Feedback Appreciated: An Ad-Free experience ala Wired.com
- Page 1 of 1
Basically, let me post what Wired.com is doing:
What does everyone at large think about this? Concerns? This isn't a thread to indicate that we'll be implementing this, especially if the feedback to something like this would be negative. We're also not Wired.com, so we can't arbitrarily implement shit like this without losing what little marketshare we do have.
Therefore, we have restricted access to articles on WIRED.com if you are using an ad blocker. There are two easy options to access that content.http://www.wired.com/how-wired-is-going-to-handle-ad-blocking/
You can simply add WIRED.com to your ad blocker’s whitelist, so you view ads. When you do, we will keep the ads as “polite” as we can, and you will only see standard display advertising.
You can subscribe to a brand-new Ad-Free version of WIRED.com. For $1 a week, you will get complete access to our content, with no display advertising or ad tracking.
Either way, you will get to experience the great content that you expect from WIRED, and you’ll be supporting our journalism.
What does everyone at large think about this? Concerns? This isn't a thread to indicate that we'll be implementing this, especially if the feedback to something like this would be negative. We're also not Wired.com, so we can't arbitrarily implement shit like this without losing what little marketshare we do have.
Isn't this pretty common place with large websites/publications?I have no problem with ads as long as they aren't intrusive like autoplay video commercials or full page ads.
Shutting your website off from a large portion of internet users is a very dumb idea. I get that you want to make money through an archaic ad system* (because you must and have no choice, this is not a knock), but once you close yourself off it will turn new people away from your website. They have no prior loyalty to you, and they will not exempt you just because you block them, they will just move on to the next website.
Big guys might be able to pull it off, like Wired, based on their name and reputation, but you as a small player will stand no chance in this, so I would highly advise you against this.
*The future of ad revenue on he internet lies in sponsored editorial content, content interesting to the user, written by the site editorial staff. Not sure where this leaves a forum, though, but ads are going the way of the dodo sooner rather than later.
Also, I am getting an ad for "ChnLove.com - International Dating Site - Find love in China" on this page. Not sure why that is relevant, but there you go.
Big guys might be able to pull it off, like Wired, based on their name and reputation, but you as a small player will stand no chance in this, so I would highly advise you against this.
*The future of ad revenue on he internet lies in sponsored editorial content, content interesting to the user, written by the site editorial staff. Not sure where this leaves a forum, though, but ads are going the way of the dodo sooner rather than later.
Also, I am getting an ad for "ChnLove.com - International Dating Site - Find love in China" on this page. Not sure why that is relevant, but there you go.
I mean, we're not looking to make money as much as pay for server costs. This site isn't run for free and ads help us keep the servers going on.
As I said, I understand completely. Just know that Average Joe won't really give a shit about that when he comes here through Google and can't see the content he wanted, but rather gets a white list block-message. He will have clicked back and went on to the next search result before he even finished reading your message.
I think this was taken in the wrong vein. Slaent has no intentions of implementing subscriber based different levels of service even in regards to the display / non-display of ad content.
If the server costs got astronomical (they aren't) and the founders got sick of topping up the funds (we do still top up), we'd more likely do something like paetron.
But those are huge ifs. We're not even really considering it. It was just a, reilo see's this getting around, what are peoples thoughts.
I personally hate the blocking of content after detecting I have an ad-blocker. It usually means my ad-blocker has sold out or they've stopped updating. Particularly to sites where I'm being linked too, externally, for one specific page. It basically means I'll disregard your entire service and never bother to go back.
I white-list sites I like, that make good and interesting content. Not ones that hold me hostage. The problem is, most users don't do the same.
If the server costs got astronomical (they aren't) and the founders got sick of topping up the funds (we do still top up), we'd more likely do something like paetron.
But those are huge ifs. We're not even really considering it. It was just a, reilo see's this getting around, what are peoples thoughts.
I personally hate the blocking of content after detecting I have an ad-blocker. It usually means my ad-blocker has sold out or they've stopped updating. Particularly to sites where I'm being linked too, externally, for one specific page. It basically means I'll disregard your entire service and never bother to go back.
I white-list sites I like, that make good and interesting content. Not ones that hold me hostage. The problem is, most users don't do the same.
I don't block Slaents ads but I also don't click on them either.
#partoftheproblem
Bring back those uncomfortable dating ones!
#partoftheproblem
Bring back those uncomfortable dating ones!
By vire Go To PostI don't block Slaents ads but I also don't click on them either.I'll post more k-pop. Will bring them all back.
#partoftheproblem
Bring back those uncomfortable dating ones!
Just viewing the ad's is enough really. You get more if people click on the ad's, but we don't expect people to do that unless they're actually interested in the content.
By Moris Go To PostDon't let Giri fool you, he has been championing the implementation of K-Pop up ads since day 1.
Outrageous slander!
