|
Post by Breepop on May 8, 2010 15:36:36 GMT -5
We're talking about the little ads on websites. I understand what you're saying, I'm not an idiot (most of the time). I know. They're a great way to advertise, even for awesome things. That's what I'm saying.
|
|
|
Post by Johncoyne on May 8, 2010 18:30:21 GMT -5
I'm not sure how great of a marketing ploy online ads are. Online ads have discouraged me from playing Evony, whatever that is. Something tells me that medieval kings have nothing to do with scantily clad women. However, if they are done correctly, and put on the right sites, they can be ggrrrrrreat.
|
|
|
Post by hey light on May 8, 2010 18:34:10 GMT -5
Most ads really don't bother me, but if they're really big or popups, they really annoy me.
|
|
|
Post by click3tyclick on May 8, 2010 18:39:19 GMT -5
I'm not sure how great of a marketing ploy online ads are. Online ads have discouraged me from playing Evony, whatever that is. Something tells me that medieval kings have nothing to do with scantily clad women. However, if they are done correctly, and put on the right sites, they can be ggrrrrrreat. WoW ads are basically "lol ppl our game chill SHIRT we have like 10 million players yo try it now",
|
|
|
Post by Johncoyne on May 8, 2010 18:57:06 GMT -5
Anyone who has a desire to play WoW is playing it already.
|
|
|
Post by Insane_Zang on May 8, 2010 20:59:01 GMT -5
That's why I don't like them though. If they need little ads on the side of some shitty website, then they fail as a game. There are more people playing WoW than living in my country. I think they're doing pretty well. Yes, but to stoop so low as to making cheep ads on some shitty web site, it sickens me. I'm not sure how great of a marketing ploy online ads are. Online ads have discouraged me from playing Evony, whatever that is. Something tells me that medieval kings have nothing to do with scantily clad women. ^That
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 9, 2010 18:22:46 GMT -5
Imagine running a restaurant where 40% of the people who came and ate didn’t pay. In a way, that’s what ad blocking is doing to us. Ars Technica Wrong. You are running a restaurant where the food is free, and on every table there’s a pot of leaflets advertising other restaurants. You are claiming that when people don’t walk out of your restaurant carrying those leaflets that they are stealing from you.
You are so, so wrong.
There is no signed contract I have made with anybody that means that I have to view any ads, otherwise I haven’t paid someone. Your contract is between you and your advertising agencies, there is no contract between me and them, nor you. If you give me your stuff for free, don’t complain if I then take it.
And don’t blame me if you made crappy decisions on how to run your business.
Update
Because I’m publishing this publicly, it’s only fair that Ars Technica has the right to reply:
It’s a real shame that you didn’t comprehend my article and have instead created a strawman. I suggest you ruminate on the meaning of “in a way,” and follow that up by locating where in my argument I say anything about “stealing.”
And by the way, we’ve not made crappy decisions on how to run our business. We’ve seen more success than 99.99% of other online content entrepreneurs out there. Ken What I can’t understand is that if they are so successful, why is the article so riddled with blame? Your advertising is based on page-views, and those page-views are being cut off industry-wide. Don’t blame users, that’s one step short of the music industry blaming piracy, when they themselves created the need for piracy. Change your advertising model. Innovate. Never blame your customers.
For perspective, OSnews ran a story about its advertising problem in 2007. The comments make for interesting reading. My opinions have definitely changed and strengthened since then (because of the worsening of bad advertising tactics), and I believe that OSnews is, like Ars Technica, making the mistake of thinking that the current advertising model is worth defending—it’s not. I am working with OSnews to revamp their advertising. “Imagine Running a Restaurant Where 40% of the People Who Came and Ate Didn’t Pay…” - Camen DesignI think this explains my opinion... Oh, and I also really like not having annoying ads blocking the sweet sweet content I want to read/see/hear.
|
|
|
Post by Jake on May 10, 2010 17:27:43 GMT -5
Adblock doesn't display the ad but it's still there in the sense that if it's "pay per impression" then the website still gets money. If it's "pay per click" then it doesn't concern me because I haven't clicked on a single ad since I was 10.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2010 17:18:20 GMT -5
Adblock doesn't display the ad but it's still there in the sense that if it's "pay per impression" then the website still gets money. If it's "pay per click" then it doesn't concern me because I haven't clicked on a single ad since I was 10. Actually, AdBlock (for Firefox) blocks ads from even being downloaded, so, for the advertiser, it is like the page was never seen, and the ad never viewed. Nonetheless, this is much more secure than simply hiding ads with CSS or removing them with JavaScript (Chrome's adblocks... due to technical limitations) because this way there is no danger whatsoever of malicious code being executed. (Maybe someone should suggest to Adblock Plus' author an option to download the adds but to not execute them, so the add was considered viewed, but still safe and non-bothering).
|
|