NOTE: ADS ON THE FORUM (updated 26/10/21)

roberty

Yeah Wez's screenshot has got me thinking I should opt back into ad personalisation. It comes with a very real risk of impulse spending though

Jonathangus

Philly_Q said:

I've got no problem with ads like the ones in Wez's screenshot above.  It's when they start popping up on top of text, or playing videos, that they really start to wind me up.

This.  I can live with a single static image, but as soon as video or animations start, it just pisses me off.

I'd still rather be ad-free, but if it keeps the lights on...

horse

From my perspective as a very regular visitor and occasional poster over the years, I'd say go as far as you want with the ads, and I'd be really happy to see you rewarded for what you've done here. I'm sure you'd keep your eye on the user experience and find a way that is palatable for the mod team anyway.

Anybody hung up on "but you said it would always be ad free" can go start their own forum - you don't owe any of us members anything, it's the other way around.

Axe_meister

If we can get a richer experience, i.e photo uploads, sole sort of in-beded video chat group thing then I'd gladly see ads. I work for Google ads pay my salary

digitalscream

Axe_meister said:

If we can get a richer experience, i.e photo uploads, sole sort of in-beded video chat group thing then I'd gladly see ads. I work for Google ads pay my salary

Damn, I forgot about that. The process of getting this set up has been a nightmare from start to finish, and it would've been enormously helpful to my mental health if somebody could have wandered over and given the AdSense folk a hearty smack round the head

TheOtherDennis

digitalscream said:

fretmeister said:

digitalscream said:

Roland said:

How much does that equate to in a year?

Not much

It's about £150/month, which is a bit more than the hosting costs. Of course, I expect it to decrease over time, but we'll see.

For what it's worth, Google reckons that if I put ads on the whole site - members and lurkers - I'd be pulling in about £100k/year.

I hope y'all recognise the restraint I'm exercising here - I could pay the modmins and quit my job 

Do it then!

FFS - that's your pension.

LOL...as I was saying to @TTony earlier...my sense of ethics has taking a right battering in the last few days

However, I always promised that members wouldn't see ads, and I'm sticking to that. The only thing that might change my mind is if I put a poll up and >60% of registered members said they were cool with it. Even then, it would be contingent on keeping an eye on the traffic to make sure it hadn't dropped significantly, and it'd still be a really hard choice to make.

Even then, it occurs to me that Google's calculator is designed to persuade you to let them stick ads on your site - I doubt it'd get anywhere near £100k - perhaps £40-50k? Dunno.

A principle isn't a principle until it costs you money.

And you're right, I do use Brave.

The reason I use an an ad-blocking browser isn't to block static ads, they're fine, they can carry on, if I accidentally (or even deliberately) click on one that's my problem. It's when they start using video or sound or they somehow prevent you from ignoring them (ie, you can't go back a page - and yes, that does happen) that they hack me off, and more and more ads are like that.

As an example, I used to allow The Guardian website to show me ads until that happened on there too, so now I don't bother. Self-defeating.

Oh, and I spent 30 years in advertising, in case anyone thinks I have an axe to grind about them.

I most definitely do. Cnuts, the lot of them (and yes, I was too, when I was doing it).

fretmeister

Even if it's 10K that has to be worth doing.

Get it done.

digitalscream

TheOtherDennis said:

A principle isn't a principle until it costs you money.

And you're right, I do use Brave.

The reason I use an an ad-blocking browser isn't to block static ads, they're fine, they can carry on, if I accidentally (or even deliberately) click on one that's my problem. It's when they start using video or sound or they somehow prevent you from ignoring them (ie, you can't go back a page - and yes, that does happen) that they hack me off, and more and more ads are like that.

As an example, I used to allow The Guardian website to show me ads until that happened on there too, so now I don't bother. Self-defeating.

Oh, and I spent 30 years in advertising, in case anyone thinks I have an axe to grind about them.

I most definitely do. Cnuts, the lot of them (and yes, I was too, when I was doing it).

For what it's worth, the ads aren't static - they're animated, although it's not too intrusive. There's no audio (and if there were, I'd find a way to block it or just kill the experiment right there and then). I've also tested it a fair bit, and there's nothing that gets in the way of the user experience beyond the ads existing in the first place.

So...a mixed bag in terms of your requirements there

digitalscream

Axe_meister said:

If we can get a richer experience, i.e photo uploads, sole sort of in-beded video chat group thing then I'd gladly see ads. I work for Google ads pay my salary

And...that's exactly what I'm thinking. If there's money coming in on the back of it, I can justify spending half of my annual leave and some whole weekends on actual development.

For what it's worth, though, the original estimates I got from Google were wildly optimistic. It remains to be seen whether it's just bedding-in, but at the moment they're out by a factor of 10.

That's not a deal breaker, but I won't be quitting my job any time soon

roberty

Sounds like everyone will win if you can pay yourself for dev time @digitalscream ;

TheOtherDennis

digitalscream said:

TheOtherDennis said:

A principle isn't a principle until it costs you money.

And you're right, I do use Brave.

The reason I use an an ad-blocking browser isn't to block static ads, they're fine, they can carry on, if I accidentally (or even deliberately) click on one that's my problem. It's when they start using video or sound or they somehow prevent you from ignoring them (ie, you can't go back a page - and yes, that does happen) that they hack me off, and more and more ads are like that.

As an example, I used to allow The Guardian website to show me ads until that happened on there too, so now I don't bother. Self-defeating.

Oh, and I spent 30 years in advertising, in case anyone thinks I have an axe to grind about them.

I most definitely do. Cnuts, the lot of them (and yes, I was too, when I was doing it).

For what it's worth, the ads aren't static - they're animated, although it's not too intrusive. There's no audio (and if there were, I'd find a way to block it or just kill the experiment right there and then). I've also tested it a fair bit, and there's nothing that gets in the way of the user experience beyond the ads existing in the first place.

So...a mixed bag in terms of your requirements there

Nah, I can live with animation/moving images, it's the full on video ads that won't shut up, or which suddenly burst out to fill the window that I hate.

I didn't really explain myself properly, to be fair. Apols.

digitalscream

TheOtherDennis said:

digitalscream said:

TheOtherDennis said:

A principle isn't a principle until it costs you money.

And you're right, I do use Brave.

The reason I use an an ad-blocking browser isn't to block static ads, they're fine, they can carry on, if I accidentally (or even deliberately) click on one that's my problem. It's when they start using video or sound or they somehow prevent you from ignoring them (ie, you can't go back a page - and yes, that does happen) that they hack me off, and more and more ads are like that.

As an example, I used to allow The Guardian website to show me ads until that happened on there too, so now I don't bother. Self-defeating.

Oh, and I spent 30 years in advertising, in case anyone thinks I have an axe to grind about them.

I most definitely do. Cnuts, the lot of them (and yes, I was too, when I was doing it).

For what it's worth, the ads aren't static - they're animated, although it's not too intrusive. There's no audio (and if there were, I'd find a way to block it or just kill the experiment right there and then). I've also tested it a fair bit, and there's nothing that gets in the way of the user experience beyond the ads existing in the first place.

So...a mixed bag in terms of your requirements there

Nah, I can live with animation/moving images, it's the full on video ads that won't shut up, or which suddenly burst out to fill the window that I hate.

I didn't really explain myself properly, to be fair. Apols.

Ahhhh, I see. That's fair, I bloody hate those too!

thumpingrug

Is there an option where you run the ads for a month or so then gauge reaction and opinion.

vasselmeyer

Can you put the "Punch the Monkey" ad on, please?

digitalscream

thumpingrug said:

Is there an option where you run the ads for a month or so then gauge reaction and opinion.

If I run a poll, then...yes, I'll include that.

All of this is subject to experiments. The current one is running ads for guest users only. I'm running it for a week with just one ad at the top and one tall one in the sidebar. Then I'll trial it with one at the top and three square ones in the sidebar (like TGP do), to see if that has any effect. Mobile ads will be unaffected (just one at the top and one at the bottom). I'll compare that to the baseline from the previous month, to make sure traffic hasn't fallen off a cliff.

Then, if I decide to give it a go (and I'm still on the fence, despite the fact that @fretmeister clearly thinks I'm an idiot if I don't ), I'll put a poll up to gauge the reaction from the members who haven't joined in on this thread. If it's clear that most would be cool with it, then I'll put ads on everything for a couple of weeks - that will be of the format that wins from the guest user experiments.

And then...I'll take a look at all the results, and if it's still inconclusive I'll put up a poll to see if everyone else can help me decide.

It's worth mentioning that I honestly didn't expect the mostly-positive reaction in this thread. I genuinely thought I'd be told to sod off with the ads.

Sometimes it's good to talk

Bellycaster

Glad there's an explanation, I saw this 12 hours too late

I was fiddling around all night trying to get rid of the ads and nothing worked.

thumpingrug

digitalscream said:

It's worth mentioning that I honestly didn't expect the mostly-positive reaction in this thread. I genuinely thought I'd be told to sod off with the ads.

Sometimes it's good to talk

I think many of us who have been around since the beginning are very aware of how much time and effort goes into keeping this place running.  Whilst it's nice to have an ad free environment, my dislike of ads on other sites is more to do with how they clutter the website so much that it can be unreadable.  You are clearly considering that and the screenshots show them not to be intrusive.  I (we) trust your judgement on this, and frankly why should you do this for free, its hard graft.  If you can being in some income that helps, do so.

crunchman

Axe_meister said:

If we can get a richer experience, i.e photo uploads, sole sort of in-beded video chat group thing then I'd gladly see ads. I work for Google ads pay my salary

Photo hosting might have other implications.  If it's on Imgur, and someone uploads something dodgy, or something they don't have the copyright for, then Imgur are liable.  If it's on here then DigitalScream or TTony will be liable.

TTony

crunchman said:

Axe_meister said:

If we can get a richer experience, i.e photo uploads, sole sort of in-beded video chat group thing then I'd gladly see ads. I work for Google ads pay my salary

Photo hosting might have other implications.  If it's on Imgur, and someone uploads something dodgy, or something they don't have the copyright for, then Imgur are liable.  If it's on here then DigitalScream or TTony will be liable.

Not me anymore @crunchman - this has been Lee’s solo baby for a couple of years now.

rivercider

thumpingrug said:

digitalscream said:

It's worth mentioning that I honestly didn't expect the mostly-positive reaction in this thread. I genuinely thought I'd be told to sod off with the ads.

Sometimes it's good to talk

I think many of us who have been around since the beginning are very aware of how much time and effort goes into keeping this place running.  Whilst it's nice to have an ad free environment, my dislike of ads on other sites is more to do with how they clutter the website so much that it can be unreadable.  You are clearly considering that and the screenshots show them not to be intrusive.  I (we) trust your judgement on this, and frankly why should you do this for free, its hard graft.  If you can being in some income that helps, do so.

This.
Quite simply, I agree. Gratitude is one thing but you can't be expected to do this forever without something in return, especially in recent times as the site's growth continues.