New ads?

SpywareShooterSpywareShooter 127.0.0.1
edited November 2004 in Community
I was fine with the google ads, but now there's a banner at the top of the page, which is positioned over part of the "Short Media Forums" banner. When did this go up? Is it permanantly there, or just a temporary ad? IMO it looks pretty crappy on top of the banner, and stretches the page.

Also, I'm sorry of this was the wrong place to put this, but I didn't know where it went.

Comments

  • ketoketo Occupied. Or is it preoccupied? Icrontian
    edited November 2004
    I was wondering why the site wasn't fitting in my browser @ 1024X768
  • MedlockMedlock Miramar, Florida Member
    edited November 2004
    I'm running 1280x960, no strechy here. So, what's the deal with the ads?

    Just noticed, a new S-M banner along the top as well. I like it. :thumbsup:
  • primesuspectprimesuspect Beepin n' Boopin Detroit, MI Icrontian
    edited November 2004
    We're trying something out. Consider it a temporary experiment.
  • LeonardoLeonardo Wake up and smell the glaciers Eagle River, Alaska Icrontian
    edited November 2004
    Well, as long as it's an experiment, I guess feedback is needed. I'm running my monitor at 1200x900; and the ad stretches my screen as well.
  • ShortyShorty Manchester, UK Icrontian
    edited November 2004
    Il fix that. A moment please.
  • ShortyShorty Manchester, UK Icrontian
    edited November 2004
    Fixed the 1024 issue. Sorry about that.
  • madmatmadmat
    edited November 2004
    Hmmm...looks [H]'ish...
  • Straight_ManStraight_Man Geeky, in my own way Naples, FL Icrontian
    edited November 2004
    It is, IMHO, not in the right place, and the banner needs to be reduced to HALF its current length to not be overlaid. Looks like Short-Media title banner istself is set to dynamicly scale to 99-100% of site width. AND, it looks like either ad is an overwidth minimum size plus is right-side anchored to right end of title banner and looks to be almost 50% of whole banner. The two together will stretch site width in all browsers I have right now.

    I would suggest a fixed maximum width ad banner overlay if you want this style banner plus an ad overlay. OR, take title banner to 50% of width of browser window with dyn-rescaling in browser, and then put ad banner in a separate cell for right half of banner part of site page feed.

    Java graphics function extensions can do this if needed, and if PHP does not allow this, as of J2SE 5. Run-time finetunings to support this are under dev now, by Sun

    I'll try to suggest a fix if I think something might be worth changing, and that is what this is-- a suggestion set only for something not hyper-major that might go on the please-fix wishlist.

    Site stretches in:

    Mozilla 1.7+, IE 6.0 SP2, FireFox 1.0, and Opera, width-wise. I have a 990+ pixel wide browser window pane open now, and site is 1.25-1.3 times WIDER than that in total width, in Mozilla 1.7.3 plus. The screen here is at 1024 pixels wide, and the browser is at full screen mode.
  • ketoketo Occupied. Or is it preoccupied? Icrontian
    edited November 2004
    The forum posts are the right width but the title bar is another 20% or so wider than 1024X768. In Firefox. Not sure if that's what John said above, sorry if this is redundant.
  • entropyentropy Yah-Der-Hey (Wisconsin)
    edited November 2004
    I hope, for everyone's sake, that this will indeed be temporary. I know we could always use some cash, but c'mon. I was proud this was basically a text-ad-only place. :(

    And yes, if you do decide to keep it, it's in the most hideous/inconvient place possible :-/.

    (side note: the pages take quite awhile longer to load...)
  • shwaipshwaip bluffin' with my muffin Icrontian
    edited November 2004
    entropy wrote:
    I hope, for everyone's sake, that this will indeed be temporary. I know we could always use some cash, but c'mon. I was proud this was basically a text-ad-only place. :(

    And yes, if you do decide to keep it, it's in the most hideous/inconvient place possible :-/.

    (side note: the pages take quite awhile longer to load...)


    hideous? yes. Inconvenient? Not in MHO. Inconvenient would be in between posts. I think it's fine there.
  • entropyentropy Yah-Der-Hey (Wisconsin)
    edited November 2004
    I mean it kind of detracts from the page...:-/

    Btw, the domain has already been added to Maxthon's ad filter. I click on an ad maybe once every 4 or 5 months, on any site, and usually then I just back out. I have never click an S-M ad, other than when Ghoosdum mentioned that eMarket one. I don't see a reason to start now...
  • ThraxThrax 🐌 Austin, TX Icrontian
    edited November 2004
    Clicking the ads generates revenue for the site which means it continues to exist as the admins don't have to pay out of pocket.

    That's a pretty good reason eh?

    Despite that, I find the new adverts to be hideously tacky. If they must stay, well, they must.. But damn. :(
  • entropyentropy Yah-Der-Hey (Wisconsin)
    edited November 2004
    Yeah, I know it generate revenue. But I just can't see myself clicking on ads all day :p:-/
  • ThraxThrax 🐌 Austin, TX Icrontian
    edited November 2004
    You don't need to click them all day. Just a few times a day from everyone adds up to a lot. I click it every fifth time I come back to the main forum page.
  • SpywareShooterSpywareShooter 127.0.0.1
    edited November 2004
    I have my resolution at 800x600 and it's still really stretched. I would go bigger, but it looks like crap on my monitor.
  • ShortyShorty Manchester, UK Icrontian
    edited November 2004
    After listening to the publics opinion, the ad has been removed :)

    We won't force something down your throats that you don't like. Nuff 'said.
  • CrunchieCrunchie Mandurah. Western Australia. Member
    edited November 2004
    Does that mean I can unblock it now? :).
  • ShortyShorty Manchester, UK Icrontian
    edited November 2004
    yes :)
  • ketoketo Occupied. Or is it preoccupied? Icrontian
    edited November 2004
    Guys, I don't think a single one of us outright begrudges the *idea* of the ad, and certainly I think I speak for most everyone when I say that I truly want to see you guys generate some revenue for the place - we know you (at least were, think still are) pulling dough out of your personal pockets every month to run the joint. Can another placement be found that doesn't intrude on the physical layout? Or is that not acceptable to the advertiser? :confused:

    It wasn't something that in a million years would have stopped me coming but it was a slight annoyance. Entropy was right, "it detracts from the page". Which you know, so I will stop flogging this dead horse now. :eek::D
  • ShortyShorty Manchester, UK Icrontian
    edited November 2004
    I thought putting it in the header would be the least obtrusive. Seeing as you scroll the page down almost straight away. :scratch:

    No matter, the ad format can't be changed and it's doesn't suit, so it's a dead thread anyway :)
  • primesuspectprimesuspect Beepin n' Boopin Detroit, MI Icrontian
    edited November 2004
    I had no idea this would be so poorly received. It's in the header, which most people spend about .5 seconds per page on. As shorty said, you scroll down to read immediately.

    We never ask for donations, ever. We are spending a great deal of money on a new server, and wanted to supplement the adsense revenue. Most regular users don't click on the adsense ads, since they're regulars. Quite a few people even block the adsense ads.

    Sorry about the intrustive ad. We won't try THAT again :(
  • LincLinc Owner Detroit Icrontian
    edited November 2004
    Regular users should be the ones clicking the ads the most... :-/
  • entropyentropy Yah-Der-Hey (Wisconsin)
    edited November 2004
    Sorry if what I said offended, it wasn't meant to. Looking back, I posted rather harshly :(. I just think the placing (right beside the 'namesake' or whatever) wasn't that good. Also, as Thrax said, they seemed somewhat flashy/gaudy.

    Maybe if there was a mellow, non-moving (because those tend to be more annoying) ad in where the Google ads are, it would be better. Like every other time, or on certain pages, add those there. I, personally, just don't like banners that scream at you, which contributed to the rash post(s).
  • MediaManMediaMan Powered by loose parts.
    edited November 2004
    The official word on ads


    Shorty, Primesuspect and I have always wanted to strive towards keeping Short-Media.com as ad-free as possible. We've had a few companies contact us wanting us to subscribe to their services. Some had equal pros and cons while others we were very quick to refuse.

    It is not important which ad services these companies are. We are looking at adding some sort of price search feature to our main page but want to maintain it as part of the site...rather than the site built around it.

    Short-Media is finding its feet on the Internet. We are gaining momentum but still are a small fish in a very large pond. Soon our bandwidth costs may sharply increase but for the moment we have the time to try out new forms of revenue that meet the approval of the suppliers and, most importantly, our members.

    It'll be exciting when the proverbial pot boils over and the new SM members starting rolling in. That's what happens on the Net. One day you are small family of 10,000 forum members and some half million visitors...and the next...hooo boy. It'll be exciting for our present family. I don't know when that day will happen but I feel it will.

    Meanwhile we are looking forward while we have time to experiment rather than having to make rash decisions. We want to preserve our SM way of life so from time to time construction is going to happen in subtle ways. Help us and keep that feedback coming. :)
Sign In or Register to comment.