Posted By: JJenZzArwen, i think you have got the wrong end of the stick here... we're not talking about what people do with the links on the template after downloading them, we're talking about what TODC should do about templates that are being submitted here purely to link farm through the sites template previews

what people do with those links after downloading a template is obviously not in our control, as you say.

aha, I'm not paying attention! I didn't even think of it in terms of template previews...doh!
my bad!

"Report this template" sounds like a great solution! two thumbs up from me

The only thing I'd be concerned about is people abusing the link. It could end up creating a lot of extra work for the admins meaning less time for template approvals.

I do like the idea though... hmmm. What do you think admins?

good ideas there greg.... i'm all for it

What if it started a discussion like Wikipedia does when an article comes into question?

i've noticed a few templates that don't adhere to the 200kb limit rule - this really should be something that's enforced, as excessive filesizes could chew through the bandwidth of an unsuspecting template user. this is something that could automatically be tested when the design is submitted, so it wouldn't be a lot of trouble for whoever does the approving.

Posted By: perthmetroIf we go down down this road of then it could impact negatively on the site.

But, if we allow people to submit designs that are "rip offs", it'll impact us negatively as well. Being able to report these things, IMHO, shows that we're serious about the quality and legitimacy of the designs submitted to this site.

Instead of a plugin, doesn't WP allow you (or at least have an existing plugin that allows you) to run custom PHP scripts? If so, it shouldn't be too difficult to do this sort of thing.

@bakercad: Indeed, there is a plugin to allow using PHP code within WordPress but I'll need to track it down. If you know of a good one, please let me know either via email or in the thread. Thanks.

@pogy366: "ease up on the iron grip"? what are you talking about?

@perthmetro: I agree with you 100%.

We should build a new database table for this, instead of having the system fire off emails...

So we need to add a new guideline, stating that designers may not use the Creative Commons Attribution License to force users of their template to keep sponsored links. Template attribution is hereby limited to at most require an indexed (cannot have rel="nofollow" applied to it) link to the designer's own site. If a template does not clearly state the terms for attribution, all CC and GPL licensed templates default to this. Feel free to post revisions of that statement, or whatever you think the rule should be.

seeing how no one has disagreed with Jason (and all other supporters of this),
seeing how the only active admin in the discussion (Sean) appears to support this,
seeing how Jason is a moderator,
seeing how something needs to be done and discussing gets nothing done...

I think it's a good thing to keep this rule up until a better rule comes along.

I agree, there's no need for all that preamble if we only allow GNU GPL and PD, and it does all the things as we need.

Again i ask, can someone justify leaving CC as an option? This is not a rhetorical question - i would like to know in case it's worth keeping, but at this stage I can't see any.

@Gnome: it doesn't answer my question - what does it have that others don't have that make it essential to stay here? I'm sure it is very author-friendly, but that doesn't mean it fits into this website.

@Pete: Of it's own merits, I don't see a reason to keep it. The only reason I see is all the existing templates that are licensed that way. The author may not have wanted it GPL or PD, so you can't just change them. You'd have to get permission first. Since it's the most common license on here, and since there will probably be a few NOs and a lot of no-answers, the site might lose a decent number of templates.

The way around that would be to remove it as an option, but keep old templates licensed just the way they are. Grandfather them in so to speak.

The reason why designers use CC is because it's available to use... i'm sure many would choose the highest licence available here if it was available. It's no secret that many designers have a problem with not being acknowledged for their work/losing 'control' over their designs.

I personally think all templates should be only PD here, but I also acknowledge that for all sorts of reasons many designers are a funny bunch and don't like giving away something for nothing. So GPL is a fair compromise - it protects the designers interests and protects this site's interests.

It's a two way street, not just the designers street.

We really need to get all these rules thrashed out once and for all. We need to get these rules down into a definitive rule book or something.

How about this for a start: OD Rules

Comments please.

I will grant access and for any other mods/admins that want it.

Not sure I want to stick my neck out too far already being lynched :-) but the part about sponsored links will need to be decided on. I suggest that a poll or vote may be the best way to go as it potentially can create a lot of heated debate.

Sean: nobody seems to take offense to that (from what I distilled from that other conversation), since each designer has one well-indexed link on their user page. On the other hand, This should probably be a question asked in a brand new thread.

I also don't think we should have sponsored links. Bad for the sites the links are on. Only thing they're good for is raising money for someone else but every day, more and more search engines are punishing sites for sponsored/paid links.

My only thought is if it is decided we allow sponsored links that on the demo version of the template on OD would have the rel no follow added to the link but only on the demo, not the download.

I think it's a bad idea to make it mandatory that a sponsored link stay on a design template as part of the license.

As for how we decide if it happens or not, I'm thinking it would be a good idea if Joe and Christopher spoke up about it too. We have 3 admins and I'm the only one chiming in. It sucks.

I am sick and tired of being the only admin speaking up on these things. Part of why I left OSWD, then OWD as an admin. I was tired of pulling almost all the weight... and it's why I've considered stepping down as an admin here on OD. So many people ranting and raving and a few of the core people who can help make changes are not chiming in...

Granted, moderators are speaking up, not all of them, but a few... so... yeah... more frustration. I'm just working on the things on my plate for OD, then it will be time for me to move on... and just be a user/member/contributor and not someone with the label 'admin' to my name.

Whatever we are doing, we need to make a decision on the issue of sponsored links in templates quickly. We have castigated ramblingsoul for sponsored links but are still approving designs with questionable links in them:

Make Money Online on top menu.

Netmeter at bottom of template.

Fotoaparáty a fotogalerie at bottom of template.

...and heavens know more templates in all probability.

Just checked some more. Yes there are loads...

They certainly seem to be submitting too many templates for just one person. Although looking at a couple of "freecsstemplates" templates I don't see any sponsored links.

@ainslie - the very first link you posted (right above my response post) if you follow the link, the name of the USER is different but it has text directing others to the freecsstemplates website and is almost word for word the text of other freecsstemplates templates "copy" - and that one (by "Templates maker") links to "Make Money Online" as you pointed out ..


I know we don't want to limit how many good templates someone can submit, but is there a limit or rule to how many people can use one single ID to submit designs??

Once we get a polling plugin, we'll vote on the addition of rel="nofollow" to DESIGN PREVIEWS ONLY, to protect the ranking of OD.