MovieChat Forums > General Discussion > A Message From Jim about Ads

A Message From Jim about Ads

posted 8 years ago by Moderator1 (767)
38 replies | jump to latest

For those of you wondering about the advertisements and avatars...

"[I am] currently testing out a bunch of different ad networks to see what's best, so during this testing process, there may be some questionable and/or laggy ads. Obviously anything that deteriorates user experience on the site won't make the final cut, but testing all the options out there is an important process.

The reason I'm hesitant about allowing avatars its twofold: (1) lag, as you mentioned, but perhaps more importantly (2) allowing users to upload any picture they want could be a moderation headache. Users could upload NSFW images and it would be hard for moderators to detect before many users see it. Perhaps one day we'll have them if we can find a solution to this issue.

Lastly, I know there were some questions around why there are ads, how much it costs to run the site, etc., ... As people probably know, there are server and hosting fees which run a few hundred bucks per month for a site of our size and traffic. Then there are email notification fees (for example, whenever someone registers a new account, we pay a small fee to have a verification email sent to the user), DDoS prevention and security fees, and other small fees for miscellaneous things. Point is, there are a lot of fees that come with running a site of our size that most people don't realize. Aside from these fees, there are expenses related to trying to grow the site. In addition to spending money out of my pocket on marketing, any left over money we have from ads/contributions will go to trying to grow the site via various marketing channels (Facebook, Google Search, etc.). Needless to say, I personally make $0 from the site. The current focus is growing the site and making it as active as possible."

[–] Popcorn Kernel (2368) 8 years ago

Thanks for the update.
The ads on top haven't bothered me too much. Often they are things I have recently shopped for anyway, those must be google ads.
The ads on the bottom "Sponsored by Revcontent" seem pretty useless, the ones that say recommended for you- they are kind of trashy stuff like right now I see melania trump's tits falling out of a bustier (some old pic from her modeling/escort days) and an ad for male enhancement. Needless to say, those are not anything I have googled in my life! But since it is at the bottom I don't need to scroll past it to get to the content. I guess I could live with it but i will never ever click on that junk, and I might actually click on the upper ads.

[–] LeiaOfLothlorien (1980) 8 years ago

Yeah, that's what I've noticed. I got ads for Lightsabers a few times since I google a lot of Star Wars trivia (yes, I'm a nerd, and proud of it!). 😌

But the stuff on the bottom... Bleh. Mostly stuff about what men should try to avoid using Viagra. 😣

[–] GlenEllyn (21526) 8 years ago

I've often wondered, if they know we've recently shopped for a particular item, how come they don't know when we've actually bought it and stop advertising it to us?

OK, I don't really want to know the answer to that. 😒

[–] Popcorn Kernel (2368) 8 years ago

Because you likely searched for it on Google so Google knows what you searched for, But then you bought it on a secure page for a different website, so Google doesn't know that.

Sorry if you didn't really want to know.

[–] GlenEllyn (21526) 8 years ago

😨 One day, they WILL know, which is a creepy thought.

[–] Popcorn Kernel (2368) 8 years ago

When Google owns every company you shop with, then they will.
:p

[–] GlenEllyn (21526) 8 years ago

Yep, Google + Amazon = Gamazon???

[–] Cookie.L.A. (2117) 8 years ago

<< 😨 One day, they WILL know, which is a creepy thought. >>

ASK RUSSIA!
.

[–] Terrygg (544) 8 years ago

I turned off email notifications because it's slowing down my internet connection.

[–] GlenEllyn (21526) 8 years ago

That's my main beef with ads - they 'constipate' the loading of webpages. Not all of us have access to or can afford higher speed connections that aren't bothered by all that stuff.

[–] Terrygg (544) 8 years ago

And the ads are spyware. They totally messed up my phone. Factory reset didnt work either. Do not enable email notifications. Okay?

[–] TexasJack (12516) 8 years ago

I haven't noticed any slowness in page load times, but since the most recent changes (last 24-48 hours) I've had the "add reply" button go to sleep on me repeatedly. click, button color changes, and then...nothing. Button color goes back to original state and no post. Usually works the second or third time.

[–] Terrygg (544) 8 years ago

It's making changes to your computer.

[–] arvin g borkar (2854) 8 years ago

Especially with Spectrum monopolizing cable and internet.

[–] Sentient Meat (1509) 8 years ago

Thanks for taking the time to clarify some of these issues.

[–] wheelin176 (2050) 8 years ago

Thank you for updating us.

[–] April-151-CT (10210) 8 years ago

Users could upload NSFW images

Perhaps one day we'll have them if we can find a solution to this issue.

1. They can do that now.

2.That's easy. Don't let any picture be shown until it is approved by a member of the site's staff.

[–] Traveler (211) 8 years ago

I thought the same and since it's so obvious I'm sure they're not doing it for another reason.
"I have other priorities" would have been fine by me.

[–] April-151-CT (10210) 8 years ago

And I don't think that lag would be any problem with such small avatar icons next to our names. That's what COOKIES are for!! (as long as they are enabled) When your device sees an image, the image will be cached so that next time it sees that same image, it will load instantly. Just like it does with these HUGE ad images.

[–] Kawada_Kira (7282) 8 years ago

Interesting. Thanks for the information. I disagree about the avatar issue though. As someone else said, people can upload NSFW pictures now, nothing stopping them. Most people won't do that though. I almost never saw it on IMDb, which was a much bigger site and very thinly moderated. I don't see how it would cause much, if any, lag either. They're just little pictures. The ads cause much more lag for me. I live in a rural area and have low-speed internet service. I never had any issues with avatars on IMDb. It's ads that cause me problems. I get why the ads are a necessary evil here (though I hope eventually they'll be less intrusive at least), but if we have to have the ads anyway, I don't see what more harm avatars can do.

[–] Prelude (1443) 8 years ago

Nooo....uploading NSFW avatar pics was rampant on some boards; if you ever checked out "Film General" you would have seen it happening all day every day, as that place was filled with trolling by the end.

The other alternative site also immediately started getting NSFW avatars from the same trolls. Personally I think we don't need them.

[–] Prelude (1443) 8 years ago

To be honest I don't mind if we never have avatar pictures -- it was a nice touch on the old IMDb, and it's all very well on that other alternative site, but I agree that it's too easily abused by those who would upload NSFW pics.

Certain boards on IMDb were filled with that kind of trolling, and the "other site" that does have avatar pics and allows upload of pictures in the posts, too, became rampant with it.

I really don't mind if this place never has those features, I can live without avatars.

[–] April-151-CT (10210) 8 years ago

And the good thing is that if we get avatars, you won't have to use one if you choose not to. It will be optional, not mandatory. 😉

[–] Terrygg (544) 8 years ago

I can live without the avatars as well.

[–] Prelude (1443) 8 years ago

Yes; I mean, they can be nice to have, but we lived without them for years on IMDb before they finally had them, so, no loss really. :)

[–] Terrygg (544) 8 years ago

Yeah. Doesn't it seem like the avatars became too distracting?

[–] Prelude (1443) 8 years ago

Yes, especially when trolls used them to post very unpleasantly graphic NSFW stuff, lol!

There's another forum site that started up after IMDb closed its boards, and they have avatars -- and their avatar pics are huge! Like physically taking up a ton of space. I'd rather just read people's posts.

[–] Terrygg (544) 8 years ago

Oh I remember that troll who would use graphic sexual content for their avatar. I hated that person for doing that. His posts were okay. He wasn't a complete asshole. He just had to use sexually graphic images for whatever reason.

On IMDb had devolved into a place where trolls practiced their shtick. It's like they went to troll school. Lol

I'm on this other site where the avatars are very small. But there are always people who find the largest images to make up for the small area given for avatar images.

I would rather read people's posts as well. I remember it took me a long time to upload an avatar because I felt that the concept only made people associate you with an image or character rather than the content of your posts.

I think having a profile picture is enough for me.

[–] April-151-CT (10210) 8 years ago

Yeah, huge avatar pictures are just a waste and unnecessary. I don't mind a small little square like on IMDb or even a small little circle like on YouTube. Just a little somethin' somethin' to easily conjure up who's who. Like now, there are about 3 people whom I confuse with one another and sometimes have to go back and look at my comment history to figure out who I'm talking to LOL.

[–] Prelude (1443) 8 years ago

Yeah I don't mind the small ones -- the tiny IMDb ones were just about right. It does help to instantly spot who's who -- now we have to go back to reading the names, lol!

[–] Cookie.L.A. (2117) 8 years ago

Thanks for the update, Lord Jim. The ads don't bother me and so far have been non intrusive. I do like avatars....but can live without them, as I am now (sob)

Maybe someone Jim trusts can be exclusively an "avatar mod", and look at the submissions twice a week or something to approve them. And maybe there could be a control where you can't switch avatars, so the whole process doesn't become overly burdensome.

I think the site's very well managed, so I trust the admins will go in the right direction : )
.

[–] April-151-CT (10210) 8 years ago

Something like you can't switch to a new, unused picture for like 30 days or so (but already uploaded ones can be changed at any time).