Ad campaigns cannot simply be removed. Each campaign is often the result of weeks of negotiations resulting in signed contracts.
Ad campaigns cannot simply be removed. Each campaign is often the result of weeks of negotiations resulting in signed contracts.
Since that is so, maybe a requirement that the add is non-intrusive be added to each contract so you can better control the working of your site. And while you're at it, no flashing ads, so you can control the look of your site. I know I'm not the only one that hates flashers.
Sorry, Didn't mean to say it should go away, I know that it is important to have them to help fund this great web site.
What I would like, is that Ask.com not popup and transfer focus to that new window when I am trying to write a message in the DaniWeb site. It is not a problem with the advertisement, but how your web guy handles the Enter key in the private message editor section.
Thanks,
Jerry
> maybe a requirement that the add is non-intrusive
We already don't allow popup, popunder, interstatial, floating, prestatial, or eyeblaster ads, and we are just about the only commercially-driven tech website that doesn't allow so many. Any further requirements and we won't ever land any campaigns, as advertisers are already going to our competition over us just because we don't offer as many ad formats.
You should be able to post in the Quick Reply area with the Access key Alt+S.
I find the following about the ads:
- Many of them take 100% CPU usage, preventing scrolling and hiding the edit window insertion point.
- There is one that expands to cover the navigation buttons, so you can't go into a forum.
- I have trouble reading posts with ads jumping around with motion pictures.
- A couple of them try to take keystrokes intended for something else.
- I received an email containing in the subject line a word I made up (as a dummy filename in an example). I never used that word anywhere else online, except in a post I made here.
We should not have to do special things to work around the ads.
How can we tell the advertisers that they make us mad when they take over or drive us crazy. Do they really think we are going to buy anything after they pester us to death?
> There is one that expands to cover the navigation buttons, so you can't go into a forum.
Can you take a screenshot? It's impossible for the ads to expand because they are contained within fixed-width IFRAMES, and if they did choose to expand, the expanded portion would be hidden out of view.
> I received an email containing in the subject line a word I made up (as a dummy filename in an example). I never used that word anywhere else online, except in a post I made here.
It sounds to me like a spammer was using a bot to crawl DaniWeb's contents, although I don't know how they'd get your email address. Maybe it was just a crazy coincidence?
My user id here is also the username of my email address, so that one is easy.
I can't take a screenshot while the ad has 100% cpu usage. The screenshot occurs after the ad stops running when I try this.
The expanded ad may be a popup instead. Come to think of it, I don't remember seeing an All-Bran ad on your site before. But I have seen it on Yahoo, where it did the same thing. Possibly it was detritus from when I opened a window to get info from an email for a post.
Might I suggest an "annoying ad" button, that we can click if the ad annoys us to the point where we would not touch the product? The advertisers might like the knowledge of the diseffectiveness of their ads. If they knew how annoying their ads really are, they might change their ways.
Might I suggest an "annoying ad" button, that we can click if the ad annoys us to the point where we would not touch the product? The advertisers might like the knowledge of the diseffectiveness of their ads. If they knew how annoying their ads really are, they might change their ways.
Boy is that an interesting suggestion. I can see someone clicking every button simply because they don't like ads.
But by the NUMBER of users clicking the annoying ad button, they can tell if one is better than another.
Maybe we should use the Independent Voting System, and have a GREAT AD and an ANNOYING AD button. Then they can compare the results to find out if the ad is great, or annoying.
I think the advertisers would find it insulting.
I find most ads insulting. Payback is h*ll :icon_wink:
If you're insulted, you complain, deal with it, and move on. If advertisers are insulted, they don't give us their business. :)
Plus you're forgetting about how wonderful I am for giving you an option to disable ads :)
Please let us again not go path of discussing why and how ads are evil; this topic has been brought up and beaten to death time and time again. Maybe it's time to mark this thread as solved...
I don't think ads are evil.
I think ads that take control of the user's browser are evil.
And ads that do things to disrupt the vision of a dyslexic person are not accessible.
And ads that lie are evil.
The advertisers might be advised that I would automatically read their ad through normal automatic visual scanning - IF I am not trying to regain control over my browser because the ad is using 100% CPU time.
I think the advertisers would find it insulting.
They would find it insulting to find out that the viewers don't like the ad because it is driving them crazy with repeated movement or a frozen mouse? I would think that, if they weren't total idiots, they would want to find out how effective their ads are.
I find ads offensive only if:
- They take control of the browser to keep you from leaving the page.
- They take so much CPU time that the user can't navigate or scroll.
- They have a lot of movement, keeping me from reading ANY part of the page.
- They are not accessible to the impaired.
- They hide the navigation controls.
- They disable the BACK button or destroy the browsing history.
- They contain profane language.
- They promote wrongdoing.
Well of course the people that I deal with aren't the people who designed the ads or have any input in the design process or influence over the ads in any way. They're just the salespeople and they would just see it as someone they're going to be paying money to offending the company they represent.
I see. The sales they lose are not their own?
No ... things pass from me to my reps at site representation firms to other people at those rep firms who deal with the publisher's side of advertising agencies who deal with another side of the advertising agency who has an advertiser as their client. From myself to the actual advertiser, multiple contracts have been signed along the way between all different people.
We're a friendly, industry-focused community of developers, IT pros, digital marketers, and technology enthusiasts meeting, networking, learning, and sharing knowledge.