Are you still seeing the annoying talking ads? I thought I switched those off permanently. What you should only be seeing are Forumosan ads – which have been around for a long time, nothing sudden about them. [/quote]
One-third of the screen is still being taken up by non-F.com related ads (on the top row; there are f.com “related” stuff below, but I cannot see why Friends and Taiwanted are so important to promote that it deserves 1/3 of the screen!). Yes, they no longer “talk”, which is good. But they are still there, and taking up WAY too much of the screen IMO.
If you are a Person of Slightly Advancing Years who has Forgotten Her Glasses and needs to enlarge the font size at all, you end up with only two words on each line of actual content for the forums, while the ads keep going original size.
Let’s put it this way – I don’t like the way F.com is ending up looking like every other Chinese web site – littered with graphics (at least they are not flashing for the most part – yet…) and advertising. Yes, the level of taste in the drawings is, so far, somewhat better, but it looks bad and irritates users. I realize F.com needs money, but isn’t there another way to raise it? How much revenue comes in from those ads versus offering some specials to get first-time advertisers on board, or even thinking about premium content within f.com?
I have noticed that when I use Safari, non-F.com ads still seem to show up. As you said, at least they no longer talk. I will look into removing them outright, if this means they are taking away face-time for local Forumosan banners.
In the default prosilver-forumosa theme, there is a font-size button that offers 2 larger sizes of text. I believe this feature is cookie-based, so after you set it, the typeface size stays that size if you use the same browser to read the rest of the website, that is, the actual content of the discussions (viewtopic pages like the one we are looking at now).
I do not know why you would see only 2 words a line – maybe you are enlarging the text using your web-browser? Try hitting CTRL-0 to get back to the normal browser type-size and then using prosilver-forumosa’s text resizer.
I’m open to hearing ways to raise the money F.com needs. The simplest way seems to be to appeal to sponsors – it’s sustainable and has largely worked for most of the past decade.
There is significant revenue coming from Forumosa Friends every quarter. It doesn’t cover all our hosting costs, but we haven’t really given it any prominent positioning. Not like this. The logic goes, if it did that much while we tucked it away down below, imagine how much more effective it could be if it was more visible. Then you extend that logic to our sponsors – why not offer them the same advantage?
Premium content within F.com? We’ve always been open to suggestion and collaboration. What do you have in mind?
I’m open to hearing ways to raise the money F.com needs. The simplest way seems to be to appeal to sponsors – it’s sustainable and has largely worked for most of the past decade.
There is significant revenue coming from Forumosa Friends every quarter. It doesn’t cover all our hosting costs, but we haven’t really given it any prominent positioning. Not like this. The logic goes, if it did that much while we tucked it away down below, imagine how much more effective it could be if it was more visible. Then you extend that logic to our sponsors – why not offer them the same advantage?
Premium content within F.com? We’ve always been open to suggestion and collaboration. What do you have in mind?[/quote]What bothers me is that the new design may be annoying users to no purpose. It’s hard enough to get any useful effect from image-heavy banner / sidebar ads (see Nielsen’s Banner Blindness article). What’s worse is that the potentially more effective ads – the ones people see as more relevant and useful (Neilsen, Making Web Advertisements Work), are mixed in with the ones that are seen as irrelevant, tacky, and commercial.
Of course Forumosa needs to give something back to its sponsors. How about doing some more research to make sure that that “something” is worth having?
What makes you think this hasn’t been done? We have details on views and clickthroughs of all banners, and we are able to compare the stats of different banner sizes and placements. Although we do experiment, we’re not doing this whimsically. If we’ve ever given that impression, please accept my apologies.
What makes you think this hasn’t been done? We have details on views and clickthroughs of all banners, and we are able to compare the stats of different banner sizes and placements. Although we do experiment, we’re not doing this whimsically. If we’ve ever given that impression, please accept my apologies.[/quote]Those stats are better than nothing. The bit that’s harder to measure is the effect on the brand (both for the advertisers and for Forumosa itself). Did you read the Nielsen articles? Any thoughts? He’s a bit dogmatic sometimes but has a lot of useful stuff to say.
I’d be more understanding if we were talking about the content pages (viewtopic) where we read what people post. But I am careful not to futz around that that too much. Now, this sidebar only appears on the search and index pages of the forums, pages that are meant to be scanned. [/quote]
This seems entirely reasonable. Most of the regulars must spend minimal time on the index page, and the search is only used within a specific time frame.[/quote]
Spoke too soon, for today I am seeing an ad sidebar on the “own” and “new” index post pages as well., and not only on the main index page. And for crappy products based in Canada, such as Mount Tremblant or Kijiji. Why on earth do I need to have the opportunity, on a Taiwan-orientated website to purchase cheesy goods like a 15 dollar vase or a $10 matching set of hair bows from some pillock in SW Ontario? Edging closer to fakebook and tealit, it would seem.
Creepy. Why do the ads have to be so intrusively large? It would be easier to bear if the ads were smaller, and there were more of them on a page.
Would be at all possible to set up some sort of staggered subscriber
tiers whereby the admins could sell the right to view less of these ads to those of us that feel that less is still actually more?
Here’s an option: Ditch the ads completely and implement subscription-only for users.
Oops! What’s that I hear? Outrage? Goodness me!
Look, its simple. The site costs money. Either maoman pays, or the advertisers do, or … WE do.
I hate the non-Forumosan ads. They’re a pain in the arse. Then again, I don’t want to pay my own hard-earned just to post snarky wise-ass comments on a bulletin board.
[quote=“sandman”]Here’s an option: Ditch the ads completely and implement subscription-only for users.
Oops! What’s that I hear? Outrage? Goodness me!
Look, its simple. The site costs money. Either maoman pays, or the advertisers do, or … WE do.
I hate the non-Forumosan ads. They’re a pain in the arse. Then again, I don’t want to pay my own hard-earned just to post snarky wise-ass comments on a bulletin board.[/quote]I don’t think it’s simple to set the advertising policy for a site like Forumosa. The advertisers only continue paying money when they continue seeing value in advertising here. If site users block ads, the site gets less money. If rates are on a pay-per-view or per-clickthrough basis, this is a very direct effect. Even if not, there will probably be an effect over time.
On the other hand, if site users generally see the ads as relevant and informative, or at least as not too obtrusive, this should benefit advertisers and the site alike. The hard part must be finding out what kind of advertising is best for the majority of site users (not just the people posting on this thread).
I clicked on the HSBC ad on the right side and it just opened up a blank page with the address, t.mookie1.com/t/v1/clk?migAgencyId=41, and the title, clk (1x1). I’m using Google Chrome on Windows 7.
[quote=“Joesox”][quote=“sandman”]Here’s an option: Ditch the ads completely and implement subscription-only for users.[/quote]I don’t think it’s simple to set the advertising policy for a site like Forumosa. The advertisers only continue paying money when they continue seeing value in advertising here. If site users block ads, the site gets less money. If rates are on a pay-per-view or per-clickthrough basis, this is a very direct effect. Even if not, there will probably be an effect over time.
On the other hand, if site users generally see the ads as relevant and informative, or at least as not too obtrusive, this should benefit advertisers and the site alike. The hard part must be finding out what kind of advertising is best for the majority of site users (not just the people posting on this thread).[/quote]
But if the users pay for the site, then we don’t need the advertisers.
I doubt that any newbie is going to pay for access to flob if they can’t see how awesome it is, so I doubt it’s a viable idea to switch wholesale to Sadman’s system. On the other hand, if he was willing to pay not to see ads then I don’t see why that’s bad for the advertisers. After all, there’s no point advertising something to someone who doesn’t want it and is dead set on not buying it out of principle. Losing Sandman’s eyeballs is hardly going to affect the bottom line of, say, HSBC because he was never going to click the ad anyway.
I guess it’s a question of who the ads are targetting, and whether the display can be tweaked according to who is looking. Customised advertising is not only better for advertisers, it’s also more likely to be useful and interesting for the person looking at the ad. Ironlady doesn’t seem to have much interest in the cute girly pics, so it’s fair enough that she wants them to go away. But if they’re generating income for flob then obviously someone wants to see them.
We need ‘granular’ ads based on voluntary sharing of all sorts of personal info, just like on Facebook. Then Sandman will see more ads for silk underwear and newbies will see ads for Hess.
Me too. I assume they’re paying per click and don’t need the money as badly as flob does, so I’ve been hitting the ad repeatedly for days. Same result as the Doc tho’.
[quote=“ironlady”]Well, I do think Sandman has a point, though.
The community that has supported F.com over the years (admittedly not always in monetary terms, but in building the base of users that make this the biggest site in Taiwan for foreigners) pretty much expect a variation of the sort of site they’ve been seeing. The sudden conversion to the 24/7 Las Vegas neon-glitz ad rush is disheartening, to say the least.
Isn’t there any way to make this site function without resorting to this sort of lowest-common-denominator, irritating ad-laden stuff? Banner ads are community members. That’s one thing. But these artificially served-up ones are just irritating. And I’m not even in any danger of my boss turning the site off at work.[/quote]
I’ve suggested to the site owners a system similar to that used on BoardGameGeek.com … people can become a patron of the site and would get a little icon under their avatar and user name showing that they financially support the site. BGG has two levels:
~NT$300 gets a patron “badge” for the year
~NT$1000 gets a patron badge and gets rid of all the ads --> for f.com, I’d suggest getting rid of all NON-LOCAL ads… personally, I’d be glad to continue to see ads for Burger Stop and so on, because those are more directly useful to me.
This site has been a huge help to me, both practically (WCIF anything???) and socially, and I’d be really glad to pay a little bit to help keep it running. I bet a lot of you would be too… so maybe it will be considered… of course, I have no idea what level of a coding/record-keeping PITA it would be, and I know that extra work could scuttle the entire idea.
[quote=“DiaFun”]I’ve suggested to the site owners a system similar to that used on BoardGameGeek.com … people can become a patron of the site and would get a little icon under their avatar and user name showing that they financially support the site. BGG has two levels:
~NT$300 gets a patron “badge” for the year
~NT$1000 gets a patron badge and gets rid of all the ads --> for f.com, I’d suggest getting rid of all NON-LOCAL ads… personally, I’d be glad to continue to see ads for Burger Stop and so on, because those are more directly useful to me.
This site has been a huge help to me, both practically (WCIF anything???) and socially, and I’d be really glad to pay a little bit to help keep it running. I bet a lot of you would be too… so maybe it will be considered… of course, I have no idea what level of a coding/record-keeping PITA it would be, and I know that extra work could scuttle the entire idea.[/quote]
What DiaFun said. I’d happily pay NT$1000 a year to get rid of all non-local ads (meaning I’d see only banner ads, not that the huge chunks of real estate would be replaced with huge local ads…)
Maybe it’s the old layout only? But when 1/3 of the width of the screen is being taken up by ads every time I go to a forum list or list of new/active topics – that IS annoying.
[/quote]