New feature: ADS UNDER THE FIRST 3 CACHE LISTINGS

[TrailsEndTom]

When I saw the ads between the caches last night I was upset. The ads on the top or side of the page are fine with me but the ads between listings are annoying. The ads on the side of the page are fine and I use them. So this is a big no to the ads between the listings.

 

TrailsEndTom

Edited June 30, 2007 by TrailsEndTom

[+genegene]

What does that have to do with anything Andrew? If you are going to say the word "CAR" in the next comment, don't even go there. You will be opening up a whole new can of worms that is not meant to be in this topic. I'm sure most of us will know what u will say next.

 

Gene

[+genegene]

Why is it that posts always get off the topic????????

 

It was a simple Question. It had 3 possible answers and here they are: I like them, I don't like them, I don't care.... Pick one of the 3, Its that simple!!!!!!! After the choice is made you can add in any suggestion's you want to.

 

There is no reason to keep arguing about who is right about one thing and wrong about another, is there? Who cares

 

Gene

Edited June 30, 2007 by genegene

[Jeremy]

I don't like them either, in the search pages or on the cache listings. I am a college student and can't really afford to have a premium membership. I wonder if expanding the products offered by the Groundspeak store would be a better option.

 

Yet you can afford a Meridan gold, eXplorist 200, Nikon D70 and N80 (so says your sig line).

 

I had 10 years of college debt. And during my college years I could have handled $3/mo. But honestly I probably wouldn't have purchased one, instead thinking that a few ads on a nearest cache is a small price to pay for not paying at all.

 

These bills aren't paid by wishful thinking. And I'm sorry I don't have a $500 camera to sell you.

[+mini cacher]

These bills aren't paid by wishful thinking. And I'm sorry I don't have a $500 camera to sell you.

lol... classic Irish comment right there.. I love it. You crack me up sometimes.... you knuckle head!

[+lacazg]

I don't think its that big of deal I signed out to see these ads and I could care less. I say put them on premium accounts too if it helps pay for geocaching. Seriously would you rather have a couple of ads or no geocaching?

[+zeobandit]

The ads are horrible. I see the need to have them to help cover costs of running the site, and that is fine. However, can't they be placed somewhere else? It is incredibly annoying to have them in the middle of the cache listings.

[+nittany dave]

The ads are horrible. I see the need to have them to help cover costs of running the site, and that is fine. However, can't they be placed somewhere else? It is incredibly annoying to have them in the middle of the cache listings.

You have a choice.

[Aushiker]

The ads are horrible. I see the need to have them to help cover costs of running the site, and that is fine. However, can't they be placed somewhere else? It is incredibly annoying to have them in the middle of the cache listings.

You have a choice.

 

+ 1 (which means I agree) ... Cup of coffee versus adverts ... $0.70 per week ... 0.10 cents per day... compared against the cost of a GPSr etc. Is it really that much hassle?

 

Regards

Andrew

[+FireRef]

I'm starting to see ads on most of the pages - I thought that they were going to be limited to non-premium members... are they going to be on all pages for premium members as well?? I DO NOT like this idea.

[+TrailGators]

I'm starting to see ads on most of the pages - I thought that they were going to be limited to non-premium members... are they going to be on all pages for premium members as well?? I DO NOT like this idea.

Check your cache pages they are not there.

[+FireRef]

I'm starting to see ads on most of the pages - I thought that they were going to be limited to non-premium members... are they going to be on all pages for premium members as well?? I DO NOT like this idea.

Check your cache pages they are not there.

 

They are on the main page (right side), and forum pages (top) - I was under the assumption that premium members wouldn't have to view them at all... apparently it's just not on the cache pages?

[+FamilyDNA]

I'm starting to see ads on most of the pages - I thought that they were going to be limited to non-premium members... are they going to be on all pages for premium members as well?? I DO NOT like this idea.

Check your cache pages they are not there.

 

They are on the main page (right side), and forum pages (top) - I was under the assumption that premium members wouldn't have to view them at all... apparently it's just not on the cache pages?

Personally, I'd say leave them on the homepage and at the top of the forums, even for PMs. I like not seeing them on cache pages or search listings. (Thanks.) They are barely noticeable on the forums, certainly not a problem. I spend a very low percentage of my time on the forums at the very top of pages where they can be seen, anyway. I have clicked one or two that looked interesting. Google seems to be doing a good job of finding relevant advertising.

[+FireRef]

I'm starting to see ads on most of the pages - I thought that they were going to be limited to non-premium members... are they going to be on all pages for premium members as well?? I DO NOT like this idea.

Check your cache pages they are not there.

 

They are on the main page (right side), and forum pages (top) - I was under the assumption that premium members wouldn't have to view them at all... apparently it's just not on the cache pages?

Personally, I'd say leave them on the homepage and at the top of the forums, even for PMs. I like not seeing them on cache pages or search listings. (Thanks.) They are barely noticeable on the forums, certainly not a problem. I spend a very low percentage of my time on the forums at the very top of pages where they can be seen, anyway. I have clicked one or two that looked interesting. Google seems to be doing a good job of finding relevant advertising.

 

I'm not saying its not relevant, or that I might not at some point see something I am interested in and click on it. I'm saying that my understanding was that PM's were already contributing (and yes, I understand that this is a very small amount, compared to what could be charged or the actual costs of running the site), and would not be subjected to the ads.

 

It is a VERY good thing that they are not on the cache pages for PM's... that would definitely be out of line in my opinion. But I do feel it makes sense that those of us who are contributing shouldn't have to be subjected to the extra downloading time (small as it is) and the clutter...

[+Michael]

I'm starting to see ads on most of the pages - I thought that they were going to be limited to non-premium members... are they going to be on all pages for premium members as well?? I DO NOT like this idea.

Check your cache pages they are not there.

 

They are on the main page (right side), and forum pages (top) - I was under the assumption that premium members wouldn't have to view them at all... apparently it's just not on the cache pages?

Personally, I'd say leave them on the homepage and at the top of the forums, even for PMs. I like not seeing them on cache pages or search listings. (Thanks.) They are barely noticeable on the forums, certainly not a problem. I spend a very low percentage of my time on the forums at the very top of pages where they can be seen, anyway. I have clicked one or two that looked interesting. Google seems to be doing a good job of finding relevant advertising.

 

I'm not saying its not relevant, or that I might not at some point see something I am interested in and click on it. I'm saying that my understanding was that PM's were already contributing (and yes, I understand that this is a very small amount, compared to what could be charged or the actual costs of running the site), and would not be subjected to the ads.

 

It is a VERY good thing that they are not on the cache pages for PM's... that would definitely be out of line in my opinion. But I do feel it makes sense that those of us who are contributing shouldn't have to be subjected to the extra downloading time (small as it is) and the clutter...

 

 

The Post where Jeremy explains what I quoted below.

 

Additionally I'm trying out a product placement on the front page of the web site as well as a google ad. Neither of these are filtered for Premium Members. The reason is I felt that the front page would be an interesting test to see how it responded if everyone saw it (which does far better than, say, the cache details page). Also it is one of those pages that most hardcore (Premium) members don't really look at anyway.

[+FireRef]

Well, I guess that's ok then - I've never been big on advertising, only because it rarely, for me, anyway, seems to be useful. But if it's going to keep this site working well, and not increase prices for us PM's, I guess it's ok!

 

It would be interesting to see statistics on clicks for the various locations of ads.

[+benjamin921]

To all the folks that are telling us non premium members to shut it (maybe a bad choice of a word) and buy a membership really need to stop it. I can afford it, I just choose not to.

 

It really isn't a matter of having the ads (I UNDERSTAND THE NEED FOR THEM), it is where they are placed - right in the middle of the page. I totally agree with and am OK with ads, just please put them off to the side.

[Aushiker]

To all the folks that are telling us non premium members to shut it (maybe a bad choice of a word) and buy a membership really need to stop it.

G'day

 

That sounds fair enough. The are all those people who are seeing the ads going to stop complaining about a few ads on a site which provides the functionality to them for free? Fair comprise?

 

Regards

Andrew

[Aushiker]

Duplicate post.

Edited July 1, 2007 by Aushiker

[Aushiker]

Sugar. Came through again.

Edited July 1, 2007 by Aushiker

[+SUp3rFM & Cruella]

The ads on the cache pages are now well placed, imho. The last format wasn't that good, but now it's pretty good. The ones placed on the nearest cache page are also ok.

 

The ads on the forum pages are just like every other forum I'm in to. It's familiar and not intrusive.

 

It's a very small price to pay to keep things running.

 

Stop whining about them.

[+mtn-man]

To all the folks that are telling us non premium members to shut it (maybe a bad choice of a word) and buy a membership really need to stop it. I can afford it, I just choose not to.

 

It really isn't a matter of having the ads (I UNDERSTAND THE NEED FOR THEM), it is where they are placed - right in the middle of the page. I totally agree with and am OK with ads, just please put them off to the side.

I actually like that placement. It might make someone that can afford it, like you for example, go ahead and do what is needed to remove them -- pay $3 a month. Since you *choose* not to support the site financially I would think you would at least have the courtesy not dictate how the site raises capital using additional methods. Instead you *choose* not to support the site financially yet you feel that you should be able to dictate to them how to run it. I am sorry, but I just don't think that is proper.

 

In addition, if they are put out of your way so you don't notice them, isn't the whole idea of getting them noticed lost? The whole reason they are there *is* so they are noticed. To get the bang for the buck, they are in fact perfectly placed. You will just have to choose to deal with it or financially support the site directly. Some web sites don't even give you that choice.

[+GeocachingAdam]

 

It really isn't a matter of having the ads (I UNDERSTAND THE NEED FOR THEM), it is where they are placed - right in the middle of the page. I totally agree with and am OK with ads, just please put them off to the side.

I actually like that placement. It might make someone that can afford it, like you for example, go ahead and do what is needed to remove them -- pay $3 a month. Since you *choose* not to support the site financially I would think you would at least have the courtesy not dictate how the site raises capital using additional methods. Instead you *choose* not to support the site financially yet you feel that you should be able to dictate to them how to run it. I am sorry, but I just don't think that is proper.

 

In addition, if they are put out of your way so you don't notice them, isn't the whole idea of getting them noticed lost? The whole reason they are there *is* so they are noticed. To get the bang for the buck, they are in fact perfectly placed. You will just have to choose to deal with it or financially support the site directly. Some web sites don't even give you that choice.

 

Very well said Mtn-Man!! And I agree wholeheartedly!

[Aushiker]

I actually like that placement. It might make someone that can afford it, like you for example, go ahead and do what is needed to remove them -- pay $3 a month. Since you *choose* not to support the site financially I would think you would at least have the courtesy not dictate how the site raises capital using additional methods. Instead you *choose* not to support the site financially yet you feel that you should be able to dictate to them how to run it. I am sorry, but I just don't think that is proper.

 

In addition, if they are put out of your way so you don't notice them, isn't the whole idea of getting them noticed lost? The whole reason they are there *is* so they are noticed. To get the bang for the buck, they are in fact perfectly placed. You will just have to choose to deal with it or financially support the site directly. Some web sites don't even give you that choice.

+1

 

Oh and well said.

 

Andrew

Edited July 2, 2007 by Aushiker

[+TrailGators]

+3

I actually like that placement. It might make someone that can afford it, like you for example, go ahead and do what is needed to remove them -- pay $3 a month. Since you *choose* not to support the site financially I would think you would at least have the courtesy not dictate how the site raises capital using additional methods. Instead you *choose* not to support the site financially yet you feel that you should be able to dictate to them how to run it. I am sorry, but I just don't think that is proper.

 

In addition, if they are put out of your way so you don't notice them, isn't the whole idea of getting them noticed lost? The whole reason they are there *is* so they are noticed. To get the bang for the buck, they are in fact perfectly placed. You will just have to choose to deal with it or financially support the site directly. Some web sites don't even give you that choice.

+1

 

Oh and wells said.

 

Andrew

+2

[+DavidMac]

I'm generally against advertising, but the more I've thought about this issue, the more I agree with what mtn-man said above. Although it may be right in the middle of the page, it's just a plain text ad. It's no different than how many news sites break up articles with advertising, but with one difference: they blink, they dance, they float over the content, they talk, they even black out the whole page until you click on an obscure close button in the corner. I'm just glad they haven't decided to pull any of those stunts here, but kept it simple and (relatively) unobtrusive.

[+benjamin921]

To all the folks that are telling us non premium members to shut it (maybe a bad choice of a word) and buy a membership really need to stop it. I can afford it, I just choose not to.

 

It really isn't a matter of having the ads (I UNDERSTAND THE NEED FOR THEM), it is where they are placed - right in the middle of the page. I totally agree with and am OK with ads, just please put them off to the side.

I actually like that placement. It might make someone that can afford it, like you for example, go ahead and do what is needed to remove them -- pay $3 a month. Since you *choose* not to support the site financially I would think you would at least have the courtesy not dictate how the site raises capital using additional methods. Instead you *choose* not to support the site financially yet you feel that you should be able to dictate to them how to run it. I am sorry, but I just don't think that is proper.

 

In addition, if they are put out of your way so you don't notice them, isn't the whole idea of getting them noticed lost? The whole reason they are there *is* so they are noticed. To get the bang for the buck, they are in fact perfectly placed. You will just have to choose to deal with it or financially support the site directly. Some web sites don't even give you that choice.

 

Never did I "dictate" how to run this site, (I am not on here screaming, yelling or demanding that the ads be removed) I merely asked if they would be able to be placed off t the side like in the cache description page. Once again, I am not against the advertising (I'm not sure that you see that).

 

[non demeaning voice] You really should have your facts straight before you tell me that I am a dictator [/voice]

[+Anonymous']

I didn't notice the ads until I was on a computer other than my own and I wasn't very happy to see them. I understand why we need them though, but personally I've never clicked a google ad in my life. Luckily my firefox blocks the ads so I can forget about them.

[+mtn-man]

To all the folks that are telling us non premium members to shut it (maybe a bad choice of a word) and buy a membership really need to stop it. I can afford it, I just choose not to.

 

It really isn't a matter of having the ads (I UNDERSTAND THE NEED FOR THEM), it is where they are placed - right in the middle of the page. I totally agree with and am OK with ads, just please put them off to the side.

I actually like that placement. It might make someone that can afford it, like you for example, go ahead and do what is needed to remove them -- pay $3 a month. Since you *choose* not to support the site financially I would think you would at least have the courtesy not dictate how the site raises capital using additional methods. Instead you *choose* not to support the site financially yet you feel that you should be able to dictate to them how to run it. I am sorry, but I just don't think that is proper.

 

In addition, if they are put out of your way so you don't notice them, isn't the whole idea of getting them noticed lost? The whole reason they are there *is* so they are noticed. To get the bang for the buck, they are in fact perfectly placed. You will just have to choose to deal with it or financially support the site directly. Some web sites don't even give you that choice.

 

Never did I "dictate" how to run this site, (I am not on here screaming, yelling or demanding that the ads be removed) I merely asked if they would be able to be placed off t the side like in the cache description page. Once again, I am not against the advertising (I'm not sure that you see that).

 

[non demeaning voice] You really should have your facts straight before you tell me that I am a dictator [/voice]

If you read the post carefully, you would see I was speaking in general terms. If the shoe fits though...

 

Nice that you feel you can be "demeaning" to me though (your term, not mine).

 

Edited to add that I will say that throughout the post I should have said "you and others" instead of "you", since some would have lost the general context I meant the post in as up seem to have. At least you said "please" when you told the site where you wanted the ads placed so they did not get in your way.

Edited July 2, 2007 by mtn-man

[Aushiker]

It really isn't a matter of having the ads (I UNDERSTAND THE NEED FOR THEM), <snip> .... (I am not on here screaming, yelling or demanding that the ads be removed)]

Actually capitals is generally considered yelling ....

 

Regards

Andrew

[+benjamin921]

To all the folks that are telling us non premium members to shut it (maybe a bad choice of a word) and buy a membership really need to stop it. I can afford it, I just choose not to.

 

It really isn't a matter of having the ads (I UNDERSTAND THE NEED FOR THEM), it is where they are placed - right in the middle of the page. I totally agree with and am OK with ads, just please put them off to the side.

I actually like that placement. It might make someone that can afford it, like you for example, go ahead and do what is needed to remove them -- pay $3 a month. Since you *choose* not to support the site financially I would think you would at least have the courtesy not dictate how the site raises capital using additional methods. Instead you *choose* not to support the site financially yet you feel that you should be able to dictate to them how to run it. I am sorry, but I just don't think that is proper.

 

In addition, if they are put out of your way so you don't notice them, isn't the whole idea of getting them noticed lost? The whole reason they are there *is* so they are noticed. To get the bang for the buck, they are in fact perfectly placed. You will just have to choose to deal with it or financially support the site directly. Some web sites don't even give you that choice.

 

Never did I "dictate" how to run this site, (I am not on here screaming, yelling or demanding that the ads be removed) I merely asked if they would be able to be placed off t the side like in the cache description page. Once again, I am not against the advertising (I'm not sure that you see that).

 

[non demeaning voice] You really should have your facts straight before you tell me that I am a dictator [/voice]

If you read the post carefully, you would see I was speaking in general terms. If the shoe fits though...

 

Nice that you feel you can be "demeaning" to me though (your term, not mine).

 

Edited to add that I will say that throughout the post I should have said "you and others" instead of "you", since some would have lost the general context I meant the post in as up seem to have. At least you said "please" when you told the site where you wanted the ads placed so they did not get in your way.

Non demeaning if you read it correctly.

[+benjamin921]

Sorry to all the other readers here. This is childish and has gotten to a pretty stupid point. Interpretations have really lacked here and now I'm done with this thread. Once again sorry to all the others that had to read this.

[+Cache Liberation Front]

http://adblock.mozdev.org/