To my knowledge, questions and answers that contain spam and promotional materials, such as to sell something or advertsting, are forbidden.

But what if someone has a username like somecompany.com ?

Sure, it isn’t a direct link, but it would still get a few people to become curious and go over. It’s a very subtle form of advertising. (There is an actual user on the site with such a username, and the site in their username IS an actual business; I checked.)

Do we have a stance on this, or am I missing something?

If the “.com” part were removed, the username would be perfectly fine, IMHO. Should we, or is it already forbidden or something of the like, prevent usernames from ending in “.com” and “.net,” and such similar website linkage endings?

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ If it's advertising something (e.g. a product) mod-flag one of their posts (if they don't have then one of your posts) and explain the situation. Moderators will probably then restore the username to user12345678. $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 11, 2019 at 18:31
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @double-beep Well the user doesn’t have any promotional posts. The only “advertisey” thing here is the username. But just leaving a silent flag and having a decison happen in the shadows didn’t feel quite right to me. I felt that a loud, clear, public answer on Meta would be supremely better for the community. $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 11, 2019 at 19:31
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Same issue raised on another site. $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 11, 2019 at 21:47

1 Answer 1


A person’s username and their profile are their own to use to express themselves, and unless they’re crossing a line in doing so, we’re pretty hesitant to stifle people’s right to self-expression. Indeed, on main Meta, this answer to the question Usernames as Advertising or Spam? spells this out more fully, and states bluntly that “there is no “spam” to a username.” (emphasis in the original)

Some users fit a particular pattern for being actual spammers. If such an account is created, we’ll usually destroy it on sight. Usernames and profile contents in those cases may serve as additional evidence that the account is a spammer, but it takes more than just putting a URL in/as one’s name or profile message for us to take any action.

The specific user you’ve asked about has answered a question here, so has had legitimate interaction with the site and has not (so far) done anything for which any kind of moderator action is warranted.

Short answer: if they’re not doing anything actually spammy, someone putting a URL in/as their username or profile isn’t doing anything actionable.


You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .