9

Earlier this year this question was asked about whether a company account is considered spam if they aren't explicitly advertising in their posts. That question was status completed as it was about a specific answer and not a broader question. Joe Strazzere asked if companies are permitted to register and provide answers, but I didn't see any real discussion besides mention of the Doxygen account on SO.

I recently came across the user Careerasaurus.com whose profile is very clearly advertising their website. However, the answers they have given so far have been generally good, one accepted with +5, and none of them have linked or advertised their site. They aren't doing anything obviously bad, but I still feel that they are using The Workplace to promote their own site, which doesn't sit well with me.

Is registration of a company account allowed? Does it fall under spam, even if they aren't doing anything overtly spammy?

| |
24

Reminds me of this - https://xkcd.com/810/

But more seriously, the main thing is that there is a clear company affiliation disclosed. Promoting a product without disclosing the affiliation is the main problem (assuming the answer is meaningful/good to begin with - low quality answers should be dealt with).

For example, a bad answer might be:

check out this website - it can help Careerasaurus.com

Or even a longer answer which basically is promoting that site without disclosing the relationship between the poster and the site.

Given that the user is clearly affiliated with the site, I think it's actually a good thing to have them named what they are - it makes that affiliation more clear, for every post they make.

Realistically I think it probably would be great for Workplace if other career related sites had users contributing high quality content.

| |
  • Thanks, I kind of thought this would be the answer, but I wanted to know what the "official" stance was. And I think that comic is now going to be linked in my profile... – David K Oct 2 '15 at 15:17
  • 2
    @DavidK this might be helpful too, though it's not "official" it seems pretty official to me - meta.stackexchange.com/a/57516/193412 – enderland Oct 2 '15 at 15:20
  • 6
    Yeah, I've seen accounts that have URLs as names elsewhere on the network, and what I've gathered from Meta.SE is that people can name their accounts anything they want that's not profane or fraudulent, and (within those bounds) their profiles are theirs to do with as they wish. If their posts are good then that's fine; if their posts are spammy they'd be spammy regardless of account name and we'll deal with them as spammers. – Monica Cellio Oct 2 '15 at 16:14
  • I'd agree with this answer - the posts are what matters, and having the affiliation disclosed is better than otherwise as it makes things easier to keep an eye on. – Jon Story Oct 6 '15 at 15:33
  • @DavidK That comic has been linked from my profile for a long time. – kasperd Oct 6 '15 at 22:32
  • 3
    I think every user of this site who answers a question is motivated by 1) a desire to help, and 2) a desire to build a reputation for him/herself (pun intended). This applies to individuals, as well as to any other entity. I agree that so long as any user's behavior contributes to the value of the site, they should be welcomed. The site works well, and our current set of mods are great at keeping it that way. – Kent A. Oct 13 '15 at 12:52

You must log in to answer this question.

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