Skip to Content

Paid links in Signatures - New VHR Project

Tell us what we can do better, need to clear the air, voice your concern or provide feedback about the forum
User avatar
PRWIN
Posts: 429
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 11:37 am

Re: Paid links in Signatures - New VHR Project

Unread post by PRWIN » Thu Mar 13, 2014 4:23 pm

DinkyBird wrote:Hi PRWIN

PRWIN wrote:Can a web site address be included on a photo as the photo is already a promotion tool for sanparks as per a copyright signature ...

No. You cannot included a website address on your photo. You obviously may copyright your photo, and protect your intellectual property as you are doing now by using your name "2014 PR Winnan", but not by using your website address on photos posted here on these forums.

Please see Rule # 17:
17. You may not use any part of these forums to establish, promote, maintain or provide, or assist in establishing, promoting, maintaining or providing your own commercial services.


Should you wish to advertise your photo website, please see the first post on this topic as to how to go about this.


I do not understand how one can be allowed and not the other, :hmz: if you google my name you will still come out at my web pagers and even more sights where I advertise my photo's for commercial gain. :shock: so what's the difference if I place a signature on the photo just giving my web page address. It is not a direct link to the sight and that sight is to show my photo's only and does not break rule #17

So actually what you saying is that you cannot even put your name on a photo as you are breaking the rule as a person can google you and still come out by a web site you have which fall's into Rule #17

User avatar
PRWIN
Posts: 429
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 11:37 am

Re: Paid links in Signatures - New VHR Project

Unread post by PRWIN » Fri Mar 14, 2014 10:39 am

Thank you MATTHYS for the reply but does not answer the question asked in the quote below

MATTHYS wrote:Dear Imax, PRWIN, DrPhil, Arks and all other valued 'mites.

There seems to be a misunderstanding about this new project.

Advertising on the forums and linking to personal and commercial websites have always been against the forum rules and this will remain so. Nothing is being taken away from any of us.
This new project is offering all of us an opportunity to advertise and have links, but in a controlled way, within the rules and doing so at a nominal fee.

The funds raised via this project will go to the SANParks VHRs and I know that where these funds will be applied will meet with your approval. Please see the Chairperson's Annual Report : 2013 - SHR Virtual Region.
PRWIN wrote:
DinkyBird wrote:Hi PRWIN

PRWIN wrote:Can a web site address be included on a photo as the photo is already a promotion tool for sanparks as per a copyright signature ...

No. You cannot included a website address on your photo. You obviously may copyright your photo, and protect your intellectual property as you are doing now by using your name "2014 PR Winnan", but not by using your website address on photos posted here on these forums.

Please see Rule # 17:
17. You may not use any part of these forums to establish, promote, maintain or provide, or assist in establishing, promoting, maintaining or providing your own commercial services.


Should you wish to advertise your photo website, please see the first post on this topic as to how to go about this.


I do not understand how one can be allowed and not the other, :hmz: if you google my name you will still come out at my web pagers and even more sights where I advertise my photo's for commercial gain. :shock: so what's the difference if I place a signature on the photo just giving my web page address. It is not a direct link to the sight and that sight is to show my photo's only and does not break rule #17

So actually what you saying is that you cannot even put your name on a photo as you are breaking the rule as a person can google you and still come out by a web site you have which fall's into Rule #17


According to the above you are breaking the rule by just putting your name on the photo as that is also a link to your web site if googled, so if you place a website signature or your name that is not a direct link to a site you are breaking the rule under rule no 5(5. The link may not be promoted or included in posts.)Your name is a link if googled sorry

User avatar
Imax
Senior Virtual Ranger
Senior Virtual Ranger
Posts: 985
Joined: Thu Jun 12, 2008 11:54 am
Location: In Limbo

Re: Paid links in Signatures - New VHR Project

Unread post by Imax » Fri Mar 14, 2014 11:59 pm

MATTHYS wrote:Nothing is being taken away from any of us.



I beg to differ, as already you have two people who will no longer share photos on the forum, as once again, I am not changing my watermarks and protection of my photos for one websites bureaucratic rules.

As this rule is enforced more photographers will stop contributing, thus its the whole forum in the end that has something being taken away.

Just as a matter of interest, the links have been removed, when are all the photos with links or names to be purged off the forum?

User avatar
Son godin
Virtual Ranger
Virtual Ranger
Posts: 1709
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2010 9:03 pm
Location: Trichardt, MP

Re: Paid links in Signatures - New VHR Project

Unread post by Son godin » Sat Mar 15, 2014 8:42 am

stevenjm wrote:Hi forumites / moddies,

I have run the process to remove all external links that do not have sanparks.org in them, there were some with mixed external urls and sanparks.org - these have also been removed.

In total only 132 signatures were removed.

Thanks


Stevenjm,

Are you going to remove links from posts as well and signatures that are not links, but hidden links, because the author just took out www. and left the name of his blog or website. To open these hidden links you only require one step and that is Google search.

I've noted by only browsing a few posts that active and hidden link in signatures are still visible, as well as links in post. The action to remove signature links are not fair if you don't apply it for each and every post and photo's included. What about links inside Youtube videos as well. Are you going to scrutinize each and every post and video. I see that there are many loop holes and only those that were honest and wanted to share a few non-commercial blogs are affected by the signature links being removed.

How will I know that a signature link is legal and been paid for? The fact that only 132 links were removed I suppose it will be easy to have a sticky page showing the links of the few that did pay.

Posting on SANPark Facebook page allows one to add a link and your FB name in itself is a link to website info , so why was the decision taken to alienate people from the forum, while another internet media allows the use of these links. The answer is that sharing links on Facebook can't be blocked and have no impact on SANParks, beside helping to promote the parks. The very same applies for the forum and no difference should be in rules between posting here and on Facebook as long as you not advertising a product. By just posting a photo with your name on you are in fact advertising your work. Now that links to photographic sites on photos or in signatures need to be paid for, posting photos with the photographers names should not be allowed as well, unless the poster also pays to post his/her photos.
Trip Reports - Painted, spotted and striped animals of the Koppies, TT of Three Arid Parks near Namibia in April 2015

User avatar
Imax
Senior Virtual Ranger
Senior Virtual Ranger
Posts: 985
Joined: Thu Jun 12, 2008 11:54 am
Location: In Limbo

Re: Paid links in Signatures - New VHR Project

Unread post by Imax » Sat Mar 15, 2014 9:28 am

well said, Son godin :clap: :clap:

User avatar
saraf
Distinguished Virtual Ranger
Distinguished Virtual Ranger
Posts: 7517
Joined: Sun Jan 16, 2005 3:19 pm
Location: Portsmouth, England

Re: Paid links in Signatures - New VHR Project

Unread post by saraf » Sat Mar 15, 2014 10:53 am

According to the above you are breaking the rule by just putting your name on the photo as that is also a link to your web site if googled, so if you place a website signature or your name that is not a direct link to a site you are breaking the rule under rule no 5(5. The link may not be promoted or included in posts.)Your name is a link if googled sorry.


@PRWIN. The rule you have highlighted specifically mentions a link not a name and your interpretation is not one we will be using, now or in the future. Our aim here is to attain a happy medium were people can advertise without spamming other members. We do not ask people to remove their name or other copyright watermarks, other than a website address, and we never will. As stated by Dinky Bird above you are currently compliant.

@Imax. We are really sorry you feel like this.

@Son Godin. I will refer you to the reply made above, we do not interpret a name as a link. I'll pass on your technical questions to Steven and the rest is Moderator policy and not under discussion.
Want to say Thank You or Well Done to a fellow 'mite? Why not nominate them for a Kudu?

User avatar
Son godin
Virtual Ranger
Virtual Ranger
Posts: 1709
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2010 9:03 pm
Location: Trichardt, MP

Re: Paid links in Signatures - New VHR Project

Unread post by Son godin » Sat Mar 15, 2014 1:29 pm

Hi Saraf,

What I understood from the above post from moderators is that the following posting of photos are allowed:

Allowed to post Thumbnail:

Image

The following photo is not allowed due to the link printed on the photo but not a link that can be open on the forum page:

Image

If you did open the thumbnail of the photo that you do allow to be posted on the forum, you will get a link to the photographer's website, which means that the first photo actually have an indirect link, while with the second one that you do not allow, you cannot find the website without googling the name.

Is it then correct that the one post with no link cannot be used while the other one is fine because you cannot see the website when only viewing the SANParks forum page. :hmz:

I've seen many of these type of posting being done during the past few days and just wonder to what extend do those mite spam if you call a website name on a photo the same as spamming. Are you going to remove those post then?
Trip Reports - Painted, spotted and striped animals of the Koppies, TT of Three Arid Parks near Namibia in April 2015

User avatar
Stark
Virtual Ranger
Virtual Ranger
Posts: 1985
Joined: Mon May 26, 2008 1:52 am
Location: Arizona, USA

Re: Paid links in Signatures - New VHR Project

Unread post by Stark » Sat Mar 15, 2014 9:37 pm

Are we making this a bit more complex than it needs to be? Success will be measured by the # of paid links, while taking into account a share of customer dissatisfaction with the new rule.

I can see why some folks are frustrated, but this is one of, and probably the smallest, social media tool in the SANParks toolbox. Do what I do - utilize one of the other options/alternatives.
"Smooth seas do not make skillful sailors." West African Proverb
Kruger Bound in May!
6-8 Berg-en-dal
9-11 Lower Sabie
12-14 Satara
15-17 Letaba
18-20 Tamboti
21-22 Skukuza

User avatar
Imax
Senior Virtual Ranger
Senior Virtual Ranger
Posts: 985
Joined: Thu Jun 12, 2008 11:54 am
Location: In Limbo

Re: Paid links in Signatures - New VHR Project

Unread post by Imax » Sat Mar 15, 2014 9:56 pm

Sorry Sparks, but no we are not making it more complex than needed. So often on this forum are people reminded that adherence to the rules are a non-negotiable, wether park rules or forum rules.

At present I find the rule on this very ambiguous as this extends beyond just a link in a signature. Adding to Son Godin what is allowed with photos? I link from Flickr, but this is a commercial website and linking to it is advertising them, IMHO.

The standard BBcode link that Flickr provide contains a number of elements, what is allowed and what not:

Image
Cape Teal, Paarl, December 2013 by roelofvdb, on Flickr

1. Link back to Flickr via the photo url
2. My name in the text linking to my Flickr profile
3. "on Flickr"?

Obviously the website in my watermark is not allowed,even though the photo links to flickr and not to my site. But now is flickr allowed but my site not? A double standard?

User avatar
Stark
Virtual Ranger
Virtual Ranger
Posts: 1985
Joined: Mon May 26, 2008 1:52 am
Location: Arizona, USA

Re: Paid links in Signatures - New VHR Project

Unread post by Stark » Sat Mar 15, 2014 10:14 pm

I get what you're saying, but I'm not Sparks. :)

My post was to point out that I have been much happier when it finally hammered home that the rules here often are used in ways I disagree with integrity-wise, and that I was "free to see other channels and sites" to get the connection I used to get here exclusively. If this is the straw that breaks your back, I get it. But I don't think forum management will change.
"Smooth seas do not make skillful sailors." West African Proverb
Kruger Bound in May!
6-8 Berg-en-dal
9-11 Lower Sabie
12-14 Satara
15-17 Letaba
18-20 Tamboti
21-22 Skukuza

User avatar
JenB
Distinguished Virtual Ranger
Distinguished Virtual Ranger
Posts: 17062
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2007 1:41 pm
Location: Johannesburg - where they cut down trees and name streets after them.

Re: Paid links in Signatures - New VHR Project

Unread post by JenB » Sun Mar 16, 2014 3:06 am

Guys, we have our wires crossed. :wink:

This project only relates to links in signatures.
Links and watermarks on photos are not managed by the VHR's. It is still subject to the forum rules to be managed by the moderators.

Photographers for instance could never post links in their signatures to their sites if they were in the business of selling photos. Some did and got away with it, others were pulled up which resulted in grey areas as far as the rules were concerned.

Generally speaking the most members links don't do much harm but if it's a free for all the forum might be overrun by commercial advertising. The question came up about how members could be accommodated without risking our neat and tidy forum becoming a rolling billboard.

One also needs to realize that SANParks has to protect their business interests so this had to be controlled in some way particularly regarding the sort of commercial links that could be allowed.

This project would level the playing field for all and would also result in fund raiser to benefit our parks. It seems like a fair solution?
This forum has a high Google rating so the benefit should flow both ways.

Son godin wrote:I've noted by only browsing a few posts that active and hidden link in signatures are still visible, as well as links in post.

Son godin, you are perfectly correct.
Links in signatures should be removed across the board.

Particularly commercial links in posts were never allowed. I cannot speak on behalf of the mods but I'm sure that they will not rip the pond out from under the duck when it comes to links in posts. I'm sure if a link is posted and it is in content with the post, it will not be removed without good reason. If a member repeats a link in every post or most posts, it has always and will still be seen a spam.

Please help us clean up the forum by reporting such posts and the moderators will make sure to have it removed?
The removal process was done by means of a software run which could only recognize proper links.

Should you apply for a paid (or free) link in your signature, a code will be given to you which should be posted with the link in your signature. That will signal to all that you may post the link with the blessing of the mods and SANParks.

Hope that clears up a few questions. :)
"Until one has loved an animal, a part of one's soul remains unawakened." ~ Anatole France

User avatar
Son godin
Virtual Ranger
Virtual Ranger
Posts: 1709
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2010 9:03 pm
Location: Trichardt, MP

Re: Paid links in Signatures - New VHR Project

Unread post by Son godin » Sun Mar 16, 2014 8:11 am

JenB,

Its clear with me on the signature links, but what I understand of post from moderators is that photo signature links are not allowed even if it is a non-commercial site. See quotes from mods below:

MATTHYS wrote:Dear Imax, PRWIN, DrPhil, Arks and all other valued 'mites.

There seems to be a misunderstanding about this new project.

Advertising on the forums and linking to personal and commercial websites have always been against the forum rules and this will remain so. Nothing is being taken away from any of us.
This new project is offering all of us an opportunity to advertise and have links, but in a controlled way, within the rules and doing so at a nominal fee.


DinkyBird wrote:Hi PRWIN

PRWIN wrote:Can a web site address be included on a photo as the photo is already a promotion tool for sanparks as per a copyright signature ...

No. You cannot included a website address on your photo. You obviously may copyright your photo, and protect your intellectual property as you are doing now by using your name "2014 PR Winnan", but not by using your website address on photos posted here on these forums.

Please see Rule # 17:
17. You may not use any part of these forums to establish, promote, maintain or provide, or assist in establishing, promoting, maintaining or providing your own commercial services.


Should you wish to advertise your photo website, please see the first post on this topic as to how to go about this.


The problem with this rule is that it is not well managed by moderators as can be seen from TT where the poster added a website on the photo and moderators comment on photos but do not ask the poster to change the photos.

Even if this rule is applied it is still easy to add a link as demonstrated by myself and Imax. My question is why is there such a rule if it is impossible to control then.

What I understood so far is no photos with web sites on allowed except the photographers name. Links is fine via any other commercial site as long as it is not on the photo. :doh:
Trip Reports - Painted, spotted and striped animals of the Koppies, TT of Three Arid Parks near Namibia in April 2015

User avatar
JenB
Distinguished Virtual Ranger
Distinguished Virtual Ranger
Posts: 17062
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2007 1:41 pm
Location: Johannesburg - where they cut down trees and name streets after them.

Re: Paid links in Signatures - New VHR Project

Unread post by JenB » Sun Mar 16, 2014 8:22 am

I'm sorry but I cannot comment on any links except those covered by this project.
"Until one has loved an animal, a part of one's soul remains unawakened." ~ Anatole France

User avatar
PRWIN
Posts: 429
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 11:37 am

Re: Paid links in Signatures - New VHR Project

Unread post by PRWIN » Wed Mar 19, 2014 3:27 pm

squirrel_asc wrote:So we may not advertise commercial services - fine. But what if you're an amateur/hobbyist? Are you then allowed to have your photos link to your photo website? (It's not commercial - just a gallery/blog)


JenB wrote:
squirrel_asc wrote:So we may not advertise commercial services - fine. But what if you're an amateur/hobbyist? Are you then allowed to have your photos link to your photo website? (It's not commercial - just a gallery/blog)

Yes, at a reduced fee as per the first post. :thumbs_up:


:big_eyes: :big_eyes: :hmz: Do I laugh ,cry or hold my head in my hands :? What is a photo website. It is a place where you place your photo's on the web for others to see like photobucket, flickr, and so on. What I now understand is that you will have to pay a fee to place photo's on the forum in a TR as you are using a photo website :big_eyes:

User avatar
DrPhil
Posts: 258
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2011 10:29 am

Re: Paid links in Signatures - New VHR Project

Unread post by DrPhil » Wed Mar 19, 2014 3:43 pm

PRWIN wrote:
:big_eyes: :big_eyes: :hmz: Do I laugh ,cry or hold my head in my hands :? What is a photo website. It is a place where you place your photo's on the web for others to see like photobucket, flickr, and so on. What I now understand is that you will have to pay a fee to place photo's on the forum in a TR as you are using a photo website :big_eyes:


Getting closer to banning cameras in all parks unless visitors pays extra to take it in. :cam: Maybe putting copyright burnmarkings on all animals to force people to pay to use their own photos. :wall:
Not in Kruger.... Busy planning the next trip...


Return to “Chill Room ”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

Webcam Highlights

Addo
Submitted by Ton&Herma at 13:10:19
orpen
Submitted by Wildspirit at 06:17:18
satara
Submitted by Tazrules229 at 23:39:55
nossob
Submitted by Mischief at 02:12:14