Merged Hatter Thread

[RedPop4]

I removed mine, even though I'm not a retailer, just a moderator and poster on another website.

FWIW, we've not allowed commercial url's in sig tags over there, but that's been the policy of that site from the beginning. I would guess it's the abrupt change and the fact that it was allowed that rankles.

This site will definitely be the poorer without these guys.

 

[deanglen]

Can I ask why not remove the web address and continue with business as usual?
If the point is to provide information and not get business, then why delete one's account?
Please read this as a serious inquiry because I do not understand the logic behind this course of action.

AMEN! Please, guys, why not stay and keep enriching the Lounge we share? We know you are vendors, we have a place for you to offer your wares and speaking for myself, as a Lounger who would love to be a "hatter" like yourselves, fully aware that it isn't without its own crosses to bear, your presence means something to all of us. You produce our dreams. You fashion our hopes. You are the Lounge! Quo Vadis?

dean

 

[J. M. Stovall]

Please stay!

 

[feltfan]

Eek.

I urge MK to communicate directly with the hatters
to come up with a solution that is acceptable to all.

This site is significantly poorer without Steve, John, Art,
Atomic Glee, and the others, to say nothing of retailers
like Steven, BigSho, and Aaron.

It is clear to me that these guys don't get much of their
business from their .sig links here. The exception to this rule is Art,
and people will just PM him when they see his great hats
anyway.

I'm not sure what prompted the "no commercial links"
announcement in the first place. I hope this can be worked
out. Otherwise there will only be one site where one can get
views from a real hatmaker...

 

[DOUGLAS]

Wow. I will miss the venders posts as they offer a very specific opinion on all things hat related however it is their choice to leave so my hat is off to them and I wish them well. Hopefully they will come back and post again. You know how hard it is to leave this joint

 

[BigSho]

I am not sure I even understand this completley. I was asked no to advertize my website and I have not see any of the vendors including myslef ever really "advertize" themselves. My link is not an advertisment it is an association no advertisement is meant by it. I doubt that me putting my link in has made me any money at all.

 

[shoeshineboy]

perhaps MK could charge a nominal sig line charge to put there website address in..


i like the hatmakers contributing thier ideas...and i don't see them hawking business in thier posts....

just my .02


mark the shoeshine boy

 

[Matt Deckard]

Oh nobody wants to see anyone go over a matter of whether or not he or she can post his or her website.

You provide knowledge and it has always been appreciated and that is not a falsehood. If you want to bow out of the crowd it's not my call, though don't let it be because you were told not to post your website.

We're on the same team. We all love hats and clothes and style. I cringe sometimes when i do see the vendors who are here just to post on everythread and hock his or her wears... it has happened before. Are we punnishing all for the actions of few? perhaps, though in the long run we think it better to allow vendors goods to show their merrits throught the customers who enjoy them.

I'm not a big fan of taking links out of signatures though if that is what is needed it is what is needed.

For Now We'll wait for MK to give the final word on the matter..

I'm not yet going to close this thread... all I ask is for level headed conversations and understanding.

 

[Arctichighlandr]

Advertising?

I think it is a grey area. I see no harm in anyone simply having their web address listed in their postings when their posts clearly are not advertisements. It is a convenient means of contacting a person and getting to know more about a fellow member if we chose to follow that link. I think the rule should only be applied to actual real advertisements for services. The more hatting industry posters we have on the forum the more knowledge there is to be shared. Being supportive and inclusive makes for a better forum. Just my 2 cents.

 

[Matt Deckard]

Can I ask why not remove the web address and continue with business as usual?
If the point is to provide information and not get business, then why delete one's account?
Please read this as a serious inquiry because I do not understand the logic behind this course of action.

Agreed... and question restated.

 

[Michaelson]

I think it is a grey area. I see no harm in anyone simply having their web address listed in their postings when their posts clearly are not advertisements. It is a convenient means of contacting a person and getting to know more about a fellow member if we chose to follow that link. I think the rule should only be applied to actual real advertisements for services. The more hatting industry posters we have on the forum the more knowledge there is to be shared. Being supportive and inclusive makes for a better forum. Just my 2 cents.

Agreed, and restated.

The only thing I'd add to the above is that if the vendor is hawking their wares has been stated elsewhere, no argument. I don't recall ANY of these folks ever doing that, and to have a forum called the Fedora Lounge alienate those who MAKE the Fedoras because of a signature web address seems interesting, but as has been stated, it's MK's call, and his rules, and if this rule is now set in stone and irreversible, so be it.

Regards! Michaelson

 

[Feraud]

Would anyone not join the Lounge if they could not link their personal website whether it be a business or not?
We should view the change as a necessary development in a growing forum. Life changes around us everyday. At this point in the game everyone knows who does what. If necessary I can p.m. a bartender or member for direction to a hatmaker if necessary.
If the hatmakers are not drawing business volume from their signature links(which I do believe) then why quit?
I hope they stay. I enjoy reading their technical posts.

 

[jake_fink]

I urge MK to communicate directly with the hatters
to come up with a solution that is acceptable to all.

This site is significantly poorer without Steve, John, Art,
Atomic Glee, and the others, to say nothing of retailers
like Steven, BigSho, and Aaron.

It is clear to me that these guys don't get much of their
business from their .sig links here. The exception to this rule is Art,
and people will just PM him when they see his great hats
anyway.

I'm not sure what prompted the "no commercial links"
announcement in the first place. I hope this can be worked
out. Otherwise there will only be one site where one can get
views from a real hatmaker...

That's exactly how I feel. Thank-you feltfan.

The hatters will be sorely missed. They gave the board a lot of value.

 

[Matt Deckard]

Agreed, and restated.

Regards! Michaelson

They can be as helpful as they like, though why pull up stakes when they are told they can't post links in their signatures.

I'm for the links in the signatures myself. I just don't think it logical to leave over the situation.

You are listed as a vendor

 

[Russ]

I never look at the vendor section or any other section; only this one on hats in general. And the posts I find the most valuable are the ones by hat makers. So this is a sad day. Both Fedora and MTHATTER leaving, and leaving a big hole. I am holding my breath and hoping the few remaining hatters won't join the exodus!

Personally I found those signature links a very convenient way to get to the web sites without doing a web search. I would allow them on my own forum. As a matter of fact, I do allow them on my own forum (not a hat forum). I also pay for the forum out of my own pocket, and it isn't that much. Of course I don't have advertisers, since forums are generally not money making projects to begin with. The presence of hatters here seems to be more valuable than sponsor issues IMO, and I think they ought to be given the freedom to keep their links.

So MTHATTER, if you are still reading these, is there another forum where you will be posting messages?

 

[Michaelson]

They can be as helpful as they like, though why pull up stakes when they are told they can't post links in their signatures.

I'm for the links in the signatures myself. I just don't think it logical to leave over the situation.

You are listed as a vendor

Matt, read John's post just above yours. He answer this question better than I can, him being one directly impacted by this decision.

Regards! Michaelson

 

[Feraud]

Whoa. This is getting ugly fast. Let me say I have no stake in either side. I like to see the links but if they are not allowed then so be it.
Once again we know who sells hats and can inquire directly to them for a link or information!! :eusa_doh: Is this so hard to do?
All this talk about punishment (self inflicted btw), advertising space, etc. is besides the point when a hatter removes himself from the forum.
Seriously, what am I missing?

 

[Vermifuge]

Matt, being a bartender, I will direct this at you.

For me personally, my website gives credence to what I have to say. Someone can take a quick look at my site and hopefully understand I am not a casual hat wearer. I never post my site digging for business - I don't need it. But my site does tell folks who I am and possibly that an opinion may be worth listening to.

I am sorry but I won't post further without a seperation and recognition somehow that I am hatmaker and the website link was the only means of doing so.

You may pass this on to MK and if he can remedy this somehow, I will be open to a solution.

John

So if MK just made a rank and maybe a gold star for hat makers you would be happy?

 

[Michaelson]

Actually, I think this has been a very decent discussion so far. Nothing ugly at all that I've read to this point.

Actually, speaking ONLY for myself, no, I DON'T know who all are hat makers here at this site, so that's not always a given. Those supplied signature links HELPED me...but once again, I'm only speaking of myself. [huh]

Regards! Michaelson

 

[Matt Deckard]

Matt, read John's post just above yours. He answer this question better than I can, him being one directly impacted by this decision.

Regards! Michaelson

So are you saying you think it's logical for vendors to leave because they can't show their link at the bottom of their posts?