Shopsmith Forums

if you want to delete it its ok with me ,, by the way there were more then 1 brand name and a bit of history and knowledge shared ,I am not affiliated with any of them, thought this might be a good post for repairing out door wood projects , like I was saying if it isnt then by all means delete it? maybe all links are advertisements ? I dont know .

Hobbyman2 wrote:if you want to delete it its ok with me ,, by the way there were more then 1 brand name and a bit of history and knowledge shared ,I am not affiliated with any of them, thought this might be a good post for repairing out door wood projects , like I was saying if it isnt then by all means delete it? maybe all links are advertisements ? I dont know .

All I was saying is that we (the forum) have somewhat of a double standard.

Dusty I dont have a issue if the post is deleted ,just saying.
I was posting in the section involving repairing wood ,possibly chairs using marine products.
I didnt see it as being different then discussing yellow glue ot PVA ,or rockler tools , dont know about a double standard?

Like ALL rules(standards), the original intent MUST be adhered to when 'enforcing' them.

This thread/discussion about the original post clearly does not apply to spam deletion. Just because it has a link does not make it spam.

It is the lack of proper consideration(judgement) that makes 'zero tolerance' an unworthy policy. MY 0.02!

Allowing for that judgement does not make a double standard, but actually prevents misapplication done in the name of blind consistency. Make that 0.04.

JPG wrote:Like ALL rules(standards), the original intent MUST be adhered to when 'enforcing' them.

This thread/discussion about the original post clearly does not apply to spam deletion. Just because it has a link does not make it spam.

It is the lack of proper consideration(judgement) that makes 'zero tolerance' an unworthy policy. MY 0.02!

Allowing for that judgement does not make a double standard, but actually prevents misapplication done in the name of blind consistency. Make that 0.04.

I totally agree. The link is totally relevant to the discussion. If you don't know what spam truly is then you should not comment on the subject.

jsburger wrote:

JPG wrote:Like ALL rules(standards), the original intent MUST be adhered to when 'enforcing' them.

This thread/discussion about the original post clearly does not apply to spam deletion. Just because it has a link does not make it spam.

It is the lack of proper consideration(judgement) that makes 'zero tolerance' an unworthy policy. MY 0.02!

Allowing for that judgement does not make a double standard, but actually prevents misapplication done in the name of blind consistency. Make that 0.04.

I totally agree. The link is totally relevant to the discussion. If you don't know what spam truly is then you should not comment on the subject.

I deleted my comment here as it was totally inappropriate to this forum and would certainly have been irritating to many.

I'll take a shot.

The OP said, in effect: I have a particular problem. Here's a product that I think will help me. Whaddaya think?

This appears to be an honest attempt to gather advice. There's no indication the owner of the product is paying the OP. The question doesn't sound like a disguised attempt at marketing. The OP didn't suddenly appear on this message board for the sole purpose of putting up that link. He's taken part in a number of serious discussions.

Spam would be: Here's a product that's so wonderful, it'll forever end the need to ever sand again, and it'll do your taxes! Some of the spam we've seen has been disguised as something less transparent than that, but most of us have seen through the disguise.

Simply including a link to a product isn't spam. Linking to a product for the main purpose of marketing that product is spam.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spamming

Not spam, but a description and history.