You don\'t think the New York Times censors what it prints? That\'s pretty simplistic.

Actually, this is

a discussion board. What you think you should have the right to do is similar to visiting a club and handing out

fliers describing a competitor\'s product, then complaining when they won\'t let you. It\'s fine to mention a

competitor or even discuss them but the moment you started handing out fliers, you stepped over the line of

reasonable behavoir. No business would allow that.

To

those who believe that the link that I deleted was to an \"article\", please check the fine print.
If you go to

askmen.com and do a search for \"pheromones\" you\'ll find a list of links to so-called articles \"reviewing\"

products.

Strangely it seems all of the most recently published articles on pheromones are about PherX, who just

so happens to be an askmen advertising client.

If you took the time to read everything including the fine print,

you\'ll see that every review that mentions PherX favorably has a disclaimer line at the top or bottom (or both)

that states, \"This article is brought to you in part by Pherx.com\".

If one goes further to examine

askmen\'s policy on sponsored \"articles\", one finds that the article that is ostensibly being presented as an

unbiased review is in fact COMMISSIONED by the ADVERTISER.

Thus the link that I deleted was one that led to an

ADVERTISEMENT, NOT an ARTICLE in the sense that I see it being argued above.

I stand by my decision.

Oscar

[img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Quote:
To those who believe that the link that

I deleted was to an \"article\", please check the fine print.
If you go to askmen.com and do a search for

\"pheromones\" you\'ll find a list of links to so-called articles \"reviewing\" products.

Strangely it

seems all of the most recently published articles on pheromones are about PherX, who just so happens to be an askmen

advertising client.

If you took the time to read everything including the fine print, you\'ll see that every

review that mentions PherX favorably has a disclaimer line at the top or bottom (or both) that states, \"This

article is brought to you in part by Pherx.com\".

If one goes further to examine askmen\'s policy on

sponsored \"articles\", one finds that the article that is ostensibly being presented as an unbiased review is in

fact COMMISSIONED by the ADVERTISER.

Thus the link that I deleted was one that led to an ADVERTISEMENT, NOT an

ARTICLE in the sense that I see it being argued above.

I stand by my decision.

Oscar

[img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

<font br / br / class=\"post\">

INDEED!

Quote:
when all it does is stop the government from

holding your bad opinion of the president or your preaching of a certain viewpoint against you.

<font class=\"post\">

...though this administration would change that pesky detail if it could.

[img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]


Holmes