Post Undeleted by Revetahw
    Post Deleted by Revetahw
8 added 1261 characters in body
source | link

Add disclosure/warnings to the answers

While the OP didn't disclose his affiliation, which is certainly bad, it doesn't mean the app is not useful. It does appear to answer the questions, and may be useful to readers.

We need to add very visible warnings which state that OP is the CEO of the company selling the app. OP may not have known about TSE rules, so him not disclosing affiliation himself should perhaps not be penalized quite so severely as to delete the answers. However, he did not respond to comments regarding it, which diesdoes detract from his case.

@EugeneO has written some good reasoning in favour of this answer. I'm including it here, because it is well written.

We are not the morality police - our #1 driving goal should be to create a site with content that is useful to travelers. To me it is clear that deleting a potentially useful answer hurts this goal much more than adding an affiliation notice. We should evaluate each answer on its merits first, and secondary criteria, well, second. If the app is a good solution to the posted question, it will get my upvote, if not - downvote. Would the usefulness of the answer to the travel community really be different if it was a random user posting about an app they like, as opposed to the app creator?

I understand the rule and the problems with self-promotion, but I think that we already have 2 mechanisms to fight it:

  1. Any user can edit the answer and add an affiliation warning.
  2. If the app turns out bad, there's the downvote mechanism.

I don't think we need a 3rd mechanism, outright deleting an answer that may be genuinely useful to someone (unless it's outright spam - promoting an app/site that does not actually answer the question where it's posted as an answer).

Add disclosure/warnings to the answers

While the OP didn't disclose his affiliation, which is certainly bad, it doesn't mean the app is not useful. It does appear to answer the questions, and may be useful to readers.

We need to add very visible warnings which state that OP is the CEO of the company selling the app. OP may not have known about TSE rules, so him not disclosing affiliation himself should perhaps not be penalized quite so severely as to delete the answers. However, he did not respond to comments regarding it, which dies detract from his case.

Add disclosure/warnings to the answers

While the OP didn't disclose his affiliation, which is certainly bad, it doesn't mean the app is not useful. It does appear to answer the questions, and may be useful to readers.

We need to add very visible warnings which state that OP is the CEO of the company selling the app. OP may not have known about TSE rules, so him not disclosing affiliation himself should perhaps not be penalized quite so severely as to delete the answers. However, he did not respond to comments regarding it, which does detract from his case.

@EugeneO has written some good reasoning in favour of this answer. I'm including it here, because it is well written.

We are not the morality police - our #1 driving goal should be to create a site with content that is useful to travelers. To me it is clear that deleting a potentially useful answer hurts this goal much more than adding an affiliation notice. We should evaluate each answer on its merits first, and secondary criteria, well, second. If the app is a good solution to the posted question, it will get my upvote, if not - downvote. Would the usefulness of the answer to the travel community really be different if it was a random user posting about an app they like, as opposed to the app creator?

I understand the rule and the problems with self-promotion, but I think that we already have 2 mechanisms to fight it:

  1. Any user can edit the answer and add an affiliation warning.
  2. If the app turns out bad, there's the downvote mechanism.

I don't think we need a 3rd mechanism, outright deleting an answer that may be genuinely useful to someone (unless it's outright spam - promoting an app/site that does not actually answer the question where it's posted as an answer).

7 added 88 characters in body
source | link

Add disclosure/warnings to the answers

While the OP didn't disclose his affiliation, which is certainly bad, it doesn't mean the app is not useful. It does appear to answer the questions, and may be useful to readers.

We need to add very visible warnings which state that OP is the CEO of the company selling the app. OP may not have known about TSE rules, so him not disclosing affiliation himself should perhaps not be penalized quite so severely as to delete the answers. However, he did not respond to comments regarding it, which dies detract from his case.

Add disclosure/warnings to the answers

While the OP didn't disclose his affiliation, which is certainly bad, it doesn't mean the app is not useful. It does appear to answer the questions, and may be useful to readers.

We need to add very visible warnings which state that OP is the CEO of the company selling the app. OP may not have known about TSE rules, so him not disclosing affiliation himself should perhaps not be penalized quite so severely as to delete the answers.

Add disclosure/warnings to the answers

While the OP didn't disclose his affiliation, which is certainly bad, it doesn't mean the app is not useful. It does appear to answer the questions, and may be useful to readers.

We need to add very visible warnings which state that OP is the CEO of the company selling the app. OP may not have known about TSE rules, so him not disclosing affiliation himself should perhaps not be penalized quite so severely as to delete the answers. However, he did not respond to comments regarding it, which dies detract from his case.

6 added 4 characters in body
source | link

Add disclosure/warnings to the answers

While the OP didn't disclose his affiliation, which is certainly bad, it doesn't mean the app is not useful. It does appear to answer the questions, and may be useful to readers.

We need to add very visible warnings which state that OP is the CEO of the company selling the app. OP may not have known about TSE rules, so him not addingdisclosing affiliation himself should perhaps not be penalized quite so severely as to delete the answers.

Add disclosure/warnings to the answers

While the OP didn't disclose his affiliation, which is certainly bad, it doesn't mean the app is not useful. It does appear to answer the questions, and may be useful to readers.

We need to add very visible warnings which state that OP is the CEO of the company selling the app. OP may not have known about TSE rules, so him not adding affiliation himself should perhaps not be penalized quite so severely as to delete the answers.

Add disclosure/warnings to the answers

While the OP didn't disclose his affiliation, which is certainly bad, it doesn't mean the app is not useful. It does appear to answer the questions, and may be useful to readers.

We need to add very visible warnings which state that OP is the CEO of the company selling the app. OP may not have known about TSE rules, so him not disclosing affiliation himself should perhaps not be penalized quite so severely as to delete the answers.

5 added 41 characters in body
source | link
4 added 1 character in body
source | link
3 deleted 146 characters in body; edited body
source | link
2 edited body
source | link
1
source | link