speak to them about this.
If you delete my account I will fight this and contact the founders of Voat. I am posting under my real name, my submission history is public, and again I'm just spreading ideas. I am not monetizing this, nor do I have any intention to make money from my writing. If people don't like what I have to say they can downvote me. I am creating high value content that Voat readers enjoy reading, and I have over 20,000 followers on social media.
Stop punishing content creators.
Cynabuns ago
2017-01-31 Review: user has made three posts since rules message of 01-11-17; one linking to BBC, and two more to a single article he authored and published on Medium.com. Continue Watch|Hold to see if user will comply with User Content guidelines.
Fresh archive of user's subms'ns: https://archive.is/6cZ8E
Cynabuns ago
https://voat.co/user/trentlapinski | Domains: https://voat.co/domains/hackernoon.com & https://medium.com/@trentlapinski
*Member for: 12 months (joined on: 1/14/2016) | This user has so far shared a total of 37 links, started a total of 2 discussions and submitted a total of 95 comments.
Attention Please and Hello @trentlapinski - your account has been posted here with a concern that there is the appearance of spam. Some users appear to be enjoying your content so I wanted to reach out to you here, and to also let you know that admins have begun to enforce the content submission rules here on Voat.
A review of your submission history shows that most/all your links were to domains with which you appear to be significantly associated. Please note from Voat's FAQ's:
It is important that we all comply with Voat's rules. Should you choose not to, some of the other rules here state that your account may be banned by the site Admins. I'm happy to provide you with some links to these, or you may find them at the bottom of every page in the FAQ and User Agreement. Please consider this to be the only rules reminder message you will likely receive. Voat is designed and supported for Personal Use Only.
Please let me know of your understanding by replying here or with any questions you may have; thank you.
trentlapinski ago
When did this rule go into effect, and why?
I don't own Hackernoon, or Medium. They're both publishing sites, and I don't believe either of them display advertising. They're mostly just political analysis pieces I write for fun, and occasional tech posts.
I don't really see the point of this rule, it doesn't serve me or the community. Why should I have to post low quality content equally to post my own high value content? Isn't the point of the voting system to let people decide what they want to read? If no one upvotes my content then fine. If they do, then I'm obviously creating value for them.
In theory, you're actually asking that I start spamming when that isn't my intention. If the only way I can continue to post my own high value content is to start posting other people's low quality content that contain advertising isn't that worse?
My only intentions are to educate people, create high value discussion, and inform others of world events. I'm not making money doing this.
Just trying to help people, if rules exist that prevent me from being able to do that I will either be forced to leave and stop creating value for others, or risk getting other people's websites banned which makes little sense.
Can I please have the contact information for the person who created this rule? I'd love to discuss it with them, and see if we cannot figure out a better solution.
Cynabuns ago
The rule has always existed on the site, but only recently has it begun to be enforced; the rule was updated at the first of the year to allow for additional submission of original content. While you may not own or have an interest in the domains, the articles are all yours, which then makes your account then possibly subject to a ban.
Your articles are informative and many have obviously enjoyed your content, but hosting your articles isn't what Voat was designed to do. No one wants you to post anything you don't want to, but only posting your content, regardless of the domain used, isn't fair either; all users to the site are equally subject to this guideline.
All of the rule/guidelines are accessible at the sidebar or at the links found on the bottom of the page.
trentlapinski ago
Voat isn't hosting anything, Voat is an aggregator of content. If I'm not allowed to submit high value content because there is a rule I must also post low value content 50% of the time that in itself is not fair to both me and the community who has to suffer through low value content to get my high value content.
Posting high value content should be the purpose and intention of Voat. The source shouldn't matter if the value of the content is provided and transparent. I am not misleading anyone here, or making money from any of this, and my account isn't even anonymous. I'm simply trying to inform and help people. Any rule that exists that prevents people from informing and helping others is a bad rule.
Again, who made this rule and why? What is the intention of the rule? Who can I speak to about this? This rule has the potential to chase away many content creators and turn this site into another Reddit which is nothing but corporate content.
Disappointed ago
https://hackernoon.com/how-container-tech-like-docker-and-business-service-automation-will-monetize-the-cloud-5cbc5a85fe59
Article links to this product page and seems to exist to do so: https://stratus5.com/
Article has links back to other sites which he has linked and claims to own here:
https://extranewsfeed.com/in-depth-interview-cyber-security-consultant-trent-lapinski-rejects-russia-hacking-claims-8bdb4f034ffc#.bjry4dddx
in submissions to v/technology
Note the web logos are the same on each site.<--- This is the Medium logo forget this.trentlapinski ago
Clearly @Disappointed does not understand what Medium is. Medium is a publishing platform where anyone can submit content. They allow for custom domains of certain publishers which have their own following such as Hackernoon and Extranewsfeed. I do not own Medium, Hacerknoon, or Extanewfeed. Furthermore, my account isn't even anonymous and I'm not hiding anything, I'm merely a content creator submitting high value content to Voat, and Medium (mostly for fun and to help others).
Both Medium, and any of the publishers on Medium do not display advertising, the whole point of the platform is to create high value content for others. I was invited to publish on both Hacernoon, and Extranewsfeed to syndicate my content to larger audiences because their editors liked my content.
I am not making money by doing this, and they are not making money by doing this. This fact alone means I am not spamming as there is no financial incentive for me or the websites that I'm linking to unlike most of the crap posted on this site.
As for the link in question, yes there are links to the startups I'm working on in my profile, and there is a single link at the end of this article linking to free automation software for developers to try. Once again, I'm not making money from any of this, and the intention of the article was to teach people how automation works.
I'm not doing anything shady here, and I'm being extremely transparent, and only submitting high value content that is clearly getting upvotes and starting authentic conversations on this site.
Your accusations of spamming are wrong.
Disappointed ago
Then stop mentioning your product in the articles you link to. Just because you wrap words around that product placement doesn't mean its not an advertisement.
trentlapinski ago
The article in question is about automation, that's the field I work in. Why shouldn't I be allowed to mention the free automation solution I'm working on in an article about automation solutions?
The article creates plenty of value for the reader, and there is nothing forcing anyone to use my software or read my articles. Even if they do use my software it is free to try, and we don't charge unless someone uses it to make money, and even then we only take a small fee to cover our costs.
Spam is when you're promoting a product or service that makes the person spamming money. There's a financial incentive. That's not what I'm doing, I'm writing about new concepts and new ways of doing things technically and trying to educate people on the solutions available presently and in the future. I reference what I'm working on as one of those potential solutions but it isn't for financial gain, it's merely an example of what technology is available.
You're simply on a witch hunt and clearly don't even understand what Medium is, or how it works. Let alone the content of my article.
Just because you don't understand what I'm talking about doesn't mean it's spam.
Disappointed ago
This link back to your products is on every page of your medium articles. Your articles link back to you or your friends products.
trentlapinski ago
Links are not by default spam. Again, the content of my articles provides value to the reader, and either informs them or educates them. That is what matters and distinguishing me from spam. Context matters. I am not forcing a product or advertising upon them.
Cynabuns ago
Thx!