|
Well, it took me 2 seconds to turn it off for teamliquid. I can spare 2 seconds of my time to support my favorite site.
|
10003 Posts
On November 04 2011 06:52 Klonere wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2011 06:46 nalgene wrote:On November 04 2011 06:45 Kamais_Ookin wrote:On November 04 2011 06:43 nalgene wrote:On November 04 2011 06:36 Kamais_Ookin wrote:On November 04 2011 06:33 SultanVinegar wrote:
I don't get why people would adblock TL, the ads here are completely non-intrusive. I am really pissed that people would block ads for streams, because that's how the streamers make most of their money! Most "pros" don't make enough money from their contracts to live off of, I don't know why you would take away their extra income that they get for providing you such an awesome service! Unfortunately it's because people are just selfish. Props to the people who don't use adblock. There's also some that use laptops and need more battery life. I can relate to the laptop users and I think that's a good reason to turn ad-block on but I meant desktop users at home. But that still uses more watts in the end for the desktop user. this has to be the single most ridiculous reason I have ever heard for blocking ads. There are probably a million different, better ways to be efficient rather than depriving a community website of a source of income.
I bet ads reduce wattage because the site is mostly white which consumes a lot of watts and the ads are not-white. The resource spent rendering the ad probably evens it out. Either way, ridiculously low.
|
Thanks for the instructions. Team Liquid must live!
|
On November 04 2011 06:41 gyth wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2011 02:36 decaf wrote:
1. open up the Add-Ons Manager by pressing CTRL+SHIFT+A
2. open up the options-menu of AdBlock Plus
3. click on 'Add filter...'
4. paste following line into the textfield:
5. @@||teamliquid.net^$document
6. Press ok/apply
7. $$ profit (for TL ) That isn't a perfect solution. I've had that applied for a long time, but I still often see the crying elephant. So if someone has a solution (that doesn't involve globally allowing all sites that TL might pull ads from) I'd be happy to apply it.
Do you have NoScript on? I noticed that the top banner was Elly despite AdBlock allowing TL.
EDIT:
Ninja'd by Pyskee
|
I don't get it, you're ok with people blocking ads but blocking the crying elephant which doesn't generate revenue = ban? Confusing.
|
I saw a sad elephant and added an exception to my adblock.
|
I adblock normally and also added a filter for the ad that shows up when you're using adblock. I see empty light blue space.
|
Just to clarify here, TL only gets paid a (few) cent(s) for every clickthrough. The impression of the ads don't pay, you do have to click.
On the other hand the TLAF sponsorship was a deal that was based on site traffic and visibility.
On affiliate links TL would make a cut when an article was purchased through the link.
What I'd like to know is how TL is registered in the netherlands(?). If it's a non-profit and other such information, it's very well hidden it seems.
|
No. I don't care about esports, but I do still love TL.
|
On November 04 2011 06:56 WesleyLok wrote:I don't get it, you're ok with people blocking ads but blocking the crying elephant which doesn't generate revenue = ban? Confusing. It's ok to block ads here, it's not ok to tell other people to block ads though that's the difference.
|
I have this sick aversion to advertisements to the point I will go to great lengths to not see them online. It's nothing personal, it's not that I don't want to support them through ad revenue but I cannot stand them, from the deepest part of me I hate them. I refuse to put ads on anything I make, including my site (hardly relevant since it's a billion times smaller than TL obviously), and have always stood against online ads.
|
On November 04 2011 06:58 ShrikeG wrote:
I have this sick aversion to advertisements to the point I will go to great lengths to not see them online. It's nothing personal, it's not that I don't want to support them through ad revenue but I cannot stand them, from the deepest part of me I hate them. I refuse to put ads on anything I make, including my site (hardly relevant since it's a billion times smaller than TL obviously), and have always stood against online ads.
Can I ask you why you have this aversion?
Completely honest question, just curious  .
|
afaik it only helps if u click the add and i dont click adds. so i guess thats it, alsoadblock
|
where's the "no i love starcraft but i dont give a shit about esports" option ?
|
On November 04 2011 06:43 Falling wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2011 06:32 Mstring wrote:On November 04 2011 06:28 Charger wrote:On November 04 2011 06:26 Mstring wrote:On November 04 2011 06:03 bonifaceviii wrote:On November 04 2011 05:58 Mstring wrote:
For an individual to support TL, money must somehow go from them to TL. If you aren't buying things that have been advertised then you aren't supporting TL, you are expecting those companies who are advertising to support TL.
Of course it's reasonable that not everyone will buy things from ads; the impression is the purchase of a "potential" sale, however, just read through this thread and count the number of people who say they simply ignore the ads. By ignoring ads there is no "potential" sale. It's not quite so cut and dried, but even assuming that what you're saying is true what's the harm in enabling TL to fleece these idiotic affiliate companies into paying them per worthless impression? While I don't agree with the idea behind ads, I don't think it's right to spite them by forcing them to pay for nothing. On November 04 2011 06:06 Charger wrote:On November 04 2011 05:58 Mstring wrote:On November 04 2011 05:49 Charger wrote:On November 04 2011 05:43 Mstring wrote:On November 04 2011 05:37 Charger wrote:On November 04 2011 05:30 Mstring wrote:
[quote]
How much money has been transfered (by buying things from seeing ads, or from direct donations) from you to TL as a result of your shameless 100% support? LOL you do realize often times sites get paid by the number of times the ad is displayed, regardless of if someone clicked it or even bought anything right? It doesn't sound like you know this but your smug attitude makes it sound like you should know this. I didn't ask how much TL had been paid as a result of that user, but rather, how much money has been transfered from the user to TL by whatever means. Consider the ideal money flow: User sees ad. User buys item. Business makes a profit and gives a cut to TL for the marketing. A business wouldn't pay for ads knowing they will never give a return. Let's look at the money flow that people seem to be advocating in this thread: User ignores ad. User doesn't buy item. Business makes no profit but pays TL anyway. Do you see a problem here? No, do you see a problem here? This whole thread is about supporting TL. Try to stay with me here: No Ad Block - Ad shows up, ad has potential to be clicked, ad has potential to sell user ad's product, TL gets money regardless, TL can continue to operate and pay for server costs, upgrades, etc For an individual to support TL, money must somehow go from them to TL. If you aren't buying things that have been advertised then you aren't supporting TL, you are expecting those companies who are advertising to support TL. Of course it's reasonable that not everyone will buy things from ads; the impression is the purchase of a "potential" sale, however, just read through this thread and count the number of people who say they simply ignore the ads. By ignoring ads there is no "potential" sale. On November 04 2011 05:49 Klonere wrote:On November 04 2011 05:43 Mstring wrote:On November 04 2011 05:37 Charger wrote:On November 04 2011 05:30 Mstring wrote:
[quote]
How much money has been transfered (by buying things from seeing ads, or from direct donations) from you to TL as a result of your shameless 100% support? LOL you do realize often times sites get paid by the number of times the ad is displayed, regardless of if someone clicked it or even bought anything right? It doesn't sound like you know this but your smug attitude makes it sound like you should know this. I didn't ask how much TL had been paid as a result of that user, but rather, how much money has been transfered from the user to TL by whatever means. Consider the ideal money flow: User sees ad. User buys item. Business makes a profit and gives a cut to TL for the marketing. A business wouldn't pay for ads knowing they will never give a return. Let's look at the money flow that people seem to be advocating in this thread: User ignores ad. User doesn't buy item. Business makes no profit but pays TL anyway. Do you see a problem here? shhh you just revealed a glaring flaw in the financial model of enormous amounts of websites Hehehe oops. I'm convinced now more than ever that you have no idea how marketing and advertising, especially online, work. No clue - at all. If you actually really fail to see how even an ad showing up is beneficial to the company paying for the ad you need to go to google and read up some and then come back. As an example, I don't drink coke (or other similar drinks). Explain to me the benefit Coca-cola receives from me viewing an ad. I am not going to copy/paste articles on what online marketing and advertising is, go to google and read up on a subject you don't know enough about. So you can't explain the benefit? Got it. I don't get why you're being so difficult about this. It's not like this is a particularly new concept, whether on internet , tv or even radio. If the concept doesn't work that ads that people hear, but don't necessarily purchase, then why are we still doing it for the last 90 years. (1920 was the first radio ad.) Actually with print media, it's probably closer to 200 years if not earlier.
The internet has changed things radically. If I want to buy a new motherboard for example, even though I might have seen asus ads 1000 times, I'm still going to research the hell out of any purchase before making it and choose the product based on actual performance, not brand recognition. 200 years ago, you couldn't possibly find objective reviews of every boot maker and then there's the logistical problems.
The coke example was used because it's a product I'll never buy no matter how many times I see it. Same for those online dating things. I know I'm never going to use it, so what reason do I have for allowing money to change hands for my seeing it given I have the choice to stop it? There is no "potential" sale here. By using adblock I am saying "do whatever you want with your marketing, but I'm having no part in it". There are other ways for a website to make money from me. I feel really good about giving money directly to services I enjoy. I don't feel good allowing a business to pay for an ad impression that will guarantee them no return.
Not everyone is as conscious of their cashflow as I am, or researches every purchase as much as I do. They can keep participating in the marketing system. I don't like it but that's life for ya.
|
On November 04 2011 06:58 ShrikeG wrote:
I have this sick aversion to advertisements to the point I will go to great lengths to not see them online. It's nothing personal, it's not that I don't want to support them through ad revenue but I cannot stand them, from the deepest part of me I hate them. I refuse to put ads on anything I make, including my site (hardly relevant since it's a billion times smaller than TL obviously), and have always stood against online ads.
Well, rationally speaking, advertising models are clearly superior for some types of businesses.
|
I don't even know how to download an ad-block and I have no intentions of downloading one.
|
No adblock for me, I support the internet
|
Nope, but since the new update I get this a lot:
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/2YTkE.png)
I'm also not a fan of the sidebar ad, its a lot more intrusive than anything that has been on TL before.
|
On November 04 2011 07:01 Mstring wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2011 06:43 Falling wrote:On November 04 2011 06:32 Mstring wrote:On November 04 2011 06:28 Charger wrote:On November 04 2011 06:26 Mstring wrote:On November 04 2011 06:03 bonifaceviii wrote:On November 04 2011 05:58 Mstring wrote:
For an individual to support TL, money must somehow go from them to TL. If you aren't buying things that have been advertised then you aren't supporting TL, you are expecting those companies who are advertising to support TL.
Of course it's reasonable that not everyone will buy things from ads; the impression is the purchase of a "potential" sale, however, just read through this thread and count the number of people who say they simply ignore the ads. By ignoring ads there is no "potential" sale. It's not quite so cut and dried, but even assuming that what you're saying is true what's the harm in enabling TL to fleece these idiotic affiliate companies into paying them per worthless impression? While I don't agree with the idea behind ads, I don't think it's right to spite them by forcing them to pay for nothing. On November 04 2011 06:06 Charger wrote:On November 04 2011 05:58 Mstring wrote:On November 04 2011 05:49 Charger wrote:On November 04 2011 05:43 Mstring wrote:On November 04 2011 05:37 Charger wrote:
[quote]
LOL you do realize often times sites get paid by the number of times the ad is displayed, regardless of if someone clicked it or even bought anything right? It doesn't sound like you know this but your smug attitude makes it sound like you should know this. I didn't ask how much TL had been paid as a result of that user, but rather, how much money has been transfered from the user to TL by whatever means. Consider the ideal money flow: User sees ad. User buys item. Business makes a profit and gives a cut to TL for the marketing. A business wouldn't pay for ads knowing they will never give a return. Let's look at the money flow that people seem to be advocating in this thread: User ignores ad. User doesn't buy item. Business makes no profit but pays TL anyway. Do you see a problem here? No, do you see a problem here? This whole thread is about supporting TL. Try to stay with me here: No Ad Block - Ad shows up, ad has potential to be clicked, ad has potential to sell user ad's product, TL gets money regardless, TL can continue to operate and pay for server costs, upgrades, etc For an individual to support TL, money must somehow go from them to TL. If you aren't buying things that have been advertised then you aren't supporting TL, you are expecting those companies who are advertising to support TL. Of course it's reasonable that not everyone will buy things from ads; the impression is the purchase of a "potential" sale, however, just read through this thread and count the number of people who say they simply ignore the ads. By ignoring ads there is no "potential" sale. On November 04 2011 05:49 Klonere wrote:On November 04 2011 05:43 Mstring wrote:On November 04 2011 05:37 Charger wrote:
[quote]
LOL you do realize often times sites get paid by the number of times the ad is displayed, regardless of if someone clicked it or even bought anything right? It doesn't sound like you know this but your smug attitude makes it sound like you should know this. I didn't ask how much TL had been paid as a result of that user, but rather, how much money has been transfered from the user to TL by whatever means. Consider the ideal money flow: User sees ad. User buys item. Business makes a profit and gives a cut to TL for the marketing. A business wouldn't pay for ads knowing they will never give a return. Let's look at the money flow that people seem to be advocating in this thread: User ignores ad. User doesn't buy item. Business makes no profit but pays TL anyway. Do you see a problem here? shhh you just revealed a glaring flaw in the financial model of enormous amounts of websites Hehehe oops. I'm convinced now more than ever that you have no idea how marketing and advertising, especially online, work. No clue - at all. If you actually really fail to see how even an ad showing up is beneficial to the company paying for the ad you need to go to google and read up some and then come back. As an example, I don't drink coke (or other similar drinks). Explain to me the benefit Coca-cola receives from me viewing an ad. I am not going to copy/paste articles on what online marketing and advertising is, go to google and read up on a subject you don't know enough about. So you can't explain the benefit? Got it. I don't get why you're being so difficult about this. It's not like this is a particularly new concept, whether on internet , tv or even radio. If the concept doesn't work that ads that people hear, but don't necessarily purchase, then why are we still doing it for the last 90 years. (1920 was the first radio ad.) Actually with print media, it's probably closer to 200 years if not earlier. The internet has changed things radically. If I want to buy a new motherboard for example, even though I might have seen asus ads 1000 times, I'm still going to research the hell out of any purchase before making it and choose the product based on actual performance, not brand recognition. 200 years ago, you couldn't possibly find objective reviews of every boot maker and then there's the logistical problems. The coke example was used because it's a product I'll never buy no matter how many times I see it. Same for those online dating things. I know I'm never going to use it, so what reason do I have for allowing money to change hands for my seeing it given I have the choice to stop it? There is no "potential" sale here. By using adblock I am saying "do whatever you want with your marketing, but I'm having no part in it". There are other ways for a website to make money from me. I feel really good about giving money directly to services I enjoy. I don't feel good allowing a business to pay for an ad impression that will guarantee them no return. Not everyone is as concious of their cashflow as I am, or researches every purchase as much as I do. They can keep participating in the marketing system. I don't like it but that's life for ya.
Gaining expertise and research in everything you buy is not necessarily rational. A lot of people can make more money doing something productive and can absorb the cost of failed purchases if they arise. Either that or some people may dislike this type of research to the point where there is more utility in accepting the risk of a failed purchase.
There's also the possibility that research in products might not necessarily decrease the risk of failed purchases. Like the studies done where it shows that job interviews are spectacularly unreliable when it comes to them being a tool to identify successful hires.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
