Creative Commons license icon

Reply to comment

That was sort of an opinion I slid in there, I did think about redacting it for a bit thinking that it seemed a bit out of place for the article. However, there are a few cases that I can think of where people were using the system to do more then just give away out of the kindness of their hearts. Typically they required you to WATCH them as well as post a reverb journal.

Of course, you can still do that if you wish, my hope is that one plans on providing something of worth to those watchers other then a chance to win a prize, cause as soon as the number is pulled you'll just lose them all again unless you give someone a reason to stick around.

I did not participate in any of these kind of sweepstakes in the past, and feel no ill will towards the idea of such things. In fact as a writer on the cusp of releasing a furry novel by early next year I was thinking of using the methods myself. This article was the result of the wall this rule change put before me and decided to share these thoughts on it.

The purpose of my raffle, however, would be to promote the book, by giving away free digital copies, the details I'm still fleshing out.

Long rambling short. Nothing against these advertising methods, as long as long as the deal isn't entirely self centered. One could argue that getting my book out is just as self centered as gaining watchers, but my hope would be that people enjoy the item they may not otherwise have heard about, given I'm not a Kyell Gold.

Reply

  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <img> <b> <i> <s> <blockquote> <ul> <ol> <li> <table> <tr> <td> <th> <sub> <sup> <object> <embed> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <h6> <dl> <dt> <dd> <param> <center> <strong> <q> <cite> <code> <em>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options

CAPTCHA
This test is to prevent automated spam submissions.
Leave empty.