[QUOTE=JohnT]
If you want to merely read the SDMB, ala a newspaper, there’s no reason to pay, right?
[/QUOTE]
That would rather defeat the purpose of a forum.
However, if I was merely reading, I wouldn’t need a membership and wouldn’t be upset that I have ads on the site I’m paying money for. So, again, I don’t quite see your point.
Others have handled the phone example.
[QUOTE=Harborwolf]
Incorrect. I copped the “this overreaction annoys me” attitude. I posted as much. You took an attitude of “I’m glad we annoy you because you deserve it” rather than trying to explain yourself. You also took the attitude of “this bothers me so if it doesn’t bother you than there is something wrong with you.” by calling me myopic. You’re right. Those attitudes are so much better than mine.
[/QUOTE]
I’ve been given an avenue to vent. I am venting. Why do my posts — which you can easily ignore — irritate you, when a goddamn ad that you cannot possibly miss, that screams at you to buy a Ford, that drops down half the page covering up half your menu, that jostles and jiggles in bright pink and yellow does not?
Well whether anyone thinks it is appropriate to be upset by the new Banners, the associated sounds and flash-overs that some do, it has generated a lot of talk at least.
I hope that members don’t leave, I also hope the new owners will make some sort of concession for these ads, I would settle for no sound and no flash-over.
I would live with just needing to block them and helping others to block them, if they would compensate us with some improvements to the board. Maybe they could review the Straightdope wish list and take an official poll for some of these changes and then implement them.
I found 15 thread tied to this banner situation so far.
Congrats, this is the 15th thread concerning the Banners.
Today’s reason to b
It’s just a Banner Ad.
Banner ads or Subscriptions? A Poll
Boycotting the banners ads
Banner Ads: An SDMB Posting Boycott
Banner ads? You’re kidding, right?
Does SDMB need a new slogan? LOCKED
Sorry for all the uproar.
Where are we going to go when we abandon this dump?
So who will actually leave due to banner ads
Split off SDMB from Chi Reader?
Is the Blitzkrieg over yet? Can those who don’t mind the banner ads come out to play? LOCKED
Is the Straight Dope marketed anywhere or in any way? If so by Whom?
Banner ads for members
Banner Ads LOCKED (The one that kicked it off)
Jim
[QUOTE=JohnT]
If there’s nothing in the rules addressing a change in recipe, then there’s an implicit assumption that the recipe might, in fact, change at any time.
[/QUOTE]
So, when they change the recipe from “Egg on Muffin” to “Air on Air” you don’t have a legitimate gripe?
When you sell a service or product, part of the idea is to have a satisfied customer. That idea is tempered by a variety of factors, but it needs to be there. You don’t take every possible legal opportunity to piss off your customers, then tell them they can’t complain because it’s legal.
I’m having a busy day but wanted to thank yojimbo, Equipoise and Brainiac4 for their answers to my posts.
[QUOTE=Harborwolf]
1)You are at work. You are not on your own time. Posting on a message board is something you should do on your own time. If the boss is gonna yell at you for doing it, maybe you shouldn’t be doing it at all anyways.
2)Computers have volume controls. Learn how to work them. Mute is your friend.
[/QUOTE]
You do, however, seem to be assuming that people who don’t like the sound ads are exclusively those who are visiting the Dope at work. There are those of us who don’t like the sound ads at all, regardless of where they’re surfing. My computer should only make noise: a) if I’ve asked it to, or b) if something’s gone wrong and it needs to let me know about it. Not when I surf onto a random webpage (this irritation not only includes noisy ads, but also webpages with background sound - although I acknowledge this is a risk I take any time I, say, visit a movie’s website. Which is why I don’t very often at home or at work).
The ads are gone for now. I verified by checking the source, the code has been removed. (For Now)
[QUOTE=Malodorous]
Agreement? Did Ed actually say or even imply that there wouldn’t be banner ads added to the site?
[/QUOTE]
Put another way Malodorous, this covers what I’d intended to mean…
[QUOTE=Dominic Mulligan]
The banner ads aren’t really all that irritating. What is irritating is the fact that there was a tacit implication that the site would be free from adverts when we went to paying for memberships.
Frankly, all the slackjaws posting about how its possible to turn sound down on your PC are missing the point - you shouldn’t have to do that for a site you pay to visit, especially when we were told that this wouldn’t happen before going P2P.
[/QUOTE]
… or, that there was an implication of sorts. I could’ve sworn (not just from memory, but I think from various posts over lo these many threads) that the trajectory was everyone suggesting we switch to ads so that we wouldn’t have to go to a pay forum. That idea was poo-pooed, but brought up again when us huddled masses didn’t understand why in the hell we’d get those Google things after we already had shelled out our money for the privilege not to. At least that’s how I seem to remember it.
[QUOTE=JohnT]
But I don’t see the “principle” involved here.
People don’t like paying for ads? Don’t these same people buy magazines, newspapers, movie tickets, and TV sets? Does the selective application of this “principle” make it one?
[/QUOTE]
By the time I’m replying to this, I’m sure it’s been already adequately covered, but since you’d asked it of me…
When I buy whatever (magazines, a movie ticket), as far as I know, I’m not supplying the content of which I’ll be partaking. Also, I do believe it’s against ‘principle’ if someone changes the basic tenets of what I feel is the agreement we’ve gotten into together.
IE: I never saw this happen personally, but I heard people complain quite loudly about those anti-theft (?) measures that studios took to prevent their wares from being taped and sold as boot-legs. Ya see, I’m sure that with your 8.00 ticket, they had every right to attempt this because it wasn’t specifically spelled out that they couldn’t. However, considering most don’t fancy themselves thieves in the first place (and hate being treated as such without provocation), they weren’t too keen on having their expectations jacked with to stop a minority from wrong-doing.
That seems somewhat comparable to this. And yes, I suck at analogies. Sorry.
I’ve never had a problem with paying for any content I’ve wanted off the 'net. I just have to pick and choose judiciously. Regardless, I can understand those who feel that way and empathize with them over what’ll probably be their loss of continuing on in that manner. In the nascent days of the web, surely this felt like an attainable pursuit. Now though? Not a snowball’s chance, in my humble opinion.
Only to the degree within which my involvement is vested. We pay our, on average, 10.00 a year to be here. I certainly don’t see why that wouldn’t extend to aiming to please your customer base. That doesn’t necessarily mean that there shouldn’t have ever been NO BANNER ADS for all eternity, but rather some sort of dialog with us. Like, “Here’s what’s going on, what’ll y’all think should happen?” Or, “We see absolutely no way around this, but would like to give a head’s up well in advance so that you may accommodate your decision / we may offer a small token of replacement value (customized titles or shorter search times or you name it) / an overhaul in current operating systems.” Something. 
Mainly, anything to be treated like an inconvenience rather than a fraction of what keeps this place running.
Lastly, I won’t go back into answering your last question again, as I’ve already tried to explain myself above. Unfortunately, I’m not certain whether or not umbrage should be taken about portions of statements like “preventing them from exposing my tender eyes to advertisements.” What drives someone to be needlessly condescending? I’ve seen many a mention from people who read the Dope at work, and before anyone starts in again about HOW THEY DAMN WELL SHOULDN’T BE SURFING ON THEIR EMPLOYER’S CLOCK THEN!!1ONE, several have explained that it’s perfectly acceptable for them to do so, but whatever they access cannot disrupt others. Well, turn the sound off then, right? Further explanations have fallen on deaf ears. [Paraphrased: “You can’t do that when you work in a call center with web support.” “When your employer tells you not to screw around with their system in any way.” Etc., etc.]
There’s also plenty of examples given about other reasons… babies and physical needs and yes, principles in general. If that’s not your concern though, I understand. What I don’t get is why then that those people don’t have as much right to complain as you (generally speaking) do. Scratch that though, I do see after all. They are airing their gripes to the company that they’ve paid to have the ability to do so. The rest are pissed off (or is that too strong a word?) that they’re doing it. Why?? I mean, disagree all you want, but don’t belittle them. Unless they’re behaving like a celebrity upset at spending 24 seconds in jail for 17 DUIs. And for the record, I don’t think I’ve witnessed a single member here doing that, even with all the so-called drama. 
Every please see **Ed Zotti’s ** update in ATMB: No more banner ads for subscribers
It is great news
[QUOTE=What Exit?]
Every please see **Ed Zotti’s ** update in ATMB: No more banner ads for subscribers
It is great news
[/QUOTE]
I clicked on that link, and you know what was at the top of the page?
You guessed it - a banner ad. Sheraton hotels.
I’m not particularly bothered by the banner ads, except for the Scotch ad that blocked the rest of the page from loading, and I was willing to write that off to “still a few bugs in the system” so don’t bother advising me on how to kill the banners. Really. I appreciate the previous offers of help, though.
[QUOTE=RTFirefly]
I clicked on that link, and you know what was at the top of the page?
You guessed it - a banner ad. Sheraton hotels.
I’m not particularly bothered by the banner ads, except for the Scotch ad that blocked the rest of the page from loading, and I was willing to write that off to “still a few bugs in the system” so don’t bother advising me on how to kill the banners. Really. I appreciate the previous offers of help, though.
[/QUOTE]
I just saw a banner ad, but only cos I was not logged in. 
[QUOTE=RTFirefly]
I clicked on that link, and you know what was at the top of the page?
You guessed it - a banner ad. Sheraton hotels.
I’m not particularly bothered by the banner ads, except for the Scotch ad that blocked the rest of the page from loading, and I was willing to write that off to “still a few bugs in the system” so don’t bother advising me on how to kill the banners. Really. I appreciate the previous offers of help, though.
[/QUOTE]
That is very odd, If you were logged in and saw a banner ad, you might want to clear your temporary internet files.
If you weren’t logged in that you would see the banners.
Jim
It’s because the thread address was written as:
http://208.100.26.199/sdmb/showthread.php?t=446080
instead of
For some reason, with the former, I open the link and am not logged in. With the latter, I am logged in.
[QUOTE=interface2x]
It’s because the thread address was written as:
http://208.100.26.199/sdmb/showthread.php?t=446080
instead of
For some reason, with the former, I open the link and am not logged in. With the latter, I am logged in.
[/QUOTE]
Interesting. Probably the reason is your browser memorized the site’s name, not IP, to link with your login name and address. I suspect if you connected using the IP address, then logged in manually while checking the box that says “remember me”, you will be automatically logged in the next time.
That assumes the browser routine makes no distinction between IP-based URLs and others. I don’t see why it would, but I dunno.