Were this board still free I might feel some obligation not to block the ads.
It isn’t and I don’t.
Count me as one of the people who thinks that they’re being slimy weasel asswipes for charging us money to look at ads. Seriously, seriously, bad, SDMB. Screw the Chicago Reader.
I think there was some uncertainty when it went pay-to-post as well. The pessimists won out that time. With past experience on our side, it seems even harder to believe that this could actually improve service. At any rate, without a specific set of goals and deadlines to improve their service, it won’t happen - and it’s clear that it’s not even on the table at this point.
More like they’re charging us money to generate content, that’ll get other people to look at the ads for free.
This is like one long ass exercise in ‘How not to provide customer service.’
They are very innocuous so far, so as long as they bring in some funds, I’m for them.
Adverts in the middle of threads, popups, flashing or screaming fonts – no thanks, I’d rather pay more than put up with that sort of stuff.
It’s not like I expect real, professional customer service from this place (and anyone who did would obviously have been disabused of their illusions long before now.) But seriously, is it too much to ask that the place be run by people who aren’t fucking stupid? I mean, what could possibly have been going through their minds when they decided this?
Then I’ll soon be letting my subscription lapse.
If you’d only warned me before I renewed.
I’ll keep reading, but I’ll not pay for a message board that went pay before trying advertising.
You got the wrong thread, pal. We’re debating the ads. We’re pitting them.
Which reminds me. I forgot otter-coddling to my previous list of adjectives.
Actually, I had the wrong thread. Go about your business, and pay no attention to the Martini-addled hamster.
Yeah, I’m glad I get to pay for the privilege of generating income for the Reader…
:rolleyes:
I guess “soon” means “immediately,” then?
They’re text-only, they’re as unobtrusive as is possible, and they’re sponsored by Google, a company I’m behind 100%. It’s just about the best possible way the SDMB could’ve added advertising.
Still, it sucks. Google ads were around when the boards went subscription-only, so I can’t help but wonder why they didn’t choose ads first, then subscription if the ads weren’t lucrative enough. It’s not even that the subscription is all that expensive; it’s the principle of the thing.
It’s not like seeing big loud Fanta ads before a movie that you already paid to see, it’s like sitting at a movie you paid to see and having someone whisper “visit Amazon.com” in your ear after every scene. Not as annoying, but annoying in a different way.
And what sucks the most is getting lumped in with the catsix camp.
Yea, this is very Not Cool.
I very much doubt I’ll be renewing - not because the ads are that obtrusive but because really, I second every negative sentiment expressed here:
-
Why should I pay to generate content for the Reader?
-
Why didn’t they try advertising before P2P?
-
Why in the hell can’t they run the ads for guests and non-members? We paid our damn money, don’t try to make another buck off me. Need money? Ask us, most of us would pony up a little extra, I’d wager.
-
If you need money so damn bad, why don’t you create some more merchandise for us to buy? I’m sick of the same old coffee mug and I’ve got all the books. Wanna generate revenue? Sell shit. New shit. Huh, interesting idea.
-
After all the comments from staff about “we can’t accept donations”, which should tell you that this community wants to be self-sustaining, why don’t you try to find a way that we can help, instead of imposing this crap on us?
Yeah, agreeing with me is almost as distasteful as felching the corpse of Lenin, eh?
You might find it’s not so bad over in this camp. At least, on this issue.
Real nice. :rolleyes:
What he/she said.
Wasn’t the point of paying that we don’t have to deal with ads? I’ve been on an hour and they are already annoying, not to mention the fact that they are in an inconvenient place.
I visit a few other places that carry Google ads. NOT ONCE have I ever clicked on an ad. NOT ONCE. In fact, after a while they become invisible to me and I don’t see them at all. When I’m reading content, I’m not shopping, and I’m not suddenly going to go looking for some random product just because an ad for it was shoved in my face. Neither do I reward telemarketers by buying their product just because they call me up out of the blue. Sorry, but I’m just not that suggestible.
VERY RARELY will I click on a Google ad when I’m conducting a search for some product or service, and then only when the regular search results have not turned up anything. Most of the time the site for the ad is equally unhelpful.
I find this on a level with premium movie channels that suddenly start showing commercials – probably not enough to boycott, but still darned annoying.
My apologies.
What sucks the most is getting lumped in with the catsix and Excalibre camp.
Out of curiousity, I popped over to Fingolfin’s classic Monster Lord of the Rings Thread (If LotR had been written by somebody else?). If there’s any thread on this message board with “more history”, it’s that one. And at the bottom? Mailing lists. Something is wrong, here… Google is usually much better at finding relevance than this.
But to those who complain about the dual revenue streams: Such is life. I subscribe to magazines, and the magazines still have ads. Most folks pay for cable TV, and the shows still have ads. Buy a newspaper, it has ads. All media contain ads. It would be unrealistic to expect anything else from the Straight Dope.
I’ve noticed that only Comments on Staff Report threads seem to have targeted ads.
As far as your second paragraph goes…I’m not entirely sure that I agree, as the majority of a newspaper’s (and perhaps other media) budget come from ads. I highly doubt the Google revenue will outweigh subscriptions. Thus, not the same.