good for you christopher for making a decision.

Posted By: JJenZz
This solution means the links don't effect them or the community yet they're still unhappy for some unknown reason. Maybe if someone could clearly explain why this solution is such a problem for them? I am genuinely interested.

i don't get it either although maybe with the heavy restrictions on some CC licensed templates they are worried the sponsored links will be affected by it. i'm not as familiar with the CC license as i could be so i'm wondering could this be an issue if sponsored links are used with a CC license or is this a non-issue?

After getting into bed last night I realised there was some redundant code in my script but at 4am, I wasn't in any rush to switch my machine back on and sort it haha...

So now that I'm up again, i've removed the redundant stuff so you can redownload the 'cleaned up' version

The only real issue I can see so far with this script is that if a template already has rel=nofollow on a link it will just add it again meaning it will have it twice. You could probably add some long a$$ code to put the links from the doc into an array and check if each one has rel=nofollow already before appending it but I'm not sure if it's really worth the effort... I'll leave that bit up to the admins :)

Posted By: perthmetro
And finally Jen. I can't wait to see you have kids. It's the best way to learn in experiencing the joy in working your bum off for absolutely nothing in return.

Haha oh I will get something in return, they'll be scrubbing the toilets and all sorts once they're old enough to understand

Ah that is very true... Oh well, you forget these things at 4am! Haha, yeah, probably best you go for Jaimie's solution.

Is TODC PHP4 or 5?

Posted By: ChristopherPHP5

Oh and I think I've got the function working nicely, but still going to use your idea of having a cleanup class as it could be useful for adding any future things like this in :)

Indeed

Oh and if TODC is PHP5, that class could do with being reworked to suit... __construct() etc.

Posted By: NickyDIf this is the case, then if my vote can be changed, please do so. My interpretation was wrong.

I understood the question the same as Christopher, and it seems that we understood it correctly. However, I think that if you want your vote changed, you should probably change it yourself...I think it would look bad for anyone else to do it.

Posted By: perthmetroI'm an open source/110% free die hard - in the way that means do something for nothing more than helping someone as best i can - with absolutely nothing expected in return. And that's what I'd like this site to be. Maybe I want it to be 100% where the reality of the commercial world says we have to compromise and settle for 90% - I don't know. Maybe I'm way off the mark with my philosophy?

I've always said my first design I submit will be PD and I'll be happy for anyone to do what ever they like with it - If they wanted to claim it as there own design and make squillions from it I wouldn't care less.

I don't think you're philosophy is "way off the mark" at all, I actually agree with it. I just think that you can have sponsored links AND your philosophy (let's call it "my philosophy," I don't want to assume to know exactly what your philosophy is). I've released two designs here, and both are PD. I agree with you, people can make TONS of money off them, I don't care (I'm not much of a designer though, so they'd have to be employing some black magic to make money off them). I also release WordPress Plugins completely free, and there are constantly more coming. I don't expect anything in return. However, I don't see a problem with someone getting something in return, assuming that's not the only reason they're doing it. Something that has sponsored links, or something that someone is paid to create, but that is still released as Public Domain is fine with me.

Think about all the great stuff we have from this kind of setup. Some are Public Domain and others aren't, but RedHat and Canonical have given a TON of free code to the linux community. Six Apart and Automattic have given a ton to the Blogging community (Movable Type and WordPress). MySQL does this with it's database, Zend does this with PHP and the Zend FrameWork, Mozilla does it with FireFox and Thunderbird, etc. All those companies make money, their employees are paid salaries, and they GREATLY benefit their community with quality, open-source, products offered for free.

I honestly think that people can have their cake and eat it too. Perhaps it's because I'm an optimist (just ask my wife, it's annoying).

not really... against outnumbers for by a few and that many have already stated they didn't entirely understand what their vote meant...

besides, it's an unoffical poll and no decisions should be based of it.

Posted By: ChristopherMaybe we should remove the limit of 2 links then? Thoughts everyone?

Personally, I'd say take out the second rule. The rel=nofollow will take care of our original concern (people sapping PR points). Though it's not a huge deal for me if the rule stays.

As a web design and SEO I would not submit templates unless I knew that the end-user would have my link in the footer as the designer without a rel="nofollow". A web designer does not really count on getting business from someone clicking on the link, but they should benefit from the link popularity in regards to seo.

If it is only edited in the preview then it is not a big deal, but if it is in the downloadable file then I think that is going too far. You should just reject templates that have excessive links for "sponsors". When I say excessive I mean a large portion of the design that has a bunch of links. Or any links to affiliate pages and stuff like that. Not cool.

I realize that by adding this comment I am beating a dead horse, but I feel that because I voted I need to put my two cents into the already checked out bill.

I voted yes on allowing sponsored links, regardless of how many and the obligations related to them. I develop small programs, PHP scripts, and contribute to many open-source things for free and would never ask for money and would never put any kind of advertisement/sponsor link on anything I do because I do everything for fun and feel that if others can enjoy it that's payment enough.

However, I do agree that, if it got out of hand (which could only happen if rules to prevent it were not put in place, mind you) it could be extremely bad for the overall scope of this site if every design here was littered with fifteen sponsored links and absolutly no way to remove them short of sending the SPONSOR (not the designer) money to do so (which means the designer would not only be getting shafted on the money end, but would also be getting a terrible name for themselves).

I 100% agree with the new rule, but I was willing to sacrifice the ability to remove a link from a design if the author of that design said I could not. I come here to get great designs, and I do, and if I am going to use a design that I feel deserves my attention enough to use on a public site I think the author's wishes should be met regardless of the circumstances.

Many people here were commenting as if the addition of a sponsored link was going to ruin this site and everything it stood for. I assure you anyone going to any kind of site that offers free services is prepared to see some kind of advertisement (it is completely awesome that this site DOES NOT do that, but anyone who has never been here and sees a link to this site is going to come here and expect it) because they know hosting does not pay for itself.

I admit I was pretty disgusted when this issue cropped up, not by the fact that ramblingsoul added a sponsored link to his design and requested that it not be removed, but how some of the members of this community were selfish enough to speak out the goals and meaning of this site as single members by forcing their outlook on this site onto the rest of the population.

I have not added any designs to this site, and have rarely helped on the forums, but I have given countless people the link to this site stating that this was the BEST website to get free web templates. I would hate to have to stop doing that and stop coming here because the community, like so many others, gets a few elitist people that know everything.

For the sake of the community think not only about the rules related to the submission of designs, but also on the talk that goes on regarding a new/old rule that needs to be added/revised/removed.

p.s. I still believe that excessive links are rediculous. It should be that the designer can have a "designed by" or "sponsored by" link and that should be the only requirement in such a license. But requiring links in a sidebar or something is crazy. I did post YES in support of sponsor links, but the post did not allow an explaination and I am able to explain it here.

Some designers may have issues because, yes we would all love to do things for people without asking anything in return. But there are allot of contributing designers who may be freelancers, and not necessarily financially able to do things like that. That is why you would see resistance. Such rules end up limiting the possibilities for a professional. While open source is, in it's own right it's own thing web designers should not discount themselves. They should always get credit for their art and to apply a rule that would take that away would understandably get some designers upset.

Sean, you have to really think about the designers that make this a community in the first place as well. I am sure you have designers that have been with OD from the start and disagree with the concept of this rule. I am not saying that you won't have an active community because some designers choose to leave, but I am saying that you should definately come up with a better way of counting votes, or just like Florida people will demand a recount. If it is indeed a community you should prepare an election of sorts, and prepare ahead of time so most, if not all the designers in this database know a specific date to vote on it. That would only be fair.

I agree. I have designs I would never give up as open source. But there was a design that I did thatI really loved which I released on here called Kylix and I would not have released it if it ended up being creative commons rejected. But that is a non-issue because I am sure you will not be killing license types, just spam templates. And I agree with filtering out the crap. Quality websites have to avoid becoming the next Craigslist, which is a haven for spammers. So I am for ridding the sponsored links or using nofollow as long as it is limited to the previews.

The outcome was already decided before any vote was cast.

limited to OD preview only is my understanding. - yep only the design previews on Open Designs will be affected, the file users download will be unaltered.

@rankrover - The CC license is staying for time being as far as I'm aware. But it's the templates that try to abuse it with wanting to force users to keep sponsored links in the templates as part of the "attribution" license, that will be rejected. Hope that makes sense!

No comments have been deleted in this thread (if there were I would see them).

But the frame's content can still get indexed, you've only got to look at Google's Indexes to see that is being picked up.

I noticed it to. I looked at the code and noticed the frames being called separately rather than use a main.htm file.

@ainslie: I agree with you and it's very sad that a lot of the core/old community has died away. A few of us are still around on the site as you know but a lot have also moved on to other "non drama" and less stressful related projects. I don't blame them.

I am part of the core/old community and I am still alive :) so it just goes to show, old or new... not everyone has the same opinons on how a site like this should be run. But then that's common sense I guess.

Posted By: ainslieIt also look now that the site belongs to the commercial people. Jenna is now our new leader? Where is LobsterMan?

Commercial people? There are some hobbyists and downloaders voting 'yes' as well. And as for me being the new leader lol what's that all about? I just gave my opinion on the matter that's all... I'm not taking over... yet mowahaha! kidding!

Posted By: gnomeSean: oh, I get it. Deleted comments become admin-visible-only. Nifty.

What do you mean? I think you were directing this towards Christopher and not me, however, yes, admins can see all... dun dun DUN!

Ok, so just what are the rules going to be with sponsored links? Can you sum up for me please Christopher?

I feel that one solution to MANY of our problems would be a link in the design preview that allows community members to report violations. The complaints can be logged and the templates in question can be taken care of. If there are complaints about something that is going on that hasn't yet been discussed, an admin can start a discussion to see what the community feels is proper for that case and the future.

Yes, Christopher set the new rules:

Posted By: ChristopherBut guess what? I'm changing the rules right now, I'm fed up with visiting the forum only to find 50+ posts going round in circles. So I'm throwing my weight around and putting the below into effect immediately.

Sponsored Links

You are welcome to include
sponsored links in your template(s) under the following conditions:

1. Users must be free to remove the sponsored link(s) if they wish - you cannot force a user to keep the sponsored link(s) in as one of the terms of use for the template.

2. A maximum of 2 (two) sponsored links per individual template is allowed.

The Open Designs site administrators and moderators have the final decision on what is classed as a sponsored link.

I am also amending the rules to state that all outbound links in design previews will have rel="nofollow" added to them. Might need some help coding up the script to make this automated though, so help is more than welcome!

Ainslie, I set those rules Aaron quoted last Saturday - when you then replied with "Bloody hell! ".

I then stated that they would be changed/amended once we'd had some decent constructive input, I asked the question should we remove the limit of 2 links and only got a couple of replies. So as of yet nothing more has been done except for the rules I originally added.

I'm pleased we've got something in place. It was definately needed.

However it's been pointed out that google indexes the preview pages directly bypassing the nofollow on the preview page. Now since these won't have a nofollow on the allowed sponsored links isn't this going to have a negative effect on OD and its own ranking?

-Mark