Referral System and a Small Change to The Guidelines

neil on 27/09/2014 - 01:14
Last edited 28/07/2017 - 18:09 by 1 other user

Referral System

Currently, we have a referral system for 20 stores. Everyone should put their referral links in our system by going to My Account-Edit-Referrals.

Additionally, if you want to put your referral link in a deal description then that is OK and your post is automatically marked as a referral post. Just like reps, you have posting limits if marked as a referrer so please read the referral link guidelines.

So what's changing?

We have been noticing, as well as receiving complaints about some deal posters soliciting users to click on their referral links in the referral box. We have had some deal posts that have bolded and headlined that people should be clicking their referral link (in the referral box). Some of these have been questionable deals.

We wish to make it fair to everyone gaining a referral credit as well as making sure people are posting deals because they are good deals. The following change is being made:

Either put your referral link at the end of the deal description or don't mention it at all - do not solicit referrals.

It's as simple as that. Either put the referral link in or don't. The referral box already says exactly what clicking the referral link will do.

As usual, feedback is welcomed.

Update 14/6/17: No longer relevant as all manual referral links are now banned from deal posts. See here.

• • 

    neil on 27/09/2014 - 21:01

    +2

    I understand what you are saying. I guess the reasoning is that we want to reward posters where having their referral link show up is a passive bonus. We don't however want posters actively promoting their referral links. Let's see how we go. I'm sure we'll be revisiting this issue again.

  • 

    RockyRaccoon on 28/09/2014 - 00:48

    We don't however want posters actively promoting their referral links

    Considering all other sharing here isnt rewarded, but at the same time using referrals can give a bonus to someone clicking on the link, the random system follows this true sharing concept.

    This also avoids the sometimes suss comments by some members, who also make referral posts, about others posts which could be seen as trying to play down that post. That being so it gets less attention, resulting in preserving the pool of ozbargainers for another future post by the suss commenter.

• 

  unity1 on 12/10/2014 - 00:54

  According to the Referral Link Posting Limit Guidelines my understanding is the maximum number of deals that a user can submit with referral links is 3 deals a week depending on previous posting history.

  I want to highlight this deal as an example https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/164864 where the OP has used 9 referral links in this one deal. I'm just wondering wether people see that as being within the spirit of the rules? Some might argue the use of 9 different codes is like posting 9 individual deals with 9 different referral codes. I think in a way using multiple codes could almost be seen as a way to get around the current posting limits.

  • 

    neil on 12/10/2014 - 01:17

    +1

    I think you've highlighted an issue but I think it has more ramifications than referral limit posts. Essentially, sparkles is creating a huge number of multiple Catch of the Day accounts to get around the maximum referral limits. This fraudulent behavior won't get unnoticed on COTD so I'd be curious to what they do about this.

    Does having a differing referral links for the same OP in the same deal count as more than one referral deal? No, I don't think so. At the end of the day, it's still one referrer in one deal.

    However I think this guideline applies:

    Do not mention ways to circumvent a sites referral rules - eg multiple sign ups.

    Having a look at some of the other people posting referral deals for COTD, they too are using multiple accounts. Hmmm.

    Given the end user should be the beneficiary, perhaps we should enable COTD to only be random? Or perhaps add a note to click on random if there is an issue with a referral link maxing out?

    • 

      unity1 on 12/10/2014 - 01:38

      +1

      I have no problem with random only. I have posted a few COTD deals but have never included my referral code previously, but I have added mine now and many other users have recently joined the pool of COTD referrers too. This is going to encourage people to post a lot more COTD deals because of the possible financial benefit to them, not necessarily because they are good deals. We are a community sharing deals, and I am happy for the community to benefit whenever I post a deal. There doesn't have to be a finacial incentive for me to do so.

    • 

      hamza23 on 12/10/2014 - 02:04

      Reply to unity1's post:
      I think this question has been raised by part of the community before, not long ago the same point was made about Vinomofo posts, questions were raised of posting for the referral credit and not because it's a good deal.

      Average deals (that might not have been posted usually) can also be worded to look a little better than they are, when real money and not just votes are at stake. That is obviously not directed at that deal or poster or anyone in particular, just the general feedback we have seen.

      Of course we want OzBargainers to be rewarded, especially when it's money for nothing as such. We also don't want to over complicate things, with different referral systems and rules already, some new users can find it a steep learning curve.

      Reply to Neil's post:
      It's a tricky one with the multiple referral ID's, Neil has summed it up well. Making the referral system random only would only work if COTD referral links in the deal were banned though, since this was the link being changed. Could it be as simple as adding a clause in the referral guidelines that you cannot change your referral link in a deal?

      • 

        unity1 on 12/10/2014 - 02:23

        +1

        The thing to note about Vinomofo deals were that they usually required a spend of $100+. COTD is going to appeal to a much bigger audience and things can be purchased on COTD for just a handful of dollars. For this reason you may see an explosion of deals with some people looking to make a quick dollar or two. Deal emphasis should be placed on quality, not quantity.

        Given the end user should be the beneficiary

        Given that this is in the current guidelines isn't random the fair and equal system for all?

        Given that COTD deals are released at set times each day it's inevitable that a subset of members will be ready to post deals at these set times. It then comes down to a horse race as to who can post a deal the quickest. It then becomes a reward for those that are the quickest typist. Is that a fair reward?

• 

  payton on 06/12/2014 - 11:27

  Hi Mod
  When a person posted a deal where referral is available, everyone has an option to either use OP's referral link, or a random one.
  Would it be possible for the us to actually 'select' a particular person out of that random pool?

  Given that some of the Ozbargain users have been genuinely helpful I would like to acknowledge them by using their referral link. Normally the deal poster should be rewarded where he/she deserved it so, I agree. However, I do not condone the behavior of some deal posters (that is apparent when they make comments, or when they react childishly to a negative vote) so I will not use their referral code.

  For example, in the ME Bank referral deal, I can choose which referral I would like to use
  https://www.ozbargain.com.au/wiki/me_bank_referrals