questionswhat's the etiquette on posting deals with…

vote-for10vote-against
vote-for21vote-against

NOT ALLOWED - staff will remove them

be back as soon as I find a staff quote...

EDIT: found one from the HHIC- head honcho in charge

vote-for10vote-against

@theoneill555 strikes again. Clearly, they have not read your FAQ. :)

And not that it really matters, but I agree with the policy. Shotgunning referral deals is just wrong.

vote-for6vote-against

@okham: I think I have been hanging around here way too long.

vote-for6vote-against

@theoneill555: Nah, we wouldn't know what to do without you and @shrdlu. You keep us in line, along with the mods :)

vote-for5vote-against

@okham: Thanks. Everything I learned came from the MASTER (AKA shrdlu) :)

vote-for6vote-against

@theoneill555 and @okham: There are a long, long list of people who attempted to do right, and to be helpful and useful. My username is just easier to remember, is all. I am deathly tired of downvoting, but it's clear that it's here to stay. I remain amazed that I have a black triangle. I visit the site, and check to see whether dearest @faughtey has posted a deal, or @brutherford, or @thunderthighs.

{I wonder when people decided to apply the term "mods" as though everyone on staff was a moderator?}

It makes me sad when people who are merely asking for help, no matter how misguided, consistently get voted down, and questions that seem like (I'm dating myself, here) cocktail fodder are voted up, and everyone rushes to comment.

Oh, well. Just ignore me.

In other news, I'm happy to see a former Googleite agrees with me about Der GOOG.

http://blogs.msdn.com/b/jw_on_tech/archive/2012/03/13/why-i-left-google.aspx

vote-for4vote-against

@adam113089: Your question is disingenuous. You asked what is the etiquette, but your comments make it plain you know what the rule/etiquette is and just wanted to elicit opinions about it.

You've been around long enough to know the answer to this question has nothing to do with what other wooters thing about it and everything to do with what the rule about referrals is.

They're inappropriate and will be deleted by staff. I'm in full agreement with that. I expect to find posts here that other wooters think are good deals, and I'm not interested in reading through deals that are here only because someone hopes to profit from this site.

vote-for3vote-against

@shrdlu: "In other news, I'm happy to see a former Googleite agrees with me about Der GOOG."

I read that article the other day and found myself doing the "usenet nod" thing, accompanied by bursts of "yes!" comments aloud. My only Google use has been you tube, google maps, and the primary search engine. I've pulled every findable bit of info about me off their sites, and I no longer sign into anything. Google has become Evul, and I view it now with great wariness.

Still, I'm sad that the Google Whittaker (and undoubtedly hundreds of others) enjoyed and flourished in has been killed off. It was nice to think there was still one large company that could survive being what it started out to be. Pity, that.

vote-for4vote-against

@shrdlu: {I wonder when people decided to apply the term "mods" as though everyone on staff was a moderator?}

Guilty. I guess I'm used to seeing the staff mostly here in forums, so I default to mods. Didn't mean to denigrate anyone's positions. I'll tuck that one away with accidentally referring to a female as a male. Ah, the joys of internet chat. :)

vote-for2vote-against

@magic cave: Maybe my wording wasn't the best, but I didn't actually know there was a rule against it. I figured it was one of those things that people either liked or didn't like, but there wasn't a set rule on. It's hard to be sure what the official "rules" are sometimes, and what's just considered in poor taste. I know it's been beaten to death before in other questions, but some kind of comprehensive rules list in the faq would be nice.

And as far as me not really having a problem with people using referral codes, I just figure if it's a good deal and people like it, it will get up voted and go popular and if it's just someone trying to profit from the site, it will get down voted and no one will think twice about it. But now that I know the official rule, I will be sure to never do it, and tattle on any that I come across.

vote-for4vote-against

@okham: Not really directed at you. You were just handy, and got caught in the cross fire. There are some members of staff who only moderate, but I believe they are over on the main sites. I think that everyone directly associated with Deals wears multiple hats. Many people who started out as deal hunters are mostly doing heavy lifting behind the scenes nowadays. @loosecannon67 (so named because that's the level of reputation he's comfortable with), and @wootfast (a well known anorexic, hence the chosen appellation of Woot Fast) post a deal or two, now and then, but nothing like in the early days.

The gentle @wootmango22 (typographical error on her name, since she loves to tango) and the elegant @hizzo87 round out the early Deal hunter set. None of them post in the way they used to...

Okay, now I'm just entertaining myself with invocations. I'm going to quit before I get myself in trouble.

vote-for3vote-against

@magic cave: For the sake of completion, and to quote a friend of mine:

Also quickly "out" upon Page's recent apotheosis (after booting
Eric Schmidt) is Jonathan Rosenberg, another adult.

Pity. I'm also switching away from Amazon's awful interface, which I explained at length in an email to them. They just stepped in it for the last time, as far as I'm concerned. I'll still buy the Kindle book now and then, but until they give me back the old interface, I'm spending my money elsewhere.