Discussing Intimacy and Food Allergies!!

[Mayashappyplace]

I know the scope of struggles we have with dating, so today I decided to touch upon it with a blog. This weekend I plan on writing the Part II to this, so please bookmark me and follow along. Feel free to add your own comments, you can make them anonymous if you want to 

{Link edited out by a moderator because it was in violation of our terms of service}

Hope everyone has an amazing weekend! Stay strong!


Oh yeah, PS - If you don't know me, I'm a 32 yr old peanut/soy and tree nut survivor with severe allergies to certain other legumes as well as many environmental and contact dermatitis to nickel, lanolin and dimethicone.

[Macabre]

Mayashappyplace we're glad that you want to be part of our community, but we foster discussion here. We have a few threads where we've talked about intimacy issues and good allergies, or we can talk about them in this new thread.  But we talk about then HERE.

Our terms if service prohibit commercial interests or bloggers from putting links to their site to drive our members there. The exception: we have one section where we've put your introductory  post that still contains a link to your blog. The other links have been edited out, per our TOS.

We also have had threads where we put links to favorite blogs.  But it's members of the community who are posting those links--members who are also engaged in conversation within this community. That would be very different from only popping in here to post a link to one's blog and not interacting with the community.

[admin rebekahc]

Your previous links were removed.  You saw that your links had been removed and responded yet you still chose to continue posting links.  If you persist in posting links you will be banned.  I promise you, this continued disregard for our forum and it's rules will NOT encourage our members to visit your site.

[Mayashappyplace]

I apologize, I posted that one about my new blog post last night before reading any of the warnings; if you look at the times, you will see it was my first post before I replied to your reprimands.

I never posted again about my site after I read your replies. I complied with your policy and only replied to all admins.

The negativity I have experienced here is unlike any other site I've ever encountered and I am very happy to leave on my own accord.

Even with your obvious ill perception of me, I wish you only the best with your site.

[rebekahc]

Had you said:  "Oops, sorry!  I didn't mean to break the rules." and then edited out the link you had just posted, I'm sure our response would have been much different.  Instead you chose to argue with our "reprimands" giving the impression you were unwilling to follow our TOS. 

I don't know of any legitimate sites who are friendly and welcoming to those who spam them and repeatedly violate TOS. 

[lakeswimr]

I want to gently say that while I understand the need for TOS I would rather see a new person given the benefit of the doubt.  I think some of the response I have seen to this new person has felt uncomfortable to me.  She violated the TOS but I assume she didn't realize that.  And she questioned the TOS--I have no problem with someone questioning or disagreeing with it.  They don't get to change it as a new person but that's perfectly fine to question.  And then we can just explain it to them without emotion.  No biggie.  I think it is too bad she won't stick around.  I saw some things on her blog that made me think it would be good if she did.  I am a bit worried about the chances she described taking eating out.  I hope she has a good allergist and access to information about FAs.   

[SilverLining]

Allowing spamming with self-promotional links lowers our site on searches, which makes it harder for people in need of help to find us.

Ignoring TOS is not acceptable, but it happens.  Sometimes people just don't read them.  So, the links were removed, and it was explained why.  And it appears this newbie wasn't unaware of the TOS...she just feels they don't apply to her.

[lakeswimr]

Yes, as I said, I understand the need for the TOS.  I also have not seen the messages that went back and forth between the admins and the OP so I could have a very different impression if i had.  My impression without reading or seeing those messages is that our response could be more gentle.  It is one thing when someone comes here to sell something or to push some crazy idea but this person seems to obviously have food allergies and could be someone who would benefit from sticking around.  I think the response could have happened without making assumptions (that she doesn't feel the TOS applies to her type attitude I read in several responses) and still been firm about the TOS.  I am uncomfortable with some of the response to this person and wish it had been different so she would have stuck around. 

[LinksEtc]

I think Lakeswimr made some good points.

Also, maybe it could be clarified in the TOS that a person's own blog or web site is considered a service by FAS, because I think this is sometimes unclear to people.  Some blogs are more for venting or for other purposes, and the authors often don't consider them a service.  Sometimes people don't understand why their posts should be in commercial if they aren't trying to make $ .  I'm speaking in general, not about this situation.

I understand the concern about too many outbound links and spam.

[admin rebekahc]

The conversations were all public and spread throughout this board. 

Our first response was to move the intro post where she describes herself to the commercial section and left that link intact.  At that time we also removed the 7 other links she had posted throughout the board with a simple note to please follow the TOS and commercial posting rules.  Next, the OP responded in various places arguing with us and continued to post links to her blog after she had been told it was against our TOS.

There were warning signs of her being a spammer in the beginning:
 - posting multiple links in the middle of the night
 - raising old threads to post links
 - not contributing usefully to threads

However, rather than banning her right away (or even making her user ID a Commercial Member), we thought she might become a productive member of our site and decided to give her the benefit of the doubt.  Once she again ignored our rules (which had been reiterated to her and acknowledged by her), we still chose not to ban her, but instead responded to her arguments and encouraged her to follow our rules and continue to be a member of our site.  At that time she was moved to Commercial Member status in the hopes she would become a participating member of our site.

If anyone has further questions about it, please PM me.

[lakeswimr]

Regardless of right or wrong (spammer or person who wanted to participate here), the response was rude in my opinion and off putting to me as a member.  The response doesn't represent how I think we should act as a community.  The TOS can be strictly enforced and people can be polite while doing so.  I found some of the responses I found rude and wrote why I felt so in the commercial link thread.  I'm not going to PM you. 

[krasota]

I think we were more than kind and I think the smackdown was gentler than I'd have been.  Linkfarming spam is really freakin' annoying.  It's not how a contributing member of a community behaves.  It only serves to drive up traffic to a website, generally to increase ad-driven revenue (or to drive up site visits in order to gain ad placements in the first place).