Ad's at the bottom of the screen?

Archived discussion from Toril-2.
Arilin Nydelahar
Sojourner
Posts: 1499
Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Virginia Beach
Contact:

Ad's at the bottom of the screen?

Postby Arilin Nydelahar » Sat Oct 06, 2007 2:43 pm

When you go into posts, you'll have your standard advertisements at the bottom of the screen, only issue is some of these, the majority at the moment seem to be not entirely SFW. As I read this at work sometimes and i'm sure others do as well, i'm curious am I the only lucky one seeing them?
Shevarash OOC: 'what can I say, I'm attracted to crazy chicks and really short dudes'
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Postby Sarvis » Sat Oct 06, 2007 3:01 pm

Err... aren't they all text? Wouldn't your boss have to be in a fairly NSFW position anyway to read them?
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
Arilin Nydelahar
Sojourner
Posts: 1499
Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Virginia Beach
Contact:

Postby Arilin Nydelahar » Sat Oct 06, 2007 3:14 pm

The ones i'm seeing aren't text. They're banner ad's with pictures. And not really, all someone would have to do is walk by, if i'm looking at the last post in a thread it's right there.
Shevarash OOC: 'what can I say, I'm attracted to crazy chicks and really short dudes'
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Postby Sarvis » Sat Oct 06, 2007 3:29 pm

Ok, I just clicked through half the threads in General and haven't seen a banner ad.

Are the ones you're seeing from Google? Pretty sure that's all they are using here (though Shevy would have to confirm that.)

You may want to check the computer for spyware. There are some programs that will swap out a website's ads with different ones so they get the advertising revenue instead.
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
Arilin Nydelahar
Sojourner
Posts: 1499
Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Virginia Beach
Contact:

Postby Arilin Nydelahar » Sat Oct 06, 2007 3:51 pm

Sarvis wrote:Ok, I just clicked through half the threads in General and haven't seen a banner ad.

Are the ones you're seeing from Google? Pretty sure that's all they are using here (though Shevy would have to confirm that.)

You may want to check the computer for spyware. There are some programs that will swap out a website's ads with different ones so they get the advertising revenue instead.


Yeah, odd thing though is like I said this is a work laptop. It's locked down pretty hard. Not like I can get to much other than this, and cnn and the like. I believe it does it on my home pc as well. Odd.
Shevarash OOC: 'what can I say, I'm attracted to crazy chicks and really short dudes'
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Postby Sarvis » Sat Oct 06, 2007 4:03 pm

Ok, how about a trial? Click the link to my site, the only banner ad should be for Lunarpages...

If it does the same thing on your home PC, do you ever transfer files between them? A virus could conceivably get itself onto your thumb drive from your home PC, then to your work laptop from the thumb drive. You can also pick them up through email, and various other ways.

Also, I've heard of ISPs substituting their own ads for site ads, though I suspect your work's ISP wouldn't stoop to that...
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
ssar
Sojourner
Posts: 1446
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Newcastle, NSW, Australia
Contact:

Postby ssar » Sat Oct 06, 2007 10:09 pm

Hmm, I dont see any banner ads / ads with pictures in these forum pages nor any torilmud.org pages.

Only that google text ad with 4 text links and descriptions along the bottom sometimes.
BEER
moritheil
Sojourner
Posts: 4845
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2001 6:01 am

Postby moritheil » Sun Oct 07, 2007 12:51 am

NoScript is your friend if you're running Firefox.
Yotus group-says 'special quest if you type hi dragon'
Shevarash OOC: 'I feature only the finest mammary glands.'
Silena group-says 'he was so fat and juicy..couldnt resist'
avak
Sojourner
Posts: 672
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 6:01 am

Postby avak » Sun Oct 07, 2007 2:04 am

moritheil wrote:NoScript is your friend if you're running Firefox.


Yeah, ns. And who browses the net anymore with ads? I actually dislike the script blockers, but Privoxy and/or Adblocker are awesome.

And, finally...what is the click through rate on the BBS? .0000001%?

Must be insanely low.
Kifle
Sojourner
Posts: 3830
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2002 6:01 am
Location: Huntington, IN USA
Contact:

Postby Kifle » Sun Oct 07, 2007 2:17 am

Yeah, I've never seen any banner ads either. Maybe you have spyware or something? Do those even show banner ads?
Fotex group-says 'Behold! penis!'

Kifle puts on his robe and wizard hat.

Thalidyrr tells you 'Yeah, you know, getting it like a jackhammer wears you out.'

Teflor "You can beat a tank with a shovel!!1!1!!one!!1!uno!!"
Kegor
Sojourner
Posts: 666
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2001 6:01 am
Location: St. Cloud, MN
Contact:

Postby Kegor » Sun Oct 07, 2007 3:47 am

Has anyone commented about the huge influx of spammer members yet? I wish those people very slow painful deaths. Pretty damn annoying.
Kifle
Sojourner
Posts: 3830
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2002 6:01 am
Location: Huntington, IN USA
Contact:

Postby Kifle » Sun Oct 07, 2007 6:06 am

Jaznolg wrote:Has anyone commented about the huge influx of spammer members yet? I wish those people very slow painful deaths. Pretty damn annoying.


Hrm, I haven't noticed those either. This forum has been my oasis in a sea of interweb advertisements. It's kinda nice.
Fotex group-says 'Behold! penis!'

Kifle puts on his robe and wizard hat.

Thalidyrr tells you 'Yeah, you know, getting it like a jackhammer wears you out.'

Teflor "You can beat a tank with a shovel!!1!1!!one!!1!uno!!"
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Postby Sarvis » Sun Oct 07, 2007 6:26 am

avak wrote:
moritheil wrote:NoScript is your friend if you're running Firefox.


Yeah, ns. And who browses the net anymore with ads?


Yeah, it would be silly if people could make money based on the work they put into something.
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
Ragorn
Sojourner
Posts: 4732
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2001 6:01 am

Postby Ragorn » Sun Oct 07, 2007 6:46 am

Sarvis wrote:Yeah, it would be silly if people could make money based on the work they put into something.

If you make money by reducing the quality of my net browsing experience, then I have no sympathy for you if you go broke.

Tivo, Adblock, no-call list.
- Ragorn
Shar: Leave the moaning to the people who have real issues to moan about like rangers or newbies.
Corth: Go ask out a chick that doesn't wiggle her poon in people's faces for a living.
Arilin Nydelahar
Sojourner
Posts: 1499
Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Virginia Beach
Contact:

Postby Arilin Nydelahar » Sun Oct 07, 2007 1:35 pm

Well, not much I could do w/the work laptop other clear cookies/cache and that worked. Oddness.
Shevarash OOC: 'what can I say, I'm attracted to crazy chicks and really short dudes'
avak
Sojourner
Posts: 672
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 6:01 am

Postby avak » Sun Oct 07, 2007 3:14 pm

Sarvis wrote:
avak wrote:
moritheil wrote:NoScript is your friend if you're running Firefox.


Yeah, ns. And who browses the net anymore with ads?


Yeah, it would be silly if people could make money based on the work they put into something.


Wouldn't it be silly if people thought they should make money off of everything they put work into?

I heard an ethicist on NPR the other day talking about how blocking ads online is technically theft! Next thing you know the corporate gov't will install 1981-style cameras in your house to make sure you are paying attention to the ads on TV.

I would -never- click on an ad like the ones at the bottom of the BBS. Why should I have to view them? Wide selection of Mud Trucks on Ebay!? wysiwtf. OTOH, I hardly play here at all anymore and I'd buy from Amazon in the name of this place. Right now I do that for Radio Paradise. Another crazy free service.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Postby Sarvis » Sun Oct 07, 2007 4:29 pm

avak wrote:Why should I have to view them?


Because it is the conditions under which the proprietor allows you entry to the site. Are you arguing that a private business owner dows not have the right to enforce rules about how you utilize their services? Interesting.

<b>Ragorn</b>

Without that person you would have NO browsing experience. At least not for that site, nor most other sites that have anything worthwhile. People tend not to do things for free, that's all there is to it.

Maybe next you'll be asking Corth to defend you in court for free?
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
avak
Sojourner
Posts: 672
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 6:01 am

Postby avak » Sun Oct 07, 2007 5:25 pm

Sarvis wrote:
avak wrote:Why should I have to view them?


Because it is the conditions under which the proprietor allows you entry to the site. Are you arguing that a private business owner dows not have the right to enforce rules about how you utilize their services? Interesting.


I turned on ads for your website. Google click through ads and one sponsor. Trust me, I understand the model. I have one site that generates roughly fifty bucks a month (nothing to brag about, I know). It's a simple equation and I couldn't care less if you turn the ads off. You're getting my intellectual property for free!!!

So, why don't you have the entry page of your site be a mandatory viewing of your hosting sponsor's ad? Yes, that's right; your modest traffic stream would wither to zero overnight.

Another interesting thought. I offer free wifi at the bistros I own. It would take me an hour to setup my POS and routers to make that a fee service. But it's an amenity...it's 'free' WIFI. I wouldn't even kick you out if you didn't make a purchase. These businesses are also the social hubs of the community....do you see a correlation?

Just because your revenue model doesn't work doesn't give you the right to change the rules. Charge a membership to your site. LOL! Charge people to play this mud!
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Postby Sarvis » Sun Oct 07, 2007 5:44 pm

avak wrote:
Sarvis wrote:
avak wrote:Why should I have to view them?


Because it is the conditions under which the proprietor allows you entry to the site. Are you arguing that a private business owner dows not have the right to enforce rules about how you utilize their services? Interesting.


I turned on ads for your website. Google click through ads and one sponsor. Trust me, I understand the model. I have one site that generates roughly fifty bucks a month (nothing to brag about, I know). It's a simple equation and I couldn't care less if you turn the ads off. You're getting my intellectual property for free!!!

So, why don't you have the entry page of your site be a mandatory viewing of your hosting sponsor's ad? Yes, that's right; your modest traffic stream would wither to zero overnight.

Another interesting thought. I offer free wifi at the bistros I own. It would take me an hour to setup my POS and routers to make that a fee service. But it's an amenity...it's 'free' WIFI. I wouldn't even kick you out if you didn't make a purchase. These businesses are also the social hubs of the community....do you see a correlation?

Just because your revenue model doesn't work doesn't give you the right to change the rules. Charge a membership to your site. LOL! Charge people to play this mud!


You've missed the point entirely. If the owner of a site decides you should view ads along with his content then you should. (I use the term content very loosely in regards to my site, btw.) You offer free wi-fi as an amenity, which is fine. Those are the terms you decided on. If you decided you SHOULD charge for it, would you be as lax with people breaking into the network and using it for free?

Maybe, but it still wouldn't make it right. You'll never see a 7-11 owner being ok with people grabbing a slushie and running!

As for interstitials, many sites DO use those to increase ad revenue. Gamespy comes to mind off hand. I don't because I don't like it, simple as that. I still want people viewing the ads. (Of course, I need to get some actual content up there for that to happen... )

EDIT: In any case, would you continue to spend time maintaining and pay hosting fees if the site generated no revenue instead of $50/month?
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
avak
Sojourner
Posts: 672
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 6:01 am

Postby avak » Sun Oct 07, 2007 5:53 pm

You've missed the point entirely. If the owner of a site decides you should view ads along with his content then you should.


And how am I supposed to know which sites require viewing and which do not; especially when I just said that I have a site where I don't require it.

I would argue that if a site owner wants to make it required to view an ad then they should design the system as such.

afaik, coders are working on ad blocker 'detectors' that will remove the content of the site if you have one turned on. Again, watch the traffic plummet when that happens. It had better be awesome content, which 90% of the web is not.
Lilira
Sojourner
Posts: 1438
Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2003 3:53 pm

Postby Lilira » Sun Oct 07, 2007 9:12 pm

Arilin,

I never see the ads.. they aren't effective on the chronicles view yet. :-) Try swapping views if you can.
~\o--Lilira Shadowlyre--o/~

You group-say 'my chars will carry the component on them if I can.'
Inama group-says 'hopefully they'll have some sort of volume discounts on ress items for people like you'
You group-say 'oh? Ya think? *giggle*'
Inama group-says 'they could at least implement frequent dier miles'

Suzalize group-says 'oh, eya's over weight i bet'
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Postby Sarvis » Sun Oct 07, 2007 9:48 pm

avak wrote:
You've missed the point entirely. If the owner of a site decides you should view ads along with his content then you should.


And how am I supposed to know which sites require viewing and which do not; especially when I just said that I have a site where I don't require it.

I would argue that if a site owner wants to make it required to view an ad then they should design the system as such.

afaik, coders are working on ad blocker 'detectors' that will remove the content of the site if you have one turned on. Again, watch the traffic plummet when that happens. It had better be awesome content, which 90% of the web is not.



Avak, if you don't want the ads to be viewed why are they there? You put them there to make money, to support the content you create right? I noticed you didn't answer my question: If you weren't earning $50/month from your site would you still maintain it and pay for it's hosting?

There are ad blocker detectors, and there are already ways around them. As the RIAA is learning there is not much you can do to control technology, it's naive of you to suggest that because a site doesn't block ad-block users they don't want to make money. in any case, you are asking business owners to spend time/money to keep their customers honest. Just like a brick and mortar store has to in order to prevent shoplifting... but I don't think anyone's likely to make a moral defense that it's ok to shoplift from the GAP!
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
avak
Sojourner
Posts: 672
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 6:01 am

Postby avak » Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:25 am

Sarvis wrote:Avak, if you don't want the ads to be viewed why are they there? You put them there to make money, to support the content you create right? I noticed you didn't answer my question: If you weren't earning $50/month from your site would you still maintain it and pay for it's hosting?


I never said that I didn't want the ads viewed. I said that I didn't care if someone browsed the site and didn't view the ads. That's different.

By circumstance, I have this passive site hosted with other active business sites and therefore don't really pay hosting. Now, you're right, if it just outright cost me money each month I would probably not host it.

However, I am not suggesting that no one view ads ever. That would be an extreme case. I am arguing that I feel no obligation to view someone's passive advertisement. Therefore I should have the right to turn it off.

To completely belabor the point (while I wait for a dvd to burn); my click through rate on said website is under 1% of 'views.' It would probably be double that if no one blocked ads (and therefore double the income roughly). That is part of doing business. I know the rules of the game, so to speak.

Similarly, I know how effective my conventional advertising strategies are for my b&m stores. Trust me, some days I wish I could force people to look at or listen to my ads. Do you, like most people, pick up the Sunday paper and discard the ads in the center? Shame on you for denying the paper their right to advertise to you.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Postby Sarvis » Mon Oct 08, 2007 1:17 am

avak wrote:I am arguing that I feel no obligation to view someone's passive advertisement.


Most shoplifters probably feel the same way.

What creates an obligation to "pay" for a service you use?

Do you, like most people, pick up the Sunday paper and discard the ads in the center? Shame on you for denying the paper their right to advertise to you.


Well, first of all I don't get the Sunday paper. :P

Second, most people I know that do get it do so specifically FOR the ads and coupons in there.
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
Ragorn
Sojourner
Posts: 4732
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2001 6:01 am

Postby Ragorn » Mon Oct 08, 2007 2:00 am

What creates an obligation to "pay" for a service you use?

The concept of ownership, and the transferral of ownership via monetary exchange. If you want to apply a similar concept to your website, then you are within your rights to create a pay site, or you can force users to view your advertising by requiring them to download a client-side adloader (like Gator). You are certainly within your rights to do that, if you want. Your content had better justify the cost or inconvenience if you want pageviews, though.

If you put up a public site littered with advertising, then you get to deal with people who circumvent your ads. Nobody "feels bad" for "stealing" your content.
- Ragorn
Shar: Leave the moaning to the people who have real issues to moan about like rangers or newbies.
Corth: Go ask out a chick that doesn't wiggle her poon in people's faces for a living.
moritheil
Sojourner
Posts: 4845
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2001 6:01 am

Postby moritheil » Mon Oct 08, 2007 2:06 am

Sarvis wrote:... but I don't think anyone's likely to make a moral defense that it's ok to shoplift from the GAP!


That's because it's been done before and therefore tiresome, not because a moral defense doesn't exist.

"The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to steal food, to beg for money, and to sleep under bridges." - Anatole France

etc, etc. If you want one you can just google it. For free. ;-)
Yotus group-says 'special quest if you type hi dragon'

Shevarash OOC: 'I feature only the finest mammary glands.'

Silena group-says 'he was so fat and juicy..couldnt resist'
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Postby Sarvis » Mon Oct 08, 2007 3:23 am

Ragorn wrote:
What creates an obligation to "pay" for a service you use?

The concept of ownership, and the transferral of ownership via monetary exchange. If you want to apply a similar concept to your website, then you are within your rights to create a pay site, or you can force users to view your advertising by requiring them to download a client-side adloader (like Gator). You are certainly within your rights to do that, if you want. Your content had better justify the cost or inconvenience if you want pageviews, though.

If you put up a public site littered with advertising, then you get to deal with people who circumvent your ads. Nobody "feels bad" for "stealing" your content.


How do you transfer ownership of any service, then? Is it ok to not pay for a massage just because no ownership was transferred?

Further, people can agree to make any exchange they wish without money. A good example is letting someone famous utilize your product for free as a form of advertising.

I understand that some crappy sites can be ruined by too much advertising, but in such a case just don't visit the site. Using that content, while not theft, is certainly unethical in a similar fashion.

<b>Moritheil</b>: You realize that Google search is ad supported, right?
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
Ragorn
Sojourner
Posts: 4732
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2001 6:01 am

Postby Ragorn » Mon Oct 08, 2007 4:08 am

Sarvis wrote:How do you transfer ownership of any service, then? Is it ok to not pay for a massage just because no ownership was transferred?

Look, the answer to this line of questioning already exists in our society's code of culture. I'm not going to explain it to you, any more than I would explain why you should drive on the right side of the highway. There's no debate here, and trying to argue about it is stupid and pointless. You can put ads on your website, and I'll go ahead and block them, and I won't feel guilty about it. And if you disable my blocking software, then I won't visit your site.

Now you can ponder that and ask why and try to point me out as immoral or hypocritical, but the fact remains: I block ads, and it is neither immoral nor illegal to do so.
- Ragorn
Shar: Leave the moaning to the people who have real issues to moan about like rangers or newbies.
Corth: Go ask out a chick that doesn't wiggle her poon in people's faces for a living.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Postby Sarvis » Mon Oct 08, 2007 4:30 am

Ragorn wrote:
Sarvis wrote:How do you transfer ownership of any service, then? Is it ok to not pay for a massage just because no ownership was transferred?

Look, the answer to this line of questioning already exists in our society's code of culture. I'm not going to explain it to you, any more than I would explain why you should drive on the right side of the highway. There's no debate here, and trying to argue about it is stupid and pointless. You can put ads on your website, and I'll go ahead and block them, and I won't feel guilty about it. And if you disable my blocking software, then I won't visit your site.

Now you can ponder that and ask why and try to point me out as immoral or hypocritical, but the fact remains: I block ads, and it is neither immoral nor illegal to do so.


Ragorn, our society's code of culture is that the provider of a service gets to define under what terms the service can be utilized. That's all there is to it.

"Fact" is a pretty funny word to use when talking about morality, given that "moral" is pretty much unique to any given person. As for the legality, you're correct but the lack of defined law against something does not make it good, moral or correct.

The simple fact is that here, on this very site, you keep calling on the owners to put time and energy into making something for you to enjoy... but refuse to do them even the courtesy of allowing them their chosen method of meeting the expenses incurred in providing this for you.
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
moritheil
Sojourner
Posts: 4845
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2001 6:01 am

Postby moritheil » Mon Oct 08, 2007 5:30 am

Sarvis wrote:<b>Moritheil</b>: You realize that Google search is ad supported, right?


You realize your argument fails on two levels?

1. The ad blockers that filter out google ads ON SITES do not filter out paid google appearances in their search engine on the actual SEARCH PAGE. The first several links will still be sponsored ones. Think about that.

2. Even if (1) were not true (and it is), that quandary exists strictly only under your paradigm. There isn't any inconsistency in say, someone who believes that "property is theft" doing an end run around google ads if they believe that doing so is right.
Yotus group-says 'special quest if you type hi dragon'

Shevarash OOC: 'I feature only the finest mammary glands.'

Silena group-says 'he was so fat and juicy..couldnt resist'
Ragorn
Sojourner
Posts: 4732
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2001 6:01 am

Postby Ragorn » Mon Oct 08, 2007 6:13 am

Sarvis wrote:The simple fact is that here, on this very site, you keep calling on the owners to put time and energy into making something for you to enjoy...

No I don't. I might make suggestions from time to time, because I enjoyed the game in the past and I'd like to see it remain fun for those who choose to play. But I never "call" on anyone to do anything. In fact, if you go shuffle through my posts, you'll see that I regularly and consistently tell people to just chill and enjoy the game as it is, rather than bitching for changes.

So yeah, there's that.

but refuse to do them even the courtesy of allowing them their chosen method of meeting the expenses incurred in providing this for you.

That is correct. If there are ads on the MUD site or the BBS, I've long since blocked them. And I'll continue to do so, and I won't feel bad about it. Advertising reduces the quality of my net surfing experience, and I choose not to view it.

I also watch free network television on my Tivo, and I skip the commercials. Shall I fetch my violin for them too?

Also, my home and cell numbers are on the do-not-call list, preventing dozens of earnest merchants from using their chosen method of meeting their expenses. What level of hell do you think I'll be sent to?
- Ragorn
Shar: Leave the moaning to the people who have real issues to moan about like rangers or newbies.
Corth: Go ask out a chick that doesn't wiggle her poon in people's faces for a living.
ssar
Sojourner
Posts: 1446
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Newcastle, NSW, Australia
Contact:

Postby ssar » Mon Oct 08, 2007 9:40 am

There is insanely more than enough advertising, in all/any form(s) rammed into our lives every day in most aspects of our day-to-day routines across all kinds of media, such that there is a huge scope for those persons wishing to significantly restict thier own personal subjection to it to do so without any negative ethical or moral dilemna present.

In fact, the practice of somewhat basing your actual purchases on a rate inversely proportional to the level of a company's effective advertising should be encouraged, embraced, and flourish in this modern era in which we live.
BEER
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Postby Sarvis » Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:23 pm

moritheil wrote:
Sarvis wrote:<b>Moritheil</b>: You realize that Google search is ad supported, right?


You realize your argument fails on two levels?

1. The ad blockers that filter out google ads ON SITES do not filter out paid google appearances in their search engine on the actual SEARCH PAGE. The first several links will still be sponsored ones. Think about that.

2. Even if (1) were not true (and it is), that quandary exists strictly only under your paradigm. There isn't any inconsistency in say, someone who believes that "property is theft" doing an end run around google ads if they believe that doing so is right.


Umm...

1) I point out that Google is ad supported, and you say that argument fails because they have ads that can't be blocked? Maybe it's because I just woke up... but I don't get it.

2) I don't even see how this applies to anything. Lots of people see things as right that are not. Serial killers often feel justified in their killings, believing God is telling them to do so or some such.

<b>Ragorn</b>

It's funny. You say ads reduce the quality of your net surfing experience, yet without them you probably wouldn't _have_ one. At least nothing like it is today, you'd basically have a few academic sites with no search engines (all ad supported) to find anything.

As for "reduces the quality..." you've just got to be kidding me? A tiny banner at the bottom of a thread does WHAT exactly? Would your "browsing experience" be more or less harmed if there was a picture down there?

No, don't be retarded.

I suppose you feel personally offended at any given sporting event too, right? Clearly the game is just not as good with all those ads plastered around the arena!

Ssar has it right, if the advertising bothers you that much don't use the service. Just like if the price of a massage is too much you don't go and get one, right?

It should also be noted that TV Networks have tried to make it illegal to skip ads using TiVo, though I don't know where the issue stands now...

You're comparison to telemarketing is a complete straw man given that you are not choosing to use their service, so let's just ignore it... 'k?

<b>ssar</b>

Not utilizing a product or service because they advertise too much is perfectly reasonable. It's using something and not "paying" for it that is objectionable.
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
User avatar
Shevarash
FORGER CODER
Posts: 2944
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2000 6:01 am

Postby Shevarash » Mon Oct 08, 2007 2:35 pm

Uh...

These forums use Google Adsense to display text ads at the bottom of the screen on forum thread pages. They can show graphical banners, but only for PSA's. There should never be any mature content, much less NSFW picture ads. If you see something like that, take a screen shot, and do a "Save Page", then send both to me.

It's pretty unlikely that Google is serving up these NSFW ads, so I'd highly suggest running comprehensive virus and spyware removal tools on your PC.
Shevarash -- Code Forger of TorilMUD
avak
Sojourner
Posts: 672
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 6:01 am

Postby avak » Mon Oct 08, 2007 2:37 pm

Ragorn, our society's code of culture is that the provider of a service gets to define under what terms the service can be utilized.


So show us where this website or yours has these terms that require ad viewing. I guess you are suggesting it is implied?

Is it tantamount to shoplifting to turn down the radio during a commercial break? Change the channel on the TV? Not watch or listen to the npr pledge drive?
Arilin Nydelahar
Sojourner
Posts: 1499
Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Virginia Beach
Contact:

Postby Arilin Nydelahar » Mon Oct 08, 2007 2:50 pm

Shevarash wrote:Uh...

These forums use Google Adsense to display text ads at the bottom of the screen on forum thread pages. They can show graphical banners, but only for PSA's. There should never be any mature content, much less NSFW picture ads. If you see something like that, take a screen shot, and do a "Save Page", then send both to me.

It's pretty unlikely that Google is serving up these NSFW ads, so I'd highly suggest running comprehensive virus and spyware removal tools on your PC.


Yeah. I fixed it way up earlier in the thread. But this is still alive, somehow, mysteriously. :P
Shevarash OOC: 'what can I say, I'm attracted to crazy chicks and really short dudes'
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Postby Sarvis » Mon Oct 08, 2007 3:01 pm

avak wrote:
Ragorn, our society's code of culture is that the provider of a service gets to define under what terms the service can be utilized.


So show us where this website or yours has these terms that require ad viewing. I guess you are suggesting it is implied?

Is it tantamount to shoplifting to turn down the radio during a commercial break? Change the channel on the TV? Not watch or listen to the npr pledge drive?


Yes, implied. You don't see big signs in the supermarket stating you have to pay them, right?

Do you rush to change the channel every time a TV commercial comes on? If so do you keep going back to catch what you were watching, or just give up and watch something else (stop using the service?)

NPR isn't a great example, they are essentially showing what would happen to TV without advertising. It would either all become pay service, or they'd do pledge drives. Also, they don't require anything out of you... they request pledges.
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
Ragorn
Sojourner
Posts: 4732
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2001 6:01 am

Postby Ragorn » Mon Oct 08, 2007 3:08 pm

Sarvis wrote:It's funny. You say ads reduce the quality of your net surfing experience, yet without them you probably wouldn't _have_ one. At least nothing like it is today, you'd basically have a few academic sites with no search engines (all ad supported) to find anything.

Yeah, that's funny. I'm sure thankful someone's clicking on all those ads, because I get free web content out of it. Works out great for me, actually.

As for "reduces the quality..." you've just got to be kidding me? A tiny banner at the bottom of a thread does WHAT exactly? Would your "browsing experience" be more or less harmed if there was a picture down there?

Well, I'm glad you've decided to argue with me about my personal preferences. Let me know how that works out for you.

I suppose you feel personally offended at any given sporting event too, right? Clearly the game is just not as good with all those ads plastered around the arena!

Having ads plastered all over the stadium certainly does lower the quality of the event. I already didn't buy EA Sports games, but the fact that they sell ad space within the names of their achievements (the Old Spice Red Zone Challenge!) makes their product even more insufferable.

Don't even get me started on the World Series of Blackjack and their inclusion of the Burger King Power Chip (which allows a player to Have It Their Way(tm) and replace a card dealt to them!).

Ssar has it right, if the advertising bothers you that much don't use the service.

No thanks. I'll continue to use the service, and I'll just block the ads. Thanks for your opinion though.

It should also be noted that TV Networks have tried to make it illegal to skip ads using TiVo, though I don't know where the issue stands now...

It was laughed out of court. That's why television shows downloaded from major network websites (NBC.com) have proprietary video players that force you to watch commercials... it's the only way they can make you see the ads.

It's also why I don't download shows from major network websites. Thanks, Tivo!

Would it make you mad if I told you that even if I'm watching a "live" television show, I'll pause it for 15 minutes and go do something else so I can skip through the commercials when I come back?
- Ragorn
Shar: Leave the moaning to the people who have real issues to moan about like rangers or newbies.
Corth: Go ask out a chick that doesn't wiggle her poon in people's faces for a living.
avak
Sojourner
Posts: 672
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 6:01 am

Postby avak » Mon Oct 08, 2007 4:02 pm

Another question in this ridiculous discussion. I have been known to browse in text-only format. Am I obligated to disavow this practice to see ads? How about java and flash? Can I block ads that play music or do I have to turn down my speakers so that advertisers can exert their rights?
Kifle
Sojourner
Posts: 3830
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2002 6:01 am
Location: Huntington, IN USA
Contact:

Postby Kifle » Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:31 pm

Ragorn wrote:Would it make you mad if I told you that even if I'm watching a "live" television show, I'll pause it for 15 minutes and go do something else so I can skip through the commercials when I come back?


This is the major reason I'm getting a Tivo soonish. To avoid commercials now I just download TV shows from torrent sites. That I kinda feel guilty about, but if I have to watch another Nascar retard try to sell me some soda, I'm going to slit my wrists in a nice warm bath. We get it... Mt. Dew is fucking extreme.
Fotex group-says 'Behold! penis!'

Kifle puts on his robe and wizard hat.

Thalidyrr tells you 'Yeah, you know, getting it like a jackhammer wears you out.'

Teflor "You can beat a tank with a shovel!!1!1!!one!!1!uno!!"
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Postby Sarvis » Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:37 pm

Kifle wrote:That I kinda feel guilty about,


Why? There is no fundamental difference, either way you rob the network of it's revenue stream.
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
Tasan
Sojourner
Posts: 1710
Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Fridley, Mn USA
Contact:

Postby Tasan » Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:57 pm

Perhaps if there was less advertising on the net, every moron with a computer wouldn't post their thoughts and bog down the tubes that make the internet run.
Danahg tells you 'yeah, luckily i kept most of it in my mouth and nasal membranes, ugh'

Dlur group-says 'I have a dead horse that I'm dragging down the shaft with my 4 corpses. Anyone want to help me beat it?'

Calladuran: There are other games to play if you want to play with yourself.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Postby Sarvis » Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:09 pm

<b>Avak</b>: Since the webmaster is technically capable of putting ads in a text browser, his failure to do so is not your responsibility. A competent webmaster would also be cognizant of the risks of java/flash being turned off or not installed and serve up a mix of ads. This is analogous to a store accepting multiple forms of payment, really.

So care to answer under what conditions it is ok to utilize a service without compensating the provider? For instance, you can get into most pay sites using bugmenot, right? Does this mean it is morally ok?


<b>Tasan</b> : We're not getting money from these ads, yet we're still posting... so probably not. :P
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
avak
Sojourner
Posts: 672
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 6:01 am

Postby avak » Tue Oct 09, 2007 12:56 am

Sarvis wrote:<b>Avak</b>: Since the webmaster is technically capable of putting ads in a text browser, his failure to do so is not your responsibility. A competent webmaster would also be cognizant of the risks of java/flash being turned off or not installed and serve up a mix of ads. This is analogous to a store accepting multiple forms of payment, really.

So care to answer under what conditions it is ok to utilize a service without compensating the provider? For instance, you can get into most pay sites using bugmenot, right? Does this mean it is morally ok?


<b>Tasan</b> : We're not getting money from these ads, yet we're still posting... so probably not. :P


I'm afraid you backed yourself into a logical corner, Sarvis. If the webmaster is technically capable of forcing me to watch passive ads, then his failure is not my responsibility.

It is okay to utilize a service without 'compensating' the provider when the means of compensation are both passive and voluntary.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Postby Sarvis » Tue Oct 09, 2007 1:00 am

avak wrote:
Sarvis wrote:<b>Avak</b>: Since the webmaster is technically capable of putting ads in a text browser, his failure to do so is not your responsibility. A competent webmaster would also be cognizant of the risks of java/flash being turned off or not installed and serve up a mix of ads. This is analogous to a store accepting multiple forms of payment, really.

So care to answer under what conditions it is ok to utilize a service without compensating the provider? For instance, you can get into most pay sites using bugmenot, right? Does this mean it is morally ok?


<b>Tasan</b> : We're not getting money from these ads, yet we're still posting... so probably not. :P


I'm afraid you backed yourself into a logical corner, Sarvis. If the webmaster is technically capable of forcing me to watch passive ads, then his failure is not my responsibility.

It is okay to utilize a service without 'compensating' the provider when the means of compensation are both passive and voluntary.


Sorry, but you're the one in a logical corner.

Since any store is technically capable of preventing theft, a store's failure to do so is not the shoplifter's responsibility.

See the problem there? At any given point it is technically possible to get around any given defense of a proprietor's service or product. (Just ask the RIAA!) Just because the defense was surpassed does not make the behavior ok, if it did there could be no basis for criminal punishment of a succesful criminal.
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
Kifle
Sojourner
Posts: 3830
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2002 6:01 am
Location: Huntington, IN USA
Contact:

Postby Kifle » Tue Oct 09, 2007 2:23 am

Sarvis wrote:
Kifle wrote:That I kinda feel guilty about,


Why? There is no fundamental difference, either way you rob the network of it's revenue stream.


Because through torrents, the networks can't say I watched the show, thus proving to the companies buying ad space/time that somebody was watching during that time. With Tivo, however, I can just record it, do something for 30 minutes, come back and watch the show uninterupted. That way, the network can still take credit for me watching the show.
Fotex group-says 'Behold! penis!'

Kifle puts on his robe and wizard hat.

Thalidyrr tells you 'Yeah, you know, getting it like a jackhammer wears you out.'

Teflor "You can beat a tank with a shovel!!1!1!!one!!1!uno!!"
Corth
Sojourner
Posts: 6002
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: NY, USA

Postby Corth » Tue Oct 09, 2007 3:12 am

This is the dumbest thread ever.
Having said all that, the situation has been handled, so this thread is pretty much at an end. -Kossuth

Goddamned slippery mage.
Arilin Nydelahar
Sojourner
Posts: 1499
Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Virginia Beach
Contact:

Postby Arilin Nydelahar » Tue Oct 09, 2007 3:18 am

Corth wrote:This is the dumbest thread ever.


I agree.
Shevarash OOC: 'what can I say, I'm attracted to crazy chicks and really short dudes'
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Postby Sarvis » Tue Oct 09, 2007 3:21 am

Kifle wrote:
Sarvis wrote:
Kifle wrote:That I kinda feel guilty about,


Why? There is no fundamental difference, either way you rob the network of it's revenue stream.


Because through torrents, the networks can't say I watched the show, thus proving to the companies buying ad space/time that somebody was watching during that time. With Tivo, however, I can just record it, do something for 30 minutes, come back and watch the show uninterupted. That way, the network can still take credit for me watching the show.


And knowing that people use TiVo to skip commercials, an advertiser might conclude that anyone TiVoing a program is not watching commercials and decide not to pay for them.

I don't think networks actually monitor everyone watching a show anyway, which is why we still have Nielsen ratings...
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
moritheil
Sojourner
Posts: 4845
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2001 6:01 am

Postby moritheil » Tue Oct 09, 2007 5:27 am

Sarvis wrote:
moritheil wrote:
Sarvis wrote:<b>Moritheil</b>: You realize that Google search is ad supported, right?


You realize your argument fails on two levels?

1. The ad blockers that filter out google ads ON SITES do not filter out paid google appearances in their search engine on the actual SEARCH PAGE. The first several links will still be sponsored ones. Think about that.

2. Even if (1) were not true (and it is), that quandary exists strictly only under your paradigm. There isn't any inconsistency in say, someone who believes that "property is theft" doing an end run around google ads if they believe that doing so is right.


Umm...

1) I point out that Google is ad supported, and you say that argument fails because they have ads that can't be blocked? Maybe it's because I just woke up... but I don't get it.

2) I don't even see how this applies to anything. Lots of people see things as right that are not. Serial killers often feel justified in their killings, believing God is telling them to do so or some such.


Oh, this is getting amusing. See, context matters here. You are the one who asked for a moral framework within which it is OK to block google ads. For the sake of the discussion, I provided one. (There are others; I just provided the first one that came to mind.) Rather than continuing this discussion by either acknowledging the validity of that framework or providing a nuanced analysis, your response was to reject it out of hand without examining it and to equate blocking google ads to serial murder. Then you tried to reprove me for bringing up other moral frameworks when in fact you were the one who asked for them in the first place.

Regarding #1, the issue is topicality. Refer to your argument that a free google search would be costing google itself revenue. I pointed out that blocking ads here on the BBS doesn't cost google itself any revenue, so your argument is not valid for this discussion.
Yotus group-says 'special quest if you type hi dragon'

Shevarash OOC: 'I feature only the finest mammary glands.'

Silena group-says 'he was so fat and juicy..couldnt resist'

Return to “General Discussion Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 27 guests