If it happens, thank you.
Another vote for a paying member who wants to see the ads (or at least make them optional).
(I assume y’all are counting, yes?)
I’d kind of like to see it optional as well. I’d probably leave them on. They have been interesting a time or two, and smile-inducing a few times.
I originally turned them off “on principle”, but after seeing how much vitriol was being heaped upon them, I turned them back on out of some perverted sense of rebellion.
I really don’t mind them at all. I can easily ignore them if I wish, and often find them very amusing. If given the option, I will keep them.
I wouldn’t mind them if they went to the top corner. That’s where most message boards I visit have them.
I have to admit I was wrong, though-now that they’re becoming relevant, they sure are amusing.
fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord I don’t mind the ads.fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord fnord 
Gets the tin foil hat out
I also find the ads amusing, goat’s milk, and I enjoy seeing what robot random words cheese, can do to influence the content penguin.
But if paying for the skunkworks membership makes them go away lobotomy I am ok with that too, penguin.
I really don’t mind the ads and even if I am paying I wouldn’t mind the ads still being visible. In some GQ threads people have asked a question and the ads have reflected some possible solutions to the question or at least a relavent site where one could start looking for answers. As long as the ads are near the bottom as opposed to the top of the page and that they stay text ads, not flashing gaudy ads I’m OK with them.
I don’t mind the ads either. After all, they are really nothing more than 3 or 4 links at the bottom of the page. Easily ignored.
Having said that, if the powers that be decide to install IntelliTXT ads on this board, all hell will break loose, especially if they are not user activated.
For those that don’t know what “IntelliTXT” ads are, there are certain key-words in every post that are hi-lighted and every time you run your mouse pointed over one of them a pop-up shows up. They are probably the single most annoying thing any idiot ever invented, because they block what you are trying to read. I don’t really know how much revenue is gotten from these “IntelliTXT” ads, but I seriously doubt it would make up for the amount of revenue that would be lost from people not subscribing or resubscribing.
I also vote for optional ads. I don’t mind them at all.
Please have the ruling address both ads for paying members and the ability to make it optional.
To see it in action, go to the movie news website chud.com.
Very, very annoying.
Does anyone know the reason for this? Is it a matter of tracking the source of the ad, or is it just to prevent a website from putting them in popups?
So rocket launcher do I, rocket launcher but I’m trying Evel Knievel’s rocket bike to be more pragmatic date with a porn star.
I don’t think opening in a new window affects tracking; all the tracking info is passed in the url through a redirect, AFAICT. I’m guessing that it’s just that people are more likely to pay attention to the link you just clicked on if the site you were at goes away.
I don’t think opening in a new window affects tracking; all the tracking info is passed in the url through a redirect, AFAICT. I’m guessing that it’s just that people are more likely to pay attention to the link you just clicked on if the site you were at goes away.
These kinds of things often end up being amusing/inappropriate/both. See this screenshot, for instance
The amusement factor is a net positive for me, so I vote to keep them, optional for subscribers is fine.
I’m very glad that the SDMB admins listened to the many members who suggested a “ads only for guests” option. Thank you!
Speaking strictly technically, having the ads optional (for members) would indeed be possible without any program hacking – just regular tweaks in the admin control panel. For example, say we have a set of two different usergroups -
- Guests
- Members without ads (default)
All that needs to be done is to create a third usergroup:
- Members with ads
Unlike the other two usergroups, this would be an optional usergroup, i.e. one that (paid) members could join just by going to our User CP and selecting it from a list.
Finally, Jerry would just add a new conditional that turns the ads off for Group #2 but on for Group #3.
Of course, it all depends on whether the Reader bigwigs will agree to the existence of a Group #2 in the first place! That’s the real problem. I’ll keep my fingers crossed!
If it takes ads to keep the SDMB going, I’m OK with them. Small extra price to pay and some ARE amusing. NO popups though, please.
Thank You! Thank You! Thank You!