1
\$\begingroup\$

I recently found this comment below a question:

It sounds like you might want to complete more of your course before taking off on your own. Check out my profile if you'd like a free trial for a training site, they have a few nice courses for people getting started with Unity, and when you're ready, you can take my advanced course :)

This is obviously not an attempt to improve the question or get it answered. It is solely an attempt to get someone to subscribe to a paid service provided by another website. The link in the author's profile seems to include an affiliate-ID which makes me believe that they get some form of incentive for advertising this website.

So I flagged the comment as "other..." and in the free-text description I described it as spam and referenced our "how to not be a spammer" guide.

But to my surprise, the flag was declined and the comment was not deleted.

Why?

\$\endgroup\$
4
\$\begingroup\$
  • The author's disclosure of affiliation is extremely clear.
  • The author's activity in other comments and answers clearly demonstrates that referencing his course is a minority aspect of his participation.
  • The overwhelming majority of the other answers posted by the author have nothing to do with the course and clearly indicate solutions to problems, et cetera.

I don't think the comment in question fits the metrics appropriate for flagging it as spam. It is permissible to refer people to software or other off-site resources you-the-poster have some affiliation with, after all.

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ Always the voice of reason. \$\endgroup\$ – jgallant Apr 5 '16 at 10:10

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .