OzBargain 101: Lesson 3: Referral Links

neil on 22/03/2016 - 17:43
Last edited 05/04/2018 - 15:02

Updated

This guide is now out of date. Use this page

This is an often confusing and provocative subject. It’s also an area that moderators have spent a lot of time seeking feedback, changing the guidelines as well as creating mechanisms to assist the system.

The Basics

What is a referral link or code?

A referral link or code is something a company gives out to enable a customer to invite their friends. The company gains another customer, the existing customer earns a credit, and sometimes the new customer also gains credit. A win for all 3.

Example:

uberpic Uber offers a referral code and link that existing customers can give out to others. Both the referrer and referee will receive a promo ride up to $10 value.

What is an affiliate link and how is it different?

Affiliate links are similar to the above but instead of getting paid in credit, they pay out in real money. One example is Amazon, where they pay a commission from every sale. Affiliate links are what the majority of websites use to monetize their sites are are usually run by affiliate networks such as DGM, Commission Junction, LinkShare, etc.

Referrals on OzBargain

The original simplistic idea was that if a member posted a deal and the store has a referral system, then they are free to mention that link or code in the deal. But like any true bargain hunters, the temptation to push their referral links everywhere meant that the site needed to come up with guidelines which are to this day still evolving.

Do I need to have special permissions to post a referral link/code in a deal?

Due to numerous users signing up to SPAM their referral codes/links, only members who don’t have a P1, P2 or L plate against their name are permitted to put referral links or codes in their deals. You will be off your P plates 6 weeks after posting a deal.

OK, I’m ready to post a deal and would like to include a referral link. How do I do this?

  • Make sure the non-referral link (e.g. a clean link) is posted in the URL field.
  • Add your referral link to the bottom of the post with a note letting others know that it is a referral link. (NOT in the coupon code box, NOT in the title)
  • If you list a code that can’t be used in conjunction with a referral link, it is best NOT to include the link.
  • Please don’t change the price to factor in the referral. The deal should stand on its own.

Referral Deal Etiquette:

  • Do not mention ways to circumvent a sites referral rules - eg multiple sign ups.
  • Do not add your referral link to your deal post if it was posted more than 7 days ago.
  • Do not post referral links from a merchant, retailer or service provider different to the one for the main deal.
  • Either put your referral link at the end of the deal description or don't mention it at all - do not solicit referrals.

I have posted a deal and put the referral link in the description. Now what?

Your deal will now be marked with a R

deal

and the referral link will be made grey.

iherblink

I’d like to post another deal with a referral link. Can I?

Once you post a deal marked as a referral, you will be subject to posting limitations as follows:

  • Users are limited to 1 referral post (deal + forum) every 24 hours or 2 referral posts (deal + forum) every rolling week, however
  • Users that have posted referral deals that have low votes will be further limited. The vote average is calculated by taking the sum of (positive vote - negative vote) for each deal post, divided by the number of recent deals.
    • If the vote average across the recent deals is 0 or below, the user cannot submit referral posts until the vote average is corrected over time.
    • If the vote average across the recent deals is between 0 and 3, the user cannot submit referral posts for 2 weeks from the last post.
    • If the vote average across the recent deals is between 3 and 8, the user's limit is reduced to maximum 1 referral post per week.
    • Users who have posted good deals with referral links are rewarded - if the two most recent referral deals made the front page, the limit is increased to 3 posts per week.
  • Users who have reached their referral posting limit will see a warning on the deal submission page. If they continue to submit posts with referral links despite the warning, their account will be placed in the penalty bin.
  • Users who have exceeded their referral posting limit will not be able submit further posts.
  • Users who have reached or exceeded their referral posting limits will be able to see further information on the vote average/breakdown of posts in their post history page, visible to themselves and moderators only.

These are the same posting limits as a rep has.

Why are there posting limits for deals with referral links/codes?

The top priority of OzBargain is serving members with good deals. If you are posting good deals that have referral links, then you will likely not be affected the the posting limits. However, if you are posting bad deals with referral links, you will be limited. Moderators constantly monitor deals and if we see a store that continually has poor performing deals that have referral links, we may ban users from including referral links for that store.

Has OzBargain banned the posting of referral links for some stores?

Yes. One example: Referral links in Vinomofo deals have been banned. See discussion .

I saw a grey box in some deals mentioning referrals. What is that?

referral

Any user can add their referral link into OzBargain’s automated system. If you are not the deal poster, your link will be among other users in the random link section. This doesn't count as a referral post as this is an automated function.

How do I put my referral link into the system?

Go to My Account - Edit - Referrals.

What stores are in the automated system?
Amino Z Dropbox Naked Wines ShopandMint
Appsumo Etsy nitrous.io StackSocial
ArtsCow Giving Assistant Nova FM (Competition) The Home
Beat The Q GreenManGaming OFX Top Cashback
Belong Groupon OneDrive TransferWise
BitGold iHerb.com OZSALE Travel Pony
Catch Of The Day ING Direct Paula's Choice Uber
Cracka Wines Kleenheat Gas PricePal Vinomofo
Cudo Koding Ratesetter Vitacost
Delivery Hero LastPass Rebtel Wordery
Digital Ocean LivingSocial Australia ReShip.com

I’ve added my link to the referral system and posted a deal but it is not showing in the grey box.

The OP’s referral link only shows after 5 votes (Now 25 votes). This is ensure that only good deals are posted.

Will having my link in the automated system and posting a deal count as a referral post?

No. Since you aren’t mentioning the referral link or code, it doesn’t count as a referral post.

I noticed there are some stores that have wiki pages for referrals. What is that?

Only stores that provide a link can go into our automated referral system. For businesses that only give out codes or require other non-URL information, wiki pages are made. Feel free to add your information to any of the wiki pages.

See Wiki: List of Referral Codes & Links

OK. Deal description, automated system, wiki pages. Anywhere else?

Link In Deal Link In Post Content (Deal or Forum) In Comments Coupon Code Box
Affiliate Links Not allowed Not allowed Not allowed Not allowed
Referral Links Not allowed Allowed Not allowed Not allowed
Other Links Allowed Allowed Allowed Not allowed

That’s it. Referral links are not permitted in comments. You also shouldn’t link to your deal elsewhere on OzBargain if it is a marked as a referral post.

Can I post a deal that is about a store’s referral system?

  • You may post a deal that is for the retailer's referral system, under the basis the referee also earns credit and it has not been posted previously (unless it is a temporary offer that had previously expired) or is already included in the OzBargain referral system.

  • Referral links or codes are not permitted in deals that are for the retailer's referral system (As of March 2016). Create a Referral Wiki Page and add your link or code there. See the ZenMarket Referral Deal as an example.

  • In the case of long running referral only deals: All subsequent “announcements” about the referral program shouldn't be posted as new deals, including updates to the referral program. This does not include limited time referral only deals where the previous offer was expired/ended and is now being offered again. You may post a forum topic about any updates to a referral program (with a link to the referral wiki or referral system only).

  • Examples: (1) Airbnb update their refer a friend credit from $32 to $34. As this is a long running referral only deal, updates to the referral program should not be posted as a deal. (2) A Bank has a promotion for the month of April, sign up to a new account and both the referee and referrer receive $50. In July they have the same promotion again - this can be posted as a new deal as it is not a long running referral deal and the previous offer had expired/ended.

I've noticed some deals are marked as a referral but don't link to a referral but rather another site.

Third-party price comparison/tracking, cashback sites, blogs and product review website operators need to follow the Third-Party Website Operator deal posting guidelines. The same guidelines as referral links apply and should be mentioned at the bottom of the deal. Referral posting limits will equally apply.

Examples:

Fashionlane is a site that scrapes fashion retailers for price changes. The deal is for Van Heusen while Fashionlane is mentioned in the description.

Tightarse is the rep for Cashrewards however he posted a deal for Lenovo.

OK, but I've noticed a Cashrewards deal posted by Tightarse and he is marked as a rep.

That's right. Cashrewards is a unique situation in that it offers deals and also can be a supplementary bonus (cashback) to deals. So if the deal itself is a cashback, then the deal is linked directly to Cashrewards, and rep posting limits apply. If the deal is for another site, like Lenovo, and there also happens to be a cashback mentioned in the description, then it is marked as a referral.

So a rep for a company, a user who posts a referral link/code in a deal, and 3rd party sites are all restricted to the same posting limits?

Yes, that is correct. We want the focus on posting good deals.
voteup If the deal is popular, then that allows the user to post more deals.
votedown If the deal is not popular, then that restricts the user from posting.

Rep Posting Limits - Referral Posting Limits

So that is a very long summary of referrals. The guidelines always evolve but this is what currently works to ensure good quality deals are posted and users are able to add referral links.

With that said, we are always looking for feedback to improve OzBargain. In a couple of recent threads, there were some different (and very heated!) opinions on referrals. Basically the following camps:

  • People who don’t care either way (most users).
  • People who don’t care if there is a referral link as it doesn’t affect the deal.
  • People who do care if there is a referral link as there is a perception that the user is posting for referral credits (irregardless of whether the deal is voted popular or not).

I hope this summary at least explains the big picture of referrals. Referral deals make up a very small % of overall deals. Feel free to ask for any particular stats and I'll see if I can track them down.

Useful Links:

Deal Posting Guidelines: Referrals
Posting Referral Links
Referral Posting Limits)
List of Referral Codes and Links
User-Submitted Referral Code Updates (Updated March 2016)
OzBargain 101: Lesson 1: Commenting and Deal Formatting
OzBargain 101: Lesson 2: Tagging Deals and Forum Posts

Questions, comments, feedback?

Site Discussion

closed Comments

        • neil on 23/03/2016 - 15:49

          @pointless comment:

          See the comment. You stated you couldn't understand with the examples I gave you so I made it easier, with instructions + screenshots and used example of deals that you had posted. Again this is OzBargain 101, which explains things for users not familiar.

          Other OzBargain 101s where hopefully users can learn some things about how to use the site:

          OzBargain 101: Lesson 1: Commenting and Deal Formatting
          OzBargain 101: Lesson 2: Tagging Deals and Forum Posts

        • pointless martyr on 23/03/2016 - 15:50

          @neil: i find that to be condescending - again, my opinion so no True/False label please

        • neil on 23/03/2016 - 15:54

          @pointless comment:

          Fair enough, wasn't intended.

        • pointless martyr on 23/03/2016 - 15:56

          @neil: no hard feelings. :)

        • GameChanger on 23/03/2016 - 16:15

          @themob: Why are you not offering up some reasons?

          I had a look at your profile and your up voting of deals is unusually high, are you hiding any associations?

        • pointless martyr on 23/03/2016 - 16:30

          @themob: You keep dropping in and out of this thread to tell us all how little you care and to drop some personal abuse…i do hope you mean it when you say 'out'

          EDIT: he didnt

        • themob on 23/03/2016 - 16:32
          -1

          @GameChanger: Oh you're a gem. Not only are you now stalking people, you're accusing AND telling others how they should vote. I'll vote how I damn well like.

        • GameChanger on 23/03/2016 - 16:38

          @themob: Where have I stalked you? Please don't make false accusations.

          I have looked at publically available information and noticed an unusual pattern on your voting. You're a relatively new user and have an extremely high vote ratio and are commenting on a issue which wouldn't ordinary concern a new user. I am not telling you how to vote or accusing you of wrong doing, but I would like to know if you have any undisclosed associations on here? And why you're not providing constructive feedback instead of been on the defensive.

          Your defensive stance suggests there is something hidden.

        • Moderatorhamza23 on 23/03/2016 - 16:45

          Accusations either way are not appropriate, please keep discussions on topic and lets not get personal. If you have genuine concerns hit the report button and moderators can take care of it.

          Moving on….

        • themob on 23/03/2016 - 17:09
          -1

          @GameChanger: my only associations are with God almighty and Mick Gatto. I don't answer to you. And I'll now move on.

        • pointless martyr on 23/03/2016 - 17:56
          +1

          @themob: Did God give you a good dressing down when you called me a spinelss creature?

          In some ways Mick is an honorable man with measured responses amd a strict moral code.

          Judging by your petulant behviour on display, i think he would be close to severing ties with you

          as they say - God is forgiveness

          Mick, not so much

      • GameChanger on 23/03/2016 - 15:27

        Well that's disappointing to hear.

        Are you saying this thread was created just as a distraction and to make it feel like the community opinion is been heard?

        • pointless martyr on 23/03/2016 - 15:38

          No i dont think that…. I think that its a case of the majority the system is not broken so doesnt need fixing

          Many users are ignorant to such issues or simply apathetic - its a symptom of society in general is suppose.

          I believe ozbargain will make chages - but only on an issue that has been pushed by a significant user proportion

          As i said above, this thread may serve nothing more than give a handful of site visiters a breakdown on numbers, and question motives of posters who work so tirelessly for the good of the community …and thats a good thing

        • neil on 23/03/2016 - 15:43

          The thread was created as it was from our agenda from last month's meeting due to the new guidelines for 3rd party referrals. However it fit in with issues that some users were making in a couple of Groupon posts so I suggested users should comment when this was posted.

          Are you saying this thread was created just as a distraction and to make it feel like the community opinion is been heard?

          Well, understandably while I have made 19,000 comments, I wouldn't make a thread and ask for feedback if I didn't mean it. Again take a look at our comment/suggestions thread if you want to see things implemented between 2008-2016 and our new thread for 2016.

        • [Deactivated] on 23/03/2016 - 17:43
          +4

          @neil: Neil, i want to say thank you and the other mods for making this thread and taking the time to read and reply to all our suggestions and arguments. I only hope changes can come from all this effort, cheers.

        • King Tightarse on 23/03/2016 - 17:49
          +1

          @clarky:
          Here here!

        • pointless martyr on 23/03/2016 - 18:01

          @clarky: agreed. While IMO , not a fact, Neil at times can come across as a bit dismissive in what he says is critical thinking, noone can say he is not engaging this afternoon.

          I have no doubt the best feedback will be discussed at the ozbargain round table…i just hope that enough people are involved in this to warrant action

          At the end of the day, changes will only be made if enough of a noise has been made to warrant it!

  • BlazinPast on 23/03/2016 - 16:14
    +1

    So why not increase the limit to reveal the OP's referral link to 20? That would defeat the purpose of spamming low quality referral deals. And if it hits 20 votes then the user can decide whether they want to support the OP or not. Its not up to us though to criticise users clicking an OP's referral link if they appreciate the deal - that's not the OP's fault. No ones being forced to click on their referral link. And who cares if their motivation is to make money? If it hits 20 votes then its a good deal and no ones being forced to support them.

    • pointless martyr on 23/03/2016 - 17:03
      +1

      Increasing the OPs referral link to 20 is a good idea, but also a band aid solution

      The real issue that has emerged is that the little grey box can be used as a back door to circumvent the measures in place to prevent repeated posts marked as referrals, effectviely allowing an infinite number of posts fishing for credit

      • BlazinPast on 23/03/2016 - 17:50

        Can you explain that last paragraph? Regardless, their referral won't show if it hits the limit for the required upvotes? If it were still set to 20 then I don't find it a big deal.

        • [Deactivated] on 23/03/2016 - 18:02
          +1

          Changing the upvote number to 20 won't change a thing IMO. The current posters will still post the same number of deals from the same suppliers in the hope they still get 20 votes. And since most of those posters have friends that will take them to those 20 votes then…well, I say no more.

        • BlazinPast on 23/03/2016 - 18:17

          @clarky: I disagree. With the current limit at 5 it's not that hard but 20 is significantly harder. I'm looking at the user in question and they dont seem to have 'friends' that upvote their every deal. They have plenty of referral deals under 20 votes. I'm sure the moderators catch people who are 'sockpuppeting' votes.

        • BlazinPast on 23/03/2016 - 18:22

          @pointless comment: I see what you mean. But isn't it still the user's choice that 25 chose to use OP and 25 chose random? They obviously appreciated the deal enough to want to use the OP's referral link.

        • pointless martyr on 23/03/2016 - 22:55
          +1

          @BlazinPast: 'sockpuppeting votes' is hard to police. This site works best when everyone can upvote freely and neggin is very resticted. As such, people can vote for whoever they want as long as they dont vote for a single user, say, 10 times in a minute.

          If people are spreading their votes across time and many users, but still actively upvoting any given user in between nothing can realistically be done

          And its not always as sinister as that - more like a group of people who support each others posts as they are 'ozbargain friends'

          But nontheless this serves to give some posters a guaranteed 5+ votes they can count on on most of their posts….fine when its a deal about a can of baked beans at colesworths, but when its a referral deal for the latest weekly COTD product dump at 10% off….not so much

      • pointless martyr on 23/03/2016 - 18:16
        +3

        Ill try to break it down - feel free to ask questions mate, ill do my best to explain….

        The referral guidelines only allow for 3 referrals per week if they keep hitting the front page. These guidelines govern posts clearly marked as referrals , wjere the poster can inlcude a direct link to their referral credit code in the main body of text pushing viewers towards to use his link.

        However any poster can keep putting up deals for any company they have a referral code for - the only difference is that it is not marked as a referrer and they cannot include a direct link or mention of it in the main body of text.

        Despite using up their quota of referrals for the week, their referral code is still displayed via the 'grey box' you see on all referral deals

        Therefore, they can post deals with their referral link on the page an infinite number of times in any given week - they just cant push people towards it.

        This leads to a situation where a poster can just keep spamming ozbargain with, for example 10% off, deals, essentially just cutting and pasting spam emails he/she recieves in the hope of getting a few people to use the link and get credit.

        when a poster consistently gets in before others with such deals, which are often emailed to thousands and thousands of people at the same time in what you know as spam emails, it raises questions as to whether a poster has insider knowledge or of collusion with representatives of the company on some sort of kick-back arrangement

        • BlazinPast on 23/03/2016 - 18:20

          I sort've get what you're saying, could you give me an example of one so I can confirm what you're trying to say?

        • pointless martyr on 23/03/2016 - 18:21

          @BlazinPast: one what?

        • BlazinPast on 23/03/2016 - 18:21

          @pointless comment: Actually don't worry I get what you mean.

        • pointless martyr on 23/03/2016 - 18:24
          +1

          @BlazinPast: ah good…its kind of confusing, which is why most people simply dont bother to learn….its much easier with something like this to be in the 'too hard, i dont care to firstly learn and secondly form an opinion'

          Just like Many contentious issues in lfe in general!

        • pointless martyr on 23/03/2016 - 18:25

          @BlazinPast: Further to my points above, ill try to break down some ballpark numbers to give you a greater understanding

          As an example, lets say a post gets 5,000 views, and 1% of those views sign up a new account through the referral link. That equates to 50 sign ups or $500 in potential store credit at $10 per sign up, the going rate for new sign up referrals at many companies

          Now lets say that of the theoretical 50 signups, 50% use the referrers direct link and 50% use the random link.

          That means that the referrer who posted the deal will recieve $250 in store credit.

          If you can jag those numbers a few times per month, it really adds up over time!

          I hope you can now Better understand that 'community spirit' is not always the driving factor in posting deals

        • BlazinPast on 23/03/2016 - 18:27

          @pointless comment: Since you moved the comment here I'll repeat my reply: I see what you mean. But isn't it still the user's choice that 25 chose to use OP and 25 chose random? They obviously appreciated the deal enough to want to use the OP's referral link.

          If user's felt like the deal wasn't good enough they wouldn't use their referral but seems like people do appreciate it.

        • pointless martyr on 23/03/2016 - 18:36

          @BlazinPast: you are absolutely right - it is about user choice.

          Many users dont understand peoples motives to actually post in the first place - and they give XX poster a referral coz they think he/she spent half the day researching the deal and finding the deal etc. when all the poster did was cut and paste an email in a matter of 30 seconds, purely for purposes of personal profit

          Some also believe its about fairness and equality in the ozbargain community, especially when its the same few who are getting all the liions share of the referral pie.

          And as i said, when posters consistently are first to post with any given company, it raises questions of insider knowledge.

          The site has grown considerably in recent years, and the guidelines in place designed to keep things fair and equitable are perhaps a bit behind the 8ball….thats what this thread is about!

        • illumination on 23/03/2016 - 20:06

          @pointless comment: Something else I've considered in relation to what you've just mentioned though is that you can't say a deal is any less of a deal due to the fact a referral credit is involved. I understand it can raise questions behind the motives behind the post, but if the deal is a deal anyway, someone else could have and maybe would have posted it with the same 30 second copy and paste effort.

          If you bring into consideration the aspect of speed of posting in relation to insider knowledge, well that's a slightly different topic (which I agree is a concern but seems difficult to police).

          An example of such a deal would be ING Direct $75 credit from opening a bank account.

  • illumination on 23/03/2016 - 20:00

    I have something else to throw in the mix.

    Say you have a referral where both referrer and referee get $10 credit. In fact, lets use Uber as an example since they are a real example of this.

    Lets assume Uber is still in its infancy, and someone shares a deal saying $10 credit for you (and me too, as the referrer). To get this $10 credit, you have to sign up using my (or anyone else that you may know) referral link. However, the referrer will also get $10 for this. Do you see where I'm going with this? This is only a deal where you have to use my referral link.

    Actually, a better example is that ING Direct $75 credit deal. You had to use a referral code to be able to get that $75 and there was no way around it.

    And if we complicate it a little more, what if you could stack all these credits?

    For example, sign up to Uber (using referral link for $10 credit) through PricePal (use another referral link to get $10 credit). Under current rules, this wouldn't be allowed because the deal is supposed to be for Uber and not PricePal, therefore the PricePal referral would be removed.

    Where do we stand with these sorts of situations where removing the referral code results in a worse deal?

    • neil on 23/03/2016 - 21:06

      Good question. That is covered in the example at the top + the guidelines:

      Can I post a deal that is about a store’s referral system?

      • You may post a deal that is for the retailer's referral system, under the basis the referee also earns credit and it has not been posted previously (unless it is a temporary offer that had previously expired) or is already included in the OzBargain referral system.

      • Referral links or codes are not permitted in deals that are for the retailer's referral system (As of March 2016). Create a Referral Wiki Page and add your link or code there. See the ZenMarket Referral Deal as an example.

      • In the case of long running referral only deals: All subsequent “announcements” about the referral program shouldn't be posted as new deals, including updates to the referral program. This does not include limited time referral only deals where the previous offer was expired/ended and is now being offered again. You may post a forum topic about any updates to a referral program (with a link to the referral wiki or referral system only).

      • Examples: (1) Airbnb update their refer a friend credit from $32 to $34. As this is a long running referral only deal, updates to the referral program should not be posted as a deal. (2) A Bank has a promotion for the month of April, sign up to a new account and both the referee and referrer receive $50. In July they have the same promotion again - this can be posted as a new deal as it is not a long running referral deal and the previous offer had expired/ended.

      So your examples:

      Lets assume Uber is still in its infancy, and someone shares a deal saying $10 credit for you (and me too, as the referrer). To get this $10 credit, you have to sign up using my (or anyone else that you may know) referral link. However, the referrer will also get $10 for this.

      So what would happen is they would link directly to Uber (no referral links). A wiki page would then be created until Scott can add them into the automated referral system. But basically there should be no referral links in the post and the automated system wouldn't be active for the first deal.

      However, Uber referrals and Uber promotion codes can't be combined so a referral code shouldn't be included. You are almost always better off with a promotion code.

      Actually, a better example is that ING Direct $75 credit deal. You had to use a referral code to be able to get that $75 and there was no way around it.

      Well, ING are supposedly blocking referrals from OzBargain so again another unique situation. If they weren't and its a temporary offer then it should be OK.

  • cowiie on 23/03/2016 - 21:10
    +2

    Ooo it's my name in the picture. Makes me feel special :)

    • King Tightarse on 23/03/2016 - 21:14

      Surely that's Mooo, it's my name in the picture

  • plmko on 23/03/2016 - 21:34
    +4

    TBH there are two things that have bugged me about OzB, if OzB really wants to get serious about it's rules.

    1. Aggregation websites

    I see no difference between having a referral link to posting aggregation website links which show the 'bargains'. An example is this

    https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/239832

    It's just one giant referral link, where the gain is made by funneling people to an external website that isn't the one producing the 'bargain'. IMO links to bargains should only be to the website directly or a non-involved parties website like a facebook post mentioning the bargain etc. Ozbargain isn't a dumping ground to advertise how well you can trawl through data.

    1. OzB being in bed with Cash Rewards.

    Yes I know we have all received benefits from TA's active OzB's posts, but how I see it is that the posts are basically telling you to follow the purchases through with a click with Cash Rewards, this is made even more superliminal by TA's monetary incentives to post stores with bargains that happen to be Cash Reward applicable. If OzB wants to be fair about the rules, I think every post with a mention of Cash Rewards should also follow with a listing of the other cash back websites, so people can make the choice.

    Two grey areas I think need to be addressed to keep OzB driven by community goodwill.

    • neil on 23/03/2016 - 21:48

      https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/239832

      Sure, good point. If the deal was just for Coles, then we'd link to Coles. If it were for Woolworths, we would link to Woolworths. The problem is it covers both so it's not appropriate to link to either store. I would actually like it if they replicated the table on the website as at least it provides something for those clicking through. Where do you think it should link specifically?

      If OzB wants to be fair about the rules, I think every post with a mention of Cash Rewards should also follow with a listing of the other cash back websites, so people can make the choice.

      Sure. It's a funny thing. For years, we've been telling people to use Qwibble, Pricepal etc with not that much traction and rarely anyone linking to them in posts. Now with Cashrewards and their exclusive cashback for eBay they've got the community going with them and even picked up TA.

      Logically, people shouldn't need to mention the cashback as it's already there under the deal however it is for the OzBargainers best interest to show the best cashback.

      Coicidently, we were today discussing this deal Groupon - 20% off Health & Beauty, 15% off Food & Drink, 10% off Things to Do where the poster mentioned the 6.8% cashback however Pricepal offers 9% for founder members, so I reckon we should add that, if we happen to check.

      I guess the issue is that the cashbacks always change and Pricepal offers different tiers depending on members.

      So good suggestion, so if someone reports it or we happen to see it (and know the other cashback rate) we will add other sites.

      Just for transparency, we have no relationship with Cashrewards or any other cashback site. We should do another cashback comparison post

    • pointless martyr on 23/03/2016 - 22:06

      @plmko

      Re Agg. Sites - i see the parallells you draw but the diff i see is these guys are upfront with their rep status and motive to profit. Ozbargain is a good platform to advertise, and i dont reckon u can hold it against these guys wanting. To have a sustained presence on ozb

      The diff i see is that constant referral spamming is essentially acting as a rep for the sites which they continually plug, except they get paid in credits and often foster a guise of Communinty service as their motive to post

      It also leads to a blurry line where such posters may even be privvy to inside knowledge of promos prior to mass email releases., and even getting undeclared cash payments.

      I somehwat agree about your raising the point of CR and TAs recent alliance being an issue for Ozbargain, but perhaps it is an issue for another post - i am sure the wise men (no offense) at OzB have discussed this issue at length over the past few months

  • GameChanger on 23/03/2016 - 21:38

    Neil wondering if you could provide me with how many people are in the referral pool?

    • neil on 23/03/2016 - 21:50

      For all stores combined? Would that exclude (e.g. count them only once) those who are in multiple referral pools?

      • GameChanger on 23/03/2016 - 21:52

        hmm yeah all stores combined

        If it doesn't take much time wouldn't mind the counting once stat as well.

        • neil on 23/03/2016 - 22:07
          +2

          I believe I've run this right and the number is 3,208 unique members have referrals. I think this may include banned accounts so subtract a bit from that. The total members is 141,004 so roughly 2.3% of users are using the system for their referrals.

          Biggest stores would be:

          Dropbox - 778 referrals (pretty much impossible to get a click). My last click was on 21/06/2014 and there are pretty much no Dropbox deals since September. A fairly useless referral but popular.

          Uber - 943 referrals.

        • GameChanger on 23/03/2016 - 22:11

          @neil: Quite a fair number- well how many users out of the 141k are active users?

        • pointless martyr on 23/03/2016 - 22:12
          +1

          @neil: one thing that impresses me about this site is your transparency with numbers

          I know traffic figures etc are freely available for marketing purposes but Neil is under no obligation to devulge this kind of stat

        • GameChanger on 23/03/2016 - 22:14

          @pointless comment: Yep its great Neil provides us with stats.

          I quite like seeing the stat side of websites.

        • neil on 23/03/2016 - 22:14

          @GameChanger:

          From the stats page: 14,840 users that have logged in within the last 24 hours.

        • GameChanger on 23/03/2016 - 22:16

          @neil: Wow that a lot more than I was thinking, but not too surprising as when I come on the site usually at least 1000 members online each hour.

  • mmd on 23/03/2016 - 23:54

    I personally don't mind these posts as I usually avoid clicking on them, unless I really need a cheap groupon vouchers/ uber ride.
    While some might disagree with the deal poster intentions, it might help someone save a few more dollars who is new to Ozbargain or who is a long time lurker. And we all know how addictive this site can be? Neil, is there a way you can check how often I refresh this site?

    And whats stopping someone from competing and posting up the deal first? Or have I completely missed the point?

    I think the more pressing issues are those bloody brodens and inappropriate language which has caused members to leave/ or avoid posting deals at all.

    • GameChanger on 24/03/2016 - 00:02
      +1

      Somewhat missed the major issues :P

      Competition/who is first is the least of the issues rather that some members are abusing the referral system and spamming deals which are pretty ordinary.

      People place their trust in this site offering the best bargains around, if we continue to let low quality deals to be posted it defeats the purpose of having this site imo

      If you have time have a read of the other comments which go in depth why a change is needed in the referral system.

      • neil on 24/03/2016 - 00:08

        if we continue to let low quality deals

        I keep hearing this low quality deal however the deals I've seen being continually referred to have received quite a bit of votes + comments.

        I can understand everyone likes different things but the community thinks its a good deal.

        • GameChanger on 24/03/2016 - 00:31
          +2

          Yes at times there is good deals as seen by the 100+ votes.

          Mind you a lot of this + votes is what I consider to be herd behavior. This particularly pertains to well known big sites. But nonetheless its still constitutes a bargain and I accept that.

          What is concerning is these sort of low quality deals that are passing through:

          https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/239873

          https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/238380

          https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/238312

          There is countless ones like this, which have been up voted alone on brand recognition (The poster).

        • mmd on 24/03/2016 - 00:34

          lol I upvoted the 20% deal since I bought a voucher.

          Competition/who is first is the least of the issues rather that some members are abusing the referral system and spamming deals which are pretty ordinary.
          People place their trust in this site offering the best bargains around, if we continue to let low quality deals to be posted it defeats the purpose of having this site imo

          A low quality deal is subjective. For ppl like you and me, we might find 10% off groupon deals are as ubiquitous as Myers Super Saturday sales. We can choose to ignore and not vote the deal. However for someone who is trawling the web for an extra groupon discount might stumble upon the post. This might further encourage them to participate and post deals on ozbargain.

        • King Tightarse on 24/03/2016 - 00:49
          +3

          I think everyone agrees the 20% off Groupon post was a valid and worthy deal.
          Still the poster didn't change from their regular behavior of pumping out whatever Groupon special was going.
          It was followed up 12 hours later with the next Groupon promotion:
          https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/239873 (10 votes)
          And soon after next up was a very mediocre deal
          https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/240083 (4 votes)
          Poster was not a really a causative factor in the 150+ voted deal being successful other than it was "next". Pumps out anything that Groupon have available.
          Getting that referral link out there….

        • GameChanger on 24/03/2016 - 00:51
          +2

          @mmd: I don't think this site would lose any potential users if low quality deals numbers dropped.

          Yes deals are subjective but I think the onus is on the site to moderate what constitutes a bargain. Lets face it the Groupon 10% off deals most of the time is pure spam for referrals and at the very core there is no money savings.

        • pointless martyr on 24/03/2016 - 00:56
          +2

          @mmd: you dont need to trawl the web for a Groupon post. If you are on their mailing list, youll get several spam emails per day

          If you are not on their list, when you are searching , youll land on their website and there will be sirens, bells and whistles alterting you to th every same 'exclusive' deals that Members receive every few hours.

          And therein lies the one of the major points - people repeatedly posting such deals simply by cutting and pasting spam emails with referral links on ozbargain are fishing - just hoping to hook 1% or so of visitors passing through.

          Even at around 1% , it is not unreasonable to extrapolate that a referrer can get several hundred dollars in referral credits per deal.

          Do this a few times a week….and you are potentially talking tens of thousands of dollars personal gain over the course of a year

        • neil on 24/03/2016 - 01:00

          OK, so loaded question here. Please be mindful and respectful in the way you answer the first part as to not attack the user but… Are the referral issues focused on the one user or are there others? I've yet to see an example that hasn't been from the mentioned user.

          In the same vain, the examples given were all Groupon. Is it mostly Groupon deals that are the issue?

        • pointless martyr on 24/03/2016 - 01:09
          +1

          Conversely Neil GCs links below show what the community thinks are a bad deal

          The deals, listed both by you and GC, in this instance are all by the same poster, from the same company in a relatively short timeframe

          I think its all spam with the intention to farm credit from ozbargain members who feel that they owe the poster a credit referral for his/her 'hard work'

        • pointless martyr on 24/03/2016 - 01:10

          @neil: Neil, you are listing examples from the said user yourself….what do you expect?

          this user Provides several current examples over the past week.

          But there are others - it would be far easier for you to tell us with your access to all the stats given your previous willingness to share them…for example, please provide the top 3 members who have generated the highest sum total of votes linked to any post where the grey box (not the referrer tag) shows their referral links over the past six months

          we can hazard a guess at one….you tell us who the other two are?

          this thread and the issues raised are about sitewide reform, not about targeting any one user

          As to which companies are the best yielding from which to farm credits, and therefor the ones that raise issues i believe King TA listed them all earlier as he himself has generated lots of credit with little effort… That may suffice your query there, its not only groupon but any company that is routinely abused in its potential to farm, credit

          Amd thanks for flagging the "loaded question" after i introduced the term to the covnverstaion earlier - the more transparency the better IMO

        • GameChanger on 24/03/2016 - 01:20
          +1

          @neil: Absolutely not, that user just happened to be the most recent one and used by yourself. And of course I didn't want to drag anyone else in as people might infer the wrong message.( Check my edit for another example)

        • pointless martyr on 24/03/2016 - 01:23

          @GameChanger: spot onmate - no one wants to make this about a single user - its about site wide reform from where i sit

        • neil on 24/03/2016 - 01:24

          @pointless comment:

          You may want to have a look at your comments in the beginning of this thread.

          You cited 2 deals that had the automated referral box activated:

          Extra 10% off Sitewide @ Groupon i.e. Audible Audiobook 2 to 4 Months $0 - $3.60

          Groupon Birthday 10% off Sitewide e.g. IMAX $13.50 & Audible 2 - 4 Months from $0 - $3.60

          What I'm trying to get is instead of re-inventing the wheel to deal with 1 user or with one store, there may be a simpler solution.

          So as mentioned in the opening post:

          Has OzBargain banned the posting of referral links for some stores?

          Yes. One example: Referral links in Vinomofo deals have been banned. See discussion .

          If you see what I'm getting at.

          EDIT: To add to that, referral links were banned from group buy sites for many years (due to referral spam and also lack of referral detection/automated system). It was only recently within the past year or so that we lifted the ban

        • pointless martyr on 24/03/2016 - 01:26

          @neil: sorry, please explain why you are referring to my post at beginning of thread?

        • neil on 24/03/2016 - 01:28

          @pointless comment:

          You wrote:

          @neil: Neil, you are listing examples from the said user yourself….what do you expect?

          And I replied with the deals you mentioned (first links mentioned on this post). Sorry if that wasn't clear.

        • pointless martyr on 24/03/2016 - 01:32

          @neil: sorry, i know i listed several recent examples where 'spot fires' over issues in this thread have occure in that earlier post

          What i meant above was that you are questioning using the particular user as an example when you have been too.

          I think that we are all using this user because ther have been umpteen posts from him this week and it coincides with the timing of your initiation of this thread….i mean theres less impact citing examples that date back to nineteen-dickety-two, yeah?

          And its far easier to cite top of mind examples of course

        • pointless martyr on 24/03/2016 - 01:38

          @neil:

          What I'm trying to get is instead of re-inventing the wheel to deal with 1 user or with one store, there may be a simpler solution

          I think people are looking for changes within the framework, its not about one user or one store - its about bending the rules that allow such behaviour…and that end of the issue lies with ozbargain itself - not opportune deal posters who take advantage

        • neil on 24/03/2016 - 01:44

          @pointless comment:

          OK understood. From what we saw, the same people commenting on this thread (KT, yourself, GC and Clarky) have commented on this Groupon Deal. Now I understand you all look at a lot of deals and comment, so fair enough if you can't recall.

          But the simplest solution may just to reinstate our ban on group buy deals (e.g. Groupon). So by the theories here, the poster(s) of those deal will probably not post them.

        • pointless martyr on 24/03/2016 - 01:51

          @neil: excellent, glad we are on the same page.

          To answer you directly, well that would be up to you as the man in charge after careful consideration of the issues presented as to what the best solution is.

          personally, i would not miss the groupon/COTD type deals - i unsubscribed from their crap emails months ago

          If you ban the deal aggregator sites it follows noone will post them - or do you just mean banning the ability to glean credit from them, so deals fromt the sites themselves are not banned?

        • neil on 24/03/2016 - 01:56

          @pointless comment:

          If you ban the deal aggregator sites it follows noone will post them - or do you just mean banning the ability to glean credit from them, so deals fromt the sites themselves are not banned?

          Banning referrals from group buy sites. So Groupon, & Cudo (nothing really posted for them).

          COTD is NOT considered a group buy site. It's a 1 a day site (well it was, now it's just an online retail shop).

        • GameChanger on 24/03/2016 - 01:59

          @neil: Whilst I personally don't like the group deals as I don't see much real bargains, a total ban would punish the whole community when there is actually a good deal.

          I think the underlying issue is still the grey box requirements which at present is very low. If it was increased this may deter posters from posting every promotion and perhaps get them to actually think twice if there is a good deal.

          King TA mentioned very early on some other sites as well which weren't group deals, so this solution may not cover all the issues.

        • neil on 24/03/2016 - 02:00

          @GameChanger:

          Whilst I personally don't like the group deals as I don't see much real bargains, a total ban would punish the whole community when there is actually a good deal.

          Not a ban on the site. Groupon deals will always be free to be posted. It's just including a referral in the post or the automated system which will be banned.

        • GameChanger on 24/03/2016 - 02:07

          @neil: Ah I see.

          This is quite targeted and from what I read of the others users it won't really make a difference. It will just shift the behavior of users to other stores.

          It would be nice if even a 1 month trial could be done with the purposed grey box to a higher vote, to see what impact it has on the site.

  • spackbace on 24/03/2016 - 01:50
    +4

    The problem I guess neil is that until recently, Groupon barely listed a coupon. It was a once a week/fortnight/month thing… Like it was relatively rare. Now it's a daily occurrence, and looks to be listed on their site around midnight every night.

    Now when it wasn't such a common occurrence, there was a better break up of deal posters. Really it was whoever was quickest off the email! But there was also scrutiny over posts because Groupon wasn't really well regarded.

    Same can be said of COTD. It was basically a running joke as to how mediocre it was (see comments to CatchBargain April fools). And then Club Catch deals became popular, and the $10 referral credit did.

    So what I'm getting at (and I bet you're sick of this discussion by now) is that until recently, I personally haven't noticed any particular member constantly posting deals for these sites because there wasn't deals to be had! Now there is, or some minor form of deal that gets 15 votes, and continued reason to keep posting for those that do it.

    Which is why I'm all for upping that vote requirement for the grey box to 20+. Not even front page as such, just a nice even figure of 20+. We can deal with the referrer tag and link within the post later on.

    For now, 20+ to show it, and we'll see if it's worth checking Groupon every day at midnight :) (oh, or are 99% of these comments not aimed at 1 particular member? Lol)

    • pointless martyr on 24/03/2016 - 01:55

      are 99% of these comments not aimed at 1 particular member

      ultimately, i dont think anyone wants to make this about a single user - its about site wide reform for the better of the community as a whole

      • spackbace on 24/03/2016 - 01:56

        A thin veil of an excuse. But it's because of this member that a loophole has been discovered.

        • GameChanger on 24/03/2016 - 02:14
          +3

          Perhaps that is true because successive posts of the same deal draws attention, but it doesn't hide the fact this issue is wide spread/ won't be abused in the future.

          Ultimately we want quality deals on this site and for the general public to have trust in the integrity of this site. The purpose of this site is to save people money, and many people who see a deal on here automatically assume it must be good. If we keep letting users spam low quality deals solely for monetary gains, the heart and soul of this site may as well be sold to a marketing company.

        • pointless martyr on 24/03/2016 - 02:15

          Sure you are entitled to your opinion….i tend to take a long term view of things…ultimately, i dont think anyone wants to make this about a single user - its about site wide reform for the better of the community as a whole

        • spackbace on 24/03/2016 - 02:18

          @pointless comment:

          Echo… Echo

          Cmon, no need to repeat the same line within the screen. This whole thread should've been barely 2 pages without the repetition.

          This whole argument started because 1 member found a loophole. That's what started it, nothing more nothing less. This thread is about trying to solve it so someone else doesn't come along and do the same thing.
          But it doesn't detract from the fact that it started from 1 person's actions.

        • spackbace on 24/03/2016 - 02:21

          @GameChanger:

          I think it's well and truly been said 'why' change is needed… That was covered on page 1. We're page 3 now, we shouldn't be rehashing the whys, just the 'hows' now yeah? Which i think everyone here has covered and now it's just getting very repetitious.

        • pointless martyr on 24/03/2016 - 02:30

          @Spackbace: Sure you are entitled to your opinion….i tend to take a long term view of things…ultimately, i dont think anyone wants to make this about a single user - its about site wide reform for the better of the community as a whole

          Please don't make me repeat myself again :)

        • neil on 24/03/2016 - 02:41
          +1

          @Spackbace:

          Cmon, no need to repeat the same line within the screen. This whole thread should've been barely 2 pages without the repetition.

          It's like an online version of Question Time in Parliament except we don't have a timer on how long each member can speak for.

    • spackbace on 24/03/2016 - 02:04
      +2

      I got an up vote from Neil! My life is complete :) lol

  • pointless martyr on 24/03/2016 - 02:28

    @neil

    I think that if, as you have suggested, pull referrals from group buy sites, it will solve issues form a short term perspective. IMO go ahead and do it ASAP - outstanding deals will still get on OzB regardless and lesser spam type deals will not be missed,

    If you want to look forward to the mid - longer term, the issues outlined previously with the 'grey box' need addressing; i think the following may satisfy the general consensus so far:

    1) Up the vote threshold for the OP link reveal to 20

    2) Go one step further to incorporate ALL on screen OP referral links - either in the grey box or in the main body of text - into the 3 per week maximum rule. This would serve to negate 'infinte referral' back-door opportunities.

    These implementations would both in turn give far greater exposure to the random referral link - the most popular recommendation here id reckon

    Not sure what the OzB brains trust will ultimately decide, but if you did all these things, it should help you to avoid issues raised in this thread for some time to come

  • King Tightarse on 24/03/2016 - 09:11
    +1

    If you think from the point of view extracting as much referral benefit as possible from the site, you would soon put together a portfolio of highest return vs effort referral companies to follow. Each would have it's own promotional cycle and approach which you would become familiar with.

    Of a few of the top referring sites:
    Amaysim would be about speed in posting with a predictable cycle (look at all the posts minutes after midnight)
    Groupon is about repetition - cutting posting the best of the daily spam emails
    iHerb is about vigilance - monitoring emails for deals.

    It is kind of helpful as a "stress test" of the sites rules, in a way. If any one member can push the limits and stay within the rule framework, you get to see the edges of the referral rule framework and have the opportunity to adjust is so desired. Obviously is one member can do it, others can too if they are so motivated.

    I mentioned the problems as I saw them earlier though:
    Hogging - milking every referral dollar from certain companies with the most generous plans.
    Running down - running down similar deals in the comments with links and advice to use their own referral post.
    Spamming - blindly posting dubious repetitive (sometimes daily) mediocre deals with an apparent view more to circulate their referral link rather than the actual deal.

    I honestly think keeping the full (up to three weekly ) "Refferer" deals as they are and changing the currently infinite number of grey referrer box posts, to random-only solves the problem very well.

    Do you anticipate any kind of loss to the site in doing this? All I see is upside. Clears out the junk posts. I don't see any particular point in focusing on Groupon, it just is the one being spammed at the moment because it pays $10 per refferal and there are daily emails, others will probably follow if you leave the system open to it.

    • neil on 24/03/2016 - 10:49

      Amaysim

      No longer has a referral program.

      iHerb

      OK, thanks. An example.

      Running down - running down similar deals in the comments with links and advice to use their own referral post.

      I mentioned this before but this is against our referral guidelines. Do you have examples of this?

      Do you anticipate any kind of loss to the site in doing this?

      The general rule of thumb would be does this improve the community OR will the changes NOT negatively effect the community. We get many requests and have to assess whether the time spent adding/changing feature is worth doing. Lots of requests. We also have to determine if what is being requested is actually what's best for the majority or is it just going to appease the minority OR can it do both?

      I'm just trying to get all the facts so I can make a final summary + do fact checks + pull stats, so we can discuss rationally. So at the very least I know what the 5 or 6 commenters here want. There are still some non-facts (e.g. referring to junk posts/spamming) that may need actual numbers. Its also pretty hard to shake that this isn't just a veiled way (by some at least) at attacking one user in particular (history of previous fights/attacks, comment history, PMs/reports we are getting about this).

      Thanks for the feedback King!

      • King Tightarse on 24/03/2016 - 11:10

        Yes, the Amaysim referral program is on hiatus but I they say will be back quite soon. It was definite past favourite for referrals so I included it as a popular example.
        In terms of running down or recommending their own deal with links in the comments of deals, I saw that multiple times in Amaysim posts. I search and link you later if you like.
        Your approach seems perfectly rational to me and I think that is the ultimate simple test: "is the site better or worse for proposed changes?" A number of approaches have been mentioned, so I guess you would be doing a few potential scenarios.
        I understand what you are saying regarding regarding specific posters but also is it not possible that one or two posters have made an exquisite artform out of referral farming and wish to defend that? I wonder if you have stats on the amounts? Money is a great motivator, you cannot discount that.
        As for "junk posts" being a non fact? I am not sure how to answer that. Looking at Groupon as an example, there are daily emails of mostly mediocre deals with the occasional "winner". If someone was to post near every incoming Groupon spam near daily how is that not junk posting? Add the fact that each Groupon post attracts the auto-generated referral box with the line "Referrer will receive $10 credit after referee made first purchase." THAT is what is really being promoted IMHO.
        As for receiving large numbers of PMs, is this not a public forum and airing? I think any valid points should be discussed and tested here, in public, in this forum so they can be looked at from all sides and tested and challenged if necessary.

        EDIT:
        "So at the very least I know what the 5 or 6 commenters here want"
        Well that is limited by 1/ those that are willing to comment on a controversial subject 2/ those that are aware that a discussion is taking place. The real number is likely to be far greater. It may even be the majority but the point of all this is to highlight a problem and suggest potential improvements. I think everyone here believes there is a problem and that the site would be a better place with some changes.
        I think moving to a random-only "grey box" auto referral system, while keeping the current three per week limits is a simple solution that addresses most of the concerns here. Currently there is self-serving motivation to post anything from sites that offer $10 per referral sign up but if it were random only, the community would benefit from little surprise "presents" from time to time and actual valid posts would be made on their merits.

        • spackbace on 24/03/2016 - 11:56

          I think moving to a random-only "grey box" auto referral system, while keeping the current three per week limits is a simple solution that addresses most of the concerns here.

          I actually do agree with that suggestion :) At least the referral box also properly summarises what's on offer to both referrer and referee

          And yes neil, it would be lovely if the other side of the debate would weigh in here, rather than just random comments on deal postings :)

  • GameChanger on 24/03/2016 - 12:28
    -2

    https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/240289

    Here is a perfect example why the grey box needs to increased imo

    • spackbace on 24/03/2016 - 12:38
      +1

      What's that post got to do with a referral box? There is no referral credit as such there, the referrer tag on TA is because of the CR affiliation. Because of the referrer tag, TA is subject to posting limits.

      I think you're still mistaken on the 2 different things

      • GameChanger on 24/03/2016 - 12:42
        +1

        It demonstrates herd behavior in relation to up votes.

        Where big posters have 'fans' who vote unconditionally.

        This is applicable to the grey box posts, if you get what I mean?

        How do you think those Groupon deals creep up above 5 votes?

        • spackbace on 24/03/2016 - 12:45

          This is applicable to the grey box posts, if you get what I mean?

          I can sorta understand what you're getting at, but using 2 different scenarios to prove a point doesn't help the case here.

          And as I said 10hrs ago, we've had the discussion as to why it's needed. It's really not necessary to repeat that point.

        • GameChanger on 24/03/2016 - 12:48

          @Spackbace: One of the underlying reasons why people in here want the 5 votes increased is because big posters have people who vote unconditionally.

          That deal reached front page alone on brand recognition, now imagine if TA was a referral farmer. Hope you can see how this deal demonstrates abuse by other users.

        • spackbace on 24/03/2016 - 12:49

          @GameChanger:

          Hope you can see how this deal demonstrates abuse by other users.

          I can! I understand the situation and this was laid out on page 1!

        • GameChanger on 24/03/2016 - 12:52
          +1

          @Spackbace: This isn't repetition….

          Neil asked for examples from other users and TA's deal demonstrates potential concerns perfectly.

          And let me make it clear this isn't an attack on TA rather a perfect example of the herd behavior effect.

        • pointless martyr on 24/03/2016 - 12:59
          +1

          I think the issues GC raises here are very closely related to the referrer issues involved with credit mining and the 'grey box'

          Only here, the grey box is replaced With the link to CashRewards - which is now just as ubiquitous. This has gotten to the point where certain users who regularly upvote TA chime in with a comment to many other users posts with a "dont forget to use cashrewards" complete with link.

          While TA is very transparent in his association with the company, the post GC linked is

          1) posted for monetary gain

          2) has in inlfated number of upvotes due to the historical comminity goodwill TA has generated and 'ozbargain friends'

          while perhaps there is enough distinction for these issues to be left for another thread at another time These two points are at the core of this thread.

          And seeing as Neil and Spackbace alluded that there are questionable motives for some involved in this thread, GCs post also serves as proof that such issues are not about any single user - its about sitewide integrtity and reform

        • GameChanger on 24/03/2016 - 13:05

          @pointless comment: Indeed! Didn't really think of CR, but thats a good point raised as the post is monetary based.

          How a deal reached front page based on pure speculation is concerning and brings into question the integrity of this site imo.

        • neil on 24/03/2016 - 13:44
          +1

          I probably don't have to rehash this but the issue with that deal is people voted up the deal without knowing what it was. The deals weren't laid out initially. When they were finally revealed, they weren't that great (according to the community). So yes herd behavior.

          Given it was less than an hour until the deal went live + the last 2 sales were very good, it was a line call. IMO, in hindsight, the deal should have initially listed the deals OR be removed. I think TA would agree with that.

          But let's be clear this is as GC states, possibly herd behaviour + also an expectation that the last 2 70% off sales were great that this one would be the same. I mean you could relate everything action a user does on this site to eventually tie in with the referral system but I think we need to be clear that this is a separate issue to the referral system we are discussing.

        • pointless martyr on 24/03/2016 - 13:59
          +1

          @neil: in this case its about voting for the TA 'brand' not the deal…Very pertinent in this thread!

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join