****ing Counter Ad - Page 6

Hey folks - I shut down the Montreal ad - again. 

Hope this thing will go away for good now!  It pays well which is why our network auto-approves it...but we don't want ads that are so obtrusive so I'll keep it on the blocked list.

Yes, it's sad that, even after Adam Ferren publishes his various emails and opens a PM box, people still don't avail themselves of this simple remedy for an ad problem.

/shrug, I've availed myself of an easy, permanent remedy...   And I'll continue to report problem ads when I see them on machines that I can't set up blocking for.  But as others have mentioned here repeatedly sites don't get a continuing free pass to blame their ad networks for the bad actors.  Like it or not HTF is viewed by its readership as trustworthy and 'respectable' as its advertisers.  Get low rent (even if they are high paying!) advertisers and that'll drag the forum down.  Get respectable, targeted advertising and viewers are more likely to believe the board is taken seriously by the industry that fuels our passion....

http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/09/25/lets-kill-the-cpm/
http://blog.seanbonner.com/2009/09/26/blog-advertising-is-broken/

The Chicago Sun-Times site for Rogert Ebert -- and who would command higher respect? -- runs the hideous teeth-whitening ads. I concede that no one cares about the ads; but I appreciate that HTF is removing the worst.

Point taken, but I don't know if old media dinosaurs who still havent gotten this whole 'web' thing 20 years later, let along how to survive in the face of it, are the best role models.  =)

You're probably right -- papers need revenue, any revenue.

It may be, in some part, the Chicago Sun-Times has its "respect" and can run any lousy ad without risk.

I'm not saying I have all the answers Dave.  If I did I would be a rich man.  I'm just saying that I personally had enough and installed ad blockers and it was a last resort for me.  I really didn't want to do that, as much as I hate ads I wanted to do my fair share for HTF and the other communities I'm part of.  But enough got to be enough between things like the Montreal ads and even the NYTimes giving their readers viruses through ads.  I'm just not convinced ads are viable long term and until this stuff gets sorted out, I'll sit on the sidelines.  If that means I should send those communities a paypal bounty instead, sign me up.

I was agreeing with you. Papers are desparate for revenue and may not know or care how they get revenue, as you were saying.

And in line with your comments on "respectability", the CST has that in spades so they can worry less about these ads.

I have only seen that annoying Montreal ad while I was in New York, roughly two weeks ago. Haven't seen it since, although I got the blue squares (which I suppose were implemented to override the ad) a few times. It may have been aimed at certain US areas indeed, therefore.

Good job fighting that ad, Huddler!

On a slightly different subject: I'm surprised that the "wide" ad at the top and the rectangular one at the right are the same all the time. That suggests a wrong random function and is more annoying and ineffective than otherwise possible.

That ad company is probably not the smartest tie in the wardrobe.


Cees

I don't know... I'm seeing different ads the top. Right now for instance I'm getting an Insignia/Best Buy ad at the top and an Aston Martin ad followed by Blue Jeans Cable on the right side. At the bottom, though, is another Blue Jeans Cable ad, so you still may have a point.


Sun-Times respectable? I've always viewed the Sun Times as just shy of a tabloid sometimes with their crazy headlines and general style of reporting. I generally think of the Chicago Tribune as way more respectable. The one notable exception being Roger Ebert, however. The Tribune still can't match that. Oh, how I miss Siskel. The Tribune hasn't yet found a good replacement (some are decent, but not great).

Com'on, Michael.  While I can understand that you don't appreciate others taking pot shots at HTF and/or Huddler about this stuff or similar, I don't think you need to get so defensive about it as to paint such a broad (and seemingly disdainful) stroke in your critcism in a quoted response to Sam's terse remark either -- and I've even recently personally defended you (to some extent) in some PM correspondence w/ someone else regarding some of your recent responses on HTF too.  I thought you pride yourself in being more careful in wording your responses than that.

Yes, Adam Ferren's contact info for this type of matter is now available somewhere in a post in this subforum, but it's not like there's a big red REPORT AD PROBLEMS button that nobody can miss for that you know.  And why should HTF members be publicly criticized (w/ such "sad" commentary no less) just because we didn't do the extra work to dig up that post for whatever reasons (legitimate or not) or didn't bookmark it (or similar) for quick-and-easy access in order to report a problem that HTF *SHOULD* address for its membership, especially in light of the software/platform/format change??  We're not talking about something nice-to-have that should only matter to a select few afterall -- you were personally very annoyed w/ that Montreal ad too, IIRC.  And at least we're posting here in the forum feedback section *and* in already existing threads on these topics.

I also understand (and agree) about not appreciating much of the me-first and/or entitlement mentality that goes on in our society these days, which I suspect is part of the underlying subtext here (although maybe nobody else is consciously thinking that at the moment), but I don't think offering feedback about this matter or reporting a problem ad in this thread (or similar) under the circumstance qualifies as such, if that's what's rubbing you the wrong way (beyond Sam's remark).

I'm not defending Sam's remark, but again, I don't think you needed to paint the rather broad stroke in your response to him, if that's really all that was.  I'm aware that you yourself often call others out for painting seemingly broad strokes in their criticisms, so I'd think you know better than to do that yourself in this instance even if that was not really your intention.

My apologies in advance if I've needlessly misinterpreted your intentions, but OTOH, like I was taught in one brief communications class, you probably haven't effectively communicated to others if they/we didn't get what you actually meant to say -- to see what I mean, http://www.effective-communication.net/ shows up at the top of a quick google on that matter.  And to paraphrase some other wise saying, if you choose to judge (and be judgemental toward) others, you're gonna end up getting judged in the same way yourself...

But thanks again for all the good work from the various parties involved.  I certainly do appreciate that even though I apparently committed the "sad" act of not using the most direct way (seemingly in Michael's opinion) to report the problem.

_Man_

PS: I'll reiterate here (like many others before me whether on HTF or elsewhere) that good/clear communications on the net can be difficult at best, so let's try to reserve judgement whenever possible, ok?  And again, my apologies if I just committed that "sin" myself -- and also, my apologies for turning up the verbosity (and getting up on a "soap box") a bit on this matter in this post.

Edited by ManW_TheUncool - 9/28/09 at 6:33pm

That's a lot of words in response to a one-sentence remark, Man. I wish I could get even a fraction of that much response to the disc reviews that take a lot longer to write.

My comment was directed to one individual and one only. It was phrased the way it was because -- well, sometimes you just do it that way (for reasons that should be obvious). I can't stop people from reading volumes of implication into it, but I'm not going to be responsible for them either.

Perhaps it's best for all concerned if I direct my energies elsewhere.
Edited by Michael Reuben - 9/28/09 at 7:52pm

Ok, so HTF absolutely shouldn't run teeth-whitening ads, lest it be like the Sun-Times

:)

Fair enough -- as I was sorta suspecting anyway, but ended up feeling like "well, sometimes", well, ok, often, "[I] just do it that way (for reasons that should be obvious)" as well anyway  -- although I know some folks have also responded similarly to your criticisms about their seemingly broad strokes before too, but you didn't usually let them off the hook too easily though.  

I mean you're kinda drawing a rather fine (and vague) line for us to follow when reading your responses, IMHO, considering your style/approach as a moderator (and participant) on HTF, which seems to be quite unlike most of the other staff members (to put it mildly).  And while it may seem obvious enough to you, it may not always be obvious to the rest (or some) of us.  I agree you can't stop people from reading too much into your words, but ...

Anyway, point taken (for the most part) ...

_Man_

Geez, you make it sound like there's an official staff "style", and I'm the only standout. The reality is that everyone here is an individual: all the owners, all the moderators and all the members. That's how I try to read posts, and that's how people should read mine.

There are really very few people with whom I have any disagreement over the specific problems that need to be fixed at HTF. As you note, I was closely involved in fixing the Montreal ads, and I was even more closely involved in fixing the "Elit" slowdown. Indeed, after the three owners (whose hours spent on this project I wouldn't even want to try to calculate), I don't think there's anyone here who's spent as much time as I have walking Huddler through operational issues that need to be addressed at HTF.

As for "fine" or "vague" lines, let me make it even clearer, at the risk of offending one or more readers: In a few instances, there have been some miscues that have been cleared up after further discussion, whether public or private. As of today, my only disagreements are with (a) people who claim that the forum is "dead", when I can plainly see otherwise, and (b) anyone -- and since you seem to be reading me closely, you may note that I have chosen a singular pronoun -- who appears to be bitching for its own sake, never missing any chance to slam the current "sad" state of affairs.

It should be obvious, Man, that I don't consider either description to apply to you, DaveF, drobbins, Bill Buklis, Mike Frezon or most of the other participants in this thread.

And yes I do remember your Mad Men comments, but I've done fourteen reviews since then.  (And I'm starting a new one, so please excuse me.)

Ok.  Understood about that chatty stuff (I left out in the quote).   What's that old Chinese saying -- or was it just a kungfu/wuxia novel/movie thing?  "If we never fought, we would never know each other [as great friends]", not that I'm now suddenly expecting us to get all buddy buddy or something of course.

Now, gosh, you mean I have *THAT* many reviews to catch up on?  Hope not many of those are for DVDs (as I don't generally check those ).  Did I also mention posting in the BD review thread for It Could Happen to You (though I'm sure that was even longer ago)?  IIRC, that was one where there was some back-and-forth about what titles should deserve a BD release at this point though I'm glad to see such a review nonetheless (regardless of whether that was actually a title deserving a BD release at this point) ...

Anyhoo...  no need to follow up on this (as you probably figured out).  I'll certainly continue to check out your reviews (along w/ others) though I can't promise to posting in those threads in any consistent manner.  Like someone else mentioned, there's typically only so much we can meaningfully (and not meaningfully) say beyond a "thanks" or similar -- although I'll certainly admit to being more openly responsive to RAH's "a few words about..." (like many others it seems), not that I don't still also appreciate other reviewers on HTF.

Anyway, peace out ... and good cheers!

_Man_

Guess I hit a nerve.  For the record, I'll note that the 'Sad' comment was A. directed at the ad agencies and not HTF and B. even if you do construe it as me 'slamming' or 'bitching' the forum, one of the few times anything I have said as a direct complaint rather than what I intend to be constructive criticism.  But, as I said it wasn't intended that way and I echo Man-Fai in noting that among the many ways in which humans communicate, text is one of the easiest to misinterpret because while it looks black and white it so easy to inject interpretation on top of it outside of the context in which it is presented.

The only real complaint I have is in having had a number of my posts deleted, as noted it's HTFs house and they can do what they want with it, we are just guests, but that does not remove my frustration at having been censored like that.  It was enough to get me to quit, tho I came to realize that was not the right way to go.  Still, I have defended Michael and HTF to the end, both here on the forum and in the private communications directed at me outside the HTF by people who are wondering just what is going on. 

Addendum:  To be clear, I'm a big boy and I take all the comments directed at me in good cheer.  If it seems I am stating the things I do just to be argumentative then I have truly failed and I apologize for that in spades.  Seriously and especially to Michael.  It is not my intention at all.  I love HTF and understand some of what I've asked for can seem to be too much, but with 12+ years here I think my record speaks for itself, I want the best for HTF but am not afraid to speak up when I see things that I wish could be done better, or which HAD been done better and have been lost.  Maybe I have a big head but I'm widely read on a lot of the issues we are facing and the things I link to are intended as food for thought and possible action not as a taunt as to how things are better somewhere else.  As far as the advertising stuff is concerned it's something that is going to change radically over the next few years and I'm as interested as anyone to see how it all plays out, so I keep close tabs on that in particular, hence my links. 


Edited by Sam Posten - 9/29/09 at 8:25am

Right now I'm getting ads for Porsche, and it appears to be from the real deal too.   

That really is a nice change.  Good work!

Edit:  And just noticed, while it IS a rollover/expander, it's not a terribly annoying one.  I could actually live with that if it brings good dough in to the forum.  I'm tempted to actually click into it and get the free USB drive and photo book, just cause it looks cool.  And I have never knowingly clicked on an internet ad on purpose.  Ever.  Not even the Apple ones. 

You deserve a Porsche, Sam.  Go get one! 

I might buy the porche of cameras but not a porche of porches =)

All my banner ads at the top of the page are now showing up like this (rendering the advanced search function non-operative):

And I get the Samsung bird following my pointer around the screen. Oh what fun.

Is that the first time you've ever had a bird following your pointer around, Steve?!? 

=================

Hey!  Your banner ad looks okay.  Don't tell me I'm the only one where things are screwing up?!?  Why is so much of this stuff happening? 

No, I'm seeing similar ads, Mike. I just sent an email to Adam Ferren.


You mean, why is it happening to you? Probably because, like me, you're here a lot.  

 On it...not sure yet why the 300x250 ads are showing up in the 728x90 slot but I will find out and post here when I do!

Oh I get that banner thing too, it compliments the bird chasing ad. Won't be long before the threads get in the way of the ads.

Here it is in all it's glory -

With Testy, that'll be the first improvement in a long time.