Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.


View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8


BDFL - Memuneh
61757 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12420

Administrator
Trusted
Geekzone
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 354650 21-Jul-2010 22:19
Send private message

Phaedrus: ...


Thanks for the long post, a very different angle on this.

Phaedrus: With regard to subscribing; if a site owner offers a 'free' forum and/or a 'paid' forum then that's fine too - it's their site. But to me unless there's a really compelling reason - in my case - then I'm not going to pay additional money (I'm already paying for bandwidth) to contribute.



That's an interesting thing - and something I've heard before, regarding illegal downloads. I asked someone if they would buy those movies from iTunes if they were available in New Zealand (the latest releases, not the limited local catalog). A few people answered the same: "NO". Their reason was similar to yours: "I am already paying for my Internet, why pay for the content" (which is also similar to Lias's comment).

I argued (in that case) that the "Internet access" and "content" are different things. The situation would be similar to getting Amazon books for free since you are already paying for Internet access. I explained I saw "content" as the book you order from Amazon, and "Internet" as the shipping costs. But no one accepted the argument...

PS: Note I am not saying we have plans to create a "paywall" like newspapers are doing...





Minimalist
5500 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 431

Moderator
Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 354660 21-Jul-2010 22:36
Send private message

I liken the above argument to:

"I paid for the courier to bring me my flash new TV from the department store, why should I have to pay the department store for my TV?"

#justsaying

Totally understand the contributing knowledge point though, nice.

 
 
 
 


4025 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1076

Trusted

  Reply # 354663 21-Jul-2010 22:38
Send private message

Don't use the site enough to make it worth the money for me, and the benefits don't hold much interest personally.

I rarely pay for things online of this kind of nature though.

942 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 29


  Reply # 354666 21-Jul-2010 22:49
Send private message

freitasm:
Phaedrus: ...


Thanks for the long post, a very different angle on this.

Phaedrus: With regard to subscribing; if a site owner offers a 'free' forum and/or a 'paid' forum then that's fine too - it's their site. But to me unless there's a really compelling reason - in my case - then I'm not going to pay additional money (I'm already paying for bandwidth) to contribute.



That's an interesting thing - and something I've heard before, regarding illegal downloads. I asked someone if they would buy those movies from iTunes if they were available in New Zealand (the latest releases, not the limited local catalog). A few people answered the same: "NO". Their reason was similar to yours: "I am already paying for my Internet, why pay for the content" (which is also similar to Lias's comment).

I argued (in that case) that the "Internet access" and "content" are different things. The situation would be similar to getting Amazon books for free since you are already paying for Internet access. I explained I saw "content" as the book you order from Amazon, and "Internet" as the shipping costs. But no one accepted the argument...

PS: Note I am not saying we have plans to create a "paywall" like newspapers are doing...



errrr...... no! That is a seriously flawed analogy, I was left lost for words for a second. But is ok, I found them now ;)

Here is the reason:

a) a free forum is supplied as exactly that, free. There is nothing wrong whatsoever in using it freely.
b) downloading moves is illegal, which is... well... illegal!

Kinda obvious when put that way.... illegal vs legal.

Which makes it sound very close to you casting us as criminals... ? Not a good look :P :P






BDFL - Memuneh
61757 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12420

Administrator
Trusted
Geekzone
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 354676 21-Jul-2010 23:11
Send private message
447 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 1


  Reply # 354682 21-Jul-2010 23:17
Send private message

Everyone may laugh at me for this, but how ads work on websites is something I have no knowledge about.

Is there a way to track who clicks what ads?

I realise you can't tell people to click ads (per a previous post), but what if you had something like an AA rewards scheme where if I click 20 ads then I get a subscription for a month (then I could go and use the net at uni to click a couple of hundred of ads for my yearly subscription :-p).

Minimalist
5500 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 431

Moderator
Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 354687 21-Jul-2010 23:28
Send private message

nickd: Everyone may laugh at me for this, but how ads work on websites is something I have no knowledge about.

Is there a way to track who clicks what ads?

I realise you can't tell people to click ads (per a previous post), but what if you had something like an AA rewards scheme where if I click 20 ads then I get a subscription for a month (then I could go and use the net at uni to click a couple of hundred of ads for my yearly subscription :-p).


If the ad provider found out it would be bye bye, and yes they could/would find out.

If only it was that simple.

74 posts

Master Geek


  Reply # 354697 21-Jul-2010 23:58
Send private message

freitasm:  Their reason was similar to yours: "I am already paying for my Internet, why pay for the content"


Just to clarify what my point was here, in my case I don't view GZ as content that I consume (such as watching a movie say), rather it's something I mostly contribute to**. Therefore to also pay $$ for access to the site, another $ or three for additional bandwith, as well as paying in one's time and occasional expertise, isn't a model that does a lot for me so I'd probably choose to go away.

In the case of those that are large nett consumers and are 'entertained' by GZ then perhaps the situation is different. At least I think the subscription question could be a less defensible argument from a moral perspective but you'd risk losing a large audience if it were to be required. See a take on that here.

To change the angle of attack a little; I don't know that the question should be so much as to whether a subscription or enforced advertisment is required but more along the lines of how Mauricio may improve his coffers and GZ, thus ensuring GZ's longevity and popularity. Now I really don't believe in successful business by committee, and I'm a private kinda guy, so I wouldn't solicit advice on my business from other than a few select people - most certainly not on a public forum - and I wouldn't proffer it unless I was asked and knew something about it, but perhaps some lateral thinking on additional features or income streams wouldn't go amiss?

P.

** I realise I've only made about 50 posts as this personality but I've had a few lives so to speak,..and I see this issue isn't restricted just to GZ, but is generic to some other forums I am a large(r) contributor to.

942 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 29


  Reply # 354698 22-Jul-2010 00:00
Send private message

freitasm: I see you didn't get it as 'content' analogy... Nothing to do with the illegal part of it. I will explain later in the morning...

Looking forward to your reply in the morning :)

I still see it as being what you just said, a content analogy....  illegal vs legal content. Of which there is no comparison when you put it that way. I can take the content angle another step further, content created by professionals vs user generated content. Again, so a huge difference between the two the comparison breaks down for practical purposes.

I don't see anything wrong with you wanting to charge for Geekzone, but I think it would helpful for you to clarify what specifically it is that you are charging for. I think it is the venue for the content, rather than the content itself.




4474 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 849

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 354711 22-Jul-2010 01:37
Send private message

dman:
freitasm: I see you didn't get it as 'content' analogy... Nothing to do with the illegal part of it. I will explain later in the morning...

Looking forward to your reply in the morning :)

I still see it as being what you just said, a content analogy....  illegal vs legal content. Of which there is no comparison when you put it that way. I can take the content angle another step further, content created by professionals vs user generated content. Again, so a huge difference between the two the comparison breaks down for practical purposes.


I don't see anything wrong with you wanting to charge for Geekzone, but I think it would helpful for you to clarify what specifically it is that you are charging for. I think it is the venue for the content, rather than the content itself.


 

I think mauricio wanted to know why most people choose not to subscribe and if there is anything he could do to make the subscription more interesting.

Btw, can i suggest geekzone to add option for donation? I like the idea of donation more than subscription.







BDFL - Memuneh
61757 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12420

Administrator
Trusted
Geekzone
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 354737 22-Jul-2010 08:49
Send private message

dman: I don't see anything wrong with you wanting to charge for Geekzone



I already said before, and repeat in bold to be clear: we have no plans to charge for Geekzone content.

dman: , but I think it would helpful for you to clarify what specifically it is that you are charging for. I think it is the venue for the content, rather than the content itself.


We are not charging for Geekzone content. It's the ability to have added features to the site - like removing ads altogether, or the ability to create private forums for example.

dman:

a) a free forum is supplied as exactly that, free. There is nothing wrong whatsoever in using it freely.
b) downloading moves is illegal, which is... well... illegal!

Kinda obvious when put that way.... illegal vs legal.

Which makes it sound very close to you casting us as criminals... ? Not a good look :P :P


My example was related to access to paid vs free content, not legal vs illegal. My question in the other thread was simply "given the option to buy a movie online or download from torrent for free, which one you chose?" and the answers, most of them, were "download from torrent". The reason given was that "I already pay for my Internet access so what's on the Internet should be free".

This was an example of how people think, nothing about the legality. I never implied blocking ads is something illegal - you are free to do what you want on your connection, your browser.






BDFL - Memuneh
61757 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12420

Administrator
Trusted
Geekzone
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 354740 22-Jul-2010 09:02
Send private message

nickd: Everyone may laugh at me for this, but how ads work on websites is something I have no knowledge about.

Is there a way to track who clicks what ads?


Websites sell "space" on pages. Advertisers buy this space, paying either on a CPM (per thousand impressions) or per click. Sales involve the advertiser, the advertiser agency, my agent and Geekzone. Agencies take anything from 20% to 3% commission. Large publishers have their own sales people.

CPM means ads are paid for every thousand times it's shown. If someone blocks those ads then we make nothing. We generally commit to deliver a certain number of impressions. A company may contact us and ask "can we have 200,000 ads between these dates" and we then lock those numbers.

Per click means advertisers will pay if someone clicks on the ad only, regardless of how many times the ad was seen.

There is another model, called per action, which means only if someone clicks, and complete a transaction (buiy something, subscribe to newsletter) we get paid.

We serve a mix of those ads.

Ads can run from our own platform (in our case we run Google DoubleClick) or from a third party. Those platforms track who clicked the ads, to prevent click-fraud for example.

Also ads can have restrictions - for example only show in New Zealand, only during weekdays, only once every 24 hours, and so on. It's all controlled automatically and it happens on that split second between the browser receiving the html and the page finished loading.

Yes, it would be possible to track who clicks what ads, but we dont. It's not in our interest to know this.

nickd: I realise you can't tell people to click ads (per a previous post), but what if you had something like an AA rewards scheme where if I click 20 ads then I get a subscription for a month (then I could go and use the net at uni to click a couple of hundred of ads for my yearly subscription :-p).


This is not possible and certainly would break a lot of T&Cs around.





489 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 68

Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 354886 22-Jul-2010 12:52
Send private message

I subscribed partly as an expression of appreciation for the service, but mostly because I remain concerned about the lack of progress to making the site more accessible. i figured if I was paying, my concerns may carry more weight. So far, the site continues to show a lack of regard for accessibility, so I probably won't renew when the time comes.




Jonathan Mosen

 

Mosen Consulting, for advice on web and app accessibility

 

http://mosen.org



BDFL - Memuneh
61757 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12420

Administrator
Trusted
Geekzone
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 354893 22-Jul-2010 13:09
Send private message

Accessibility is a long slope. We try a lot of things - making sure images have tags, pages have title and descriptions, links are spelled out... But I have to say it's hard because I have no idea really what to do to make it more accessible.





489 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 68

Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 354898 22-Jul-2010 13:18
Send private message

Then I'm happy to tell you, although I'm fairly sure I'm repeating myself.

1. each new post should start with an HTML header tag. The level doesn't really matter, provided it's consistent.

2. The body of the post should also be denoted with a lower level heading. So you might use H2 for new posts, H3 for the body. Alternatively, use an aria landmark for the body of each post.

3. Quoted text should use proper HTML block quotes.

Even these three things would improve accessibility markedly overnight.




Jonathan Mosen

 

Mosen Consulting, for advice on web and app accessibility

 

http://mosen.org

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic



Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.