It's funny, really.

You spend hours upon hours to research the new changes for a hotel program and write a blog post about it.

This post will benefit at least some people, and probably more than just a few because you have gathered your info practically by hand, and the info -- to those who are interested in this particular program -- must be extremely valuable, there's just no way it isn't.

You post your findings in a relevant FT thread -- which is (the thread) is not extremely busy, to say the least. You link to your blog. Your post disappears.

Here is why it's funny.

The forum in question is very slow. So, no, you don't get a lot of traffic back to your not selling any credit cards or whatever blog. If you want traffic, you will write about something much more sexy than this. And yet, someone hates your blogging guts so much, that they report it to a moderator and your post gets removed for no freaking reason at all!

At least, this is my theory of what has happened because posts don't just drop off the face of the Earth.

Have I pushed any products or services to deserve that? Hell, no! It was a strictly analytical post.

While I don't give a flying duck whether my post is there or not, I can't help but shake my head in disbelief, even if just a little.

Hence the rant. Sorry.

Look at your signature line; it's almost YELLING about YOUR BLOG and YOUR BOOK!


Which probably predisposes some to believe you post because of a profit motive, and they get annoyed. A lot of FTers blame bloggers, rightly or wrongly, for "ruining" mistake fares or whatever their little parochial interests may be, and the animosity may spill over a bit.

YMMV

Cheers,

Doc.

So you are unhappy some moderator on FT deleted your post? What has that to do with EM&PR?

I'll look up the mod who deleted your post and let him/her know.

BTW, there are conventions on how to link to your own blog on FT:
http://www.flyertalk.com/help/rules.php#externallinks

Regards Oliver2002
Mod EM&PR forum

Precisely. And throwing out the baby with the bath water is a bit irrational, me thinks.

And I had no idea that my signature was so aggressive. I know I'm not...

I don't believe I did anything outside of these conventions.

And to answer your question, I did think it had something to do with EM&PR. This is FT, and the EMPR in question is mine.

I am 99% sure I know the post which was removed. While it is a shame you were not notified the post was removed (assuming you were not) I believe it was a violation of the rules, specifically this one. Sending a PM to the mod of the forum would probably get you a similar answer. You did not attempt to share any content to the FT community.

The content was essentially "Hey I posted a bunch of info elsewhere; do you think it is accurate." There was not sufficient content for the post to stand on its own without leaving FT. It would not have been hard to include some of the details from the analysis in the post, making it meet the requirements.

Follow the rules and it is no big deal. Ignore them and, yes, posts go poof. And ranting here about moderator actions isn't going to make the post come back, though it might get you in deeper trouble since that's also against the rules.

On the contrary.

You would assume - since I run the only British Airways blog of scale and have done for 3 years - that most people who read the BA FT forum would read my site. However, whenever someone (or myself) includes a link from the BA FT forum to my site, I get well over 100 hits from it. Most of those people are good candidates to be converted to regular readers so it is valuable traffic.

I am actually surprised that many blog writers reduce their contributions to FT since it is a good source.

You need to respect the FT rules, of course, which effectively mean you need to write "This is what I think or know, and I wrote about it at greater length here if you are interested."

You haven't shown any evidence that "hatred" had anything to do with the post being deleted.

smb12's likely explanation seems more probable and I've seen other similarly content-thin posts be deleted for violating the same FT rule. In fact if you just make sure to follow the linked FT rule you could simply re-post with appropriate content and be fine.

When you hear hoofbeats, think horses, not zebras.

Precisely. Bloggers are free to troll FT for clicks and readers.

But the chum they throw has to have some substance to it.

Easy peasy.

I don't remember exactly what I wrote in that FT post, but if you think that was the reason why my post was deleted, that's fine by me. I didn't think that was the case when I wrote it, but if you believe it was, then I can see how other people could feel the same way.

No, I was not advised that my post had been removed, and since I don't see myself as a spammer, it upset me. I also did send a PM to the Mod only to be ignored. And you are mistaken if you think I want my post back; really, that's the last thing on my mind.

I'd like to close this thread now.

LOL....

I think you are getting some pretty good advice, actually.

If you become more engaged and post more valuable information, people will see you as a credible source and probably be MORE likely to visit your blog.

Cheers,

Doc

I agree. For one thing, I followed your advice and demilitarized my signature.

Other than that, I guess, I did overreact a little. Cheers.

Really? I don't remember noticing the old version, but this one looks pretty aggressive to me: "Read my bestselling books to get started"? Should I add emphsais to the word bestselling?

Whenever I see the thinly veiled posts where the main point is the link to a blog, just to drive traffic there, I tend to get really annoyed and immediately put the blog on my personal "do not ever visit" blacklist. Sometimes I'll post a critical comment, especially if I think that the relationship between the poster and the blog hasn't been clearly disclosed. Yet I really respect several bloggers around here who obviously know their stuff very well, behave ethically, and make significant contributions to FT (or MP). If the opportunity were to arise, I'd go out of my way to do a credit card application through their referral links, if applicable, or otherwise support the blog as appropriate.

What you call a "thinly veiled post" was a result of a long and tedious manual research on an important topic, posted in a very low-traffic thread. "Just to drive traffic?" I think not!

Sorry you don't like my sig, but it's my sig, and it looks fine to me. I respect your opinion, but, apparently, I don't see things the same way you do. Thank you for your comment.

I was kind of expecting more eloquent responses from a "best-selling" author.

I think we better end the discussion before more 'hatred' is generated. Would be a shame for me to take out the FT rule book and apply progressive discipline for such a petty topic?

Regards Oliver2002
Mod EM&PR