What did Spoony do this time?

[Dacke]

Maybe it's just my ISP messing up or something, but I haven't been able to get to either ENWorld or CM for a couple of hours now. Anyone know what's up in Morrus-land?

[Dawnstar]

have no clue but i have tried CM several times today and nothing.

[GreyOne]

Spoony is holed up in the control room with hostages. His demands: 2 crates of Mountain Dew, a half pallet of Doritos Extra Spicy, and a copy of Ovid's Love Poems.

[nerfherder]

Maybe this is the upgrade to ENW2? Seems odd not to announce it before taking the boards down. Unless I missed the announcement - I tend not to be online that much over the weekend.

[Dacke]

Well, seems to be up again now.

Edit: I seem to have spoken too soon. I could get into CM for a few minutes, but now it seems dead again. Looks like they're working on it at least.

[Kastil]

Down on my end but that just means I go play somewhere else.... like here. :D

[Lady Fury]

Here is much more fun anyways. :tongue:

[Kastil]

Here is much more fun anyways. :tongue:Fun is where you make it. I don't think I belong to any crappy MBs. I just try to keep them to a minimum so I don't lose track.

[Harry]

I was doing my weekly drive-by at CM this morning, and all I could get was the front page. And nothing else, there or ENW.

[Bugbear]

Spoony is holed up in the control room with hostages. His demands: 2 crates of Mountain Dew, a half pallet of Doritos Extra Spicy, and a copy of Ovid's Love Poems.

I'm not one to negotiate with terrorists, but his demands seem reasonable. I say give him what wants.

[GreyOne]

I'm not one to negotiate with terrorists, but his demands seem reasonable. I say give him what wants.

A half-pallet? Are you serious? That is totally unreasonable! 50 bags maybe.

[Harry]

A half-pallet? Are you serious? That is totally unreasonable! 50 bags maybe.

It's a trap. Dorito's don't get delivered by the pallet. They come by case, and by float, but not pallet.

[nerfherder]

Looks like the Circvs is back in town, and ENW too...

It was hackers.

http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?p=4215427#post4215427
Apologies for the downtime over the last 24 hours or so - EN World was the target of hackers (again!), and the server went down for a while. It's back up now, and we're monitoring to see if it happens again.

[Kastil]

Well I still can't get to CM but EnWorld comes up fine. No big.

[Harry]

http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?p=4215427#post4215427

Wow. Way to bury the explanation! I went looking for one, but never made it that far. Yeah, I know, Front Page and shit, but I don't do Front Pages for anyone but Kay.

[nerfherder]

Wow. Way to bury the explanation! I went looking for one, but never made it that far. Yeah, I know, Front Page and shit, but I don't do Front Pages for anyone but Kay.

Did you want him to come over personally and give you the message in the form of a morse code blowjob? Slurp-slurp-sluuuuurp-slurp-slurp-sluuuuuurp...

[Harry]

How about, in General or Meta? Where people actually look.

[Kastil]

How about, in General or Meta? Where people actually look.I don't go to EnWorld at all anymore so it wouldn't have mattered in any case. CM is now blocked at work (citing that it's a 'gaming' board :lol: ) so I'll just run amuck here until they deem this a naughty place too.

[Lisa Nadazdy]

Spoony is holed up in the control room with hostages. His demands: 2 crates of Mountain Dew, a half pallet of Doritos Extra Spicy, and a copy of Ovid's Love Poems.

Well, shit, if he gets that, then the hostages may as well kill themselves and spare themselves the agony. :D

[Dacke]

And now they seem to be dead again.

[Dawnstar]

I have had no problems this morning with CM. I have been all over the board.

[Dacke]

It seems it was a brief thing, probably related to reorganizing the ENWorld forums or something.

[Pigs in Space]

I have had no problems this morning with CM. I have been all over the board.

:winkgun:

[Harry]

Fair warning. I will be placing code in EN2 that will inspect the page and refuse to display it if ad blockers are in use - the page will also fail to display if Javascript is disabled.

Viewing the page without the ads is, in my view, stealing.

From this wonderful thread:

http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=227594

[Lady Fury]

Wow. That's an annoying ad structure.

[Singularity]

I predict an outcry immediately after that is put into place, followed by the code being removed rather than losing the large minority of people who will abandon the site otherwise.

Calling it stealing though? Please. Give me a fucking break.

[Varaj]

I predict an outcry immediately after that is put into place, followed by the code being removed rather than losing the large minority of people who will abandon the site otherwise.

Calling it stealing though? Please. Give me a fucking break.

I seem to recall a tv exec saying that watching tv without commercials is stealing. That comment went over so well.

[Glass]

From this wonderful thread:

http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=227594
...Wow.

[Rappaccini's Daughter]

Sorry guys, as much as I know you love them, I won't put ads up here. I'd rather submit to Bagpuss' nasal sex! :D

[Singularity]

Sorry guys, as much as I know you love them, I won't put ads up here. I'd rather submit to Bagpuss' nasal sex! :D

Post pix pls.... thx.

[doc]

You know those Brits kinky lil pervs one and all

[Vizzini]

I seem to recall a tv exec saying that watching tv without commercials is stealing. That comment went over so well.
TV execs have already collected their money from advertisers before the ad airs though, so this isn't a valid comparison. Internet advertisers don't collect any money until the ads are displayed.

Each page fed without ads cuts into that revenue stream. Cut deep enough (i.e. if enough users choose to block ads ) and the revenue stream dries up - then the site goes down and everyone loses. Damn right I'll fight that, I've too much to lose.

The night I posted that I was upset and didn't think it through. I've never claimed to be politically or socially astute, and joelawyer's attitude rubs me the wrong way. The site isn't some entitlement - it costs time and money to maintain and bragging about reducing that money rubs me the wrong way.

For what it's worth before any such plan would go into effect I'd need proof that it would be effective and worth time to create and maintain the block code. As long as the block rate is lower than around 10% not including google spiders I really could care less. However if it's crosses over 40% or more then yes, I will consult with Russ and with his permission install countermeasures. We know the page serve rates and can compare them to the ad serve rates.

Will that drive people off the site? Damn straight it will - but such with such users gone the bandwidth usage will decrease and the hosting rates will drop. I'd rather not see costs offset that way, but given the choice of seeing the site go down because it can't be funded any longer I'll settle with being an asshole and villain I guess and driving off users who are such special snowflakes that they can't be bothered with the ads everyone else sees.

If there was another revenue stream available I'd use it. I hate the damn ads too for what it's worth and they annoy me everybit as much as they annoy everyone else. As an added bonus I had to spend 2 hours of my time installing the code for the fuckers that I would have rather spent doing **anything** else. But until such a stream is discovered and implemented (I am working on one possibility) or someone with a couple million dollars around to put into a trust to permanently fund the site shows up there will be ads.

And if adblocking continues to grow in popularity so will countermeasures.

[Varaj]

Sites like EN World have to have ads to exist. Nobody disputes that, but it isn't stealing to browse the site without ads. EN World is publicly available for anybody to reach and consume in what ever manner they so desire.

The only way it would be stealing is if EN World required registration for access and part of the registration agreement required ads be viewed.

EN World is fully within its rights to try and make people view ads but users are fully within in their rights to not view the ads as well.

Until EN World shuts down as a public site it isn't stealing.

[Vizzini]

We'll just have to agree to disagree I guess. Blocking ads incurs a cost onto the site that cannot be recovered. Stealing incurs a cost onto the original owner that cannot be recovered. I see no operative difference here. I also see no moral reason not to deploy code that can defeat adblockers.

Put it another way - if you went to the office of your local free newspaper and asked for a copy of the paper without any ads do you think they'd give it to you? The analogy is very loose because it's not technically feasable to strip ads out of a newspaper - and even if you did they're already paid for. In the world of electronics though it is possible and results in a revenue loss for the site owner.

[Varaj]

We'll just have to agree to disagree I guess. Blocking ads incurs a cost onto the site that cannot be recovered. Stealing incurs a cost onto the original owner that cannot be recovered. I see no operative difference here. I also see no moral reason not to deploy code that can defeat adblockers.

You must have missed where I said it's well within EN World's rights to try to force ad viewing or to limit the site to only people without ad blockers.
The simple fact is EN World is publicly available and makes itself such. How a user chooses to consume that publicly available content is legal just as how EN World chooses to limit who consumes it.
It doesn't matter if revenue is recovered. EN World waived that legal and moral right to call it stealing by making it publicly available.


Put it another way - if you went to the office of your local free newspaper and asked for a copy of the paper without any ads do you think they'd give it to you? The analogy is very loose because it's not technically feasable to strip ads out of a newspaper - and even if you did they're already paid for. In the world of electronics though it is possible and results in a revenue loss for the site owner.

You analogy is poor. This is a better one.
To put it another way if I have my kid brother pick up a free newspaper and have him cut out every ad and then I read that newspaper. That is not stealing.

Yes ad blockers cost a site owner revenue and a site owner has every right to try and limit that. A consume of a publicly available site has the right to consume in the fashion that bests suites their needs. Sorry but that is they way the law works. You can choose to disagree all you want but you are wrong about the law.

Even outside of the law you have to claim that consumers of EN World have entered in some sort of contract with EN World for it to even be morally equivalent to stealing. The idea that reading a publicly available web site constitutes a contractual obligation appears to me to be patently ridiculous.
If EN World wants that sort of contractual obligation (both legal and moral) from consumers it needs to close it from the public for viewing. Once registration is required you can justly make the moral and legal claim.

[Varaj]

Quick question Vizzini? If two people use the same computer is it still stealing? One user is browsing the site with no ad revenue being generated. What about three, four or a hundred people all on one computer?

For that matter how often can a user view the site before they are stealing, in your mind. Because most of those views cost EN World money and generate no revenue. Should a person read each page only once a day to prevent that loss of ad revenue?

[Vizzini]

Quick question Vizzini? If two people use the same computer is it still stealing? One user is browsing the site with no ad revenue being generated. What about three, four or a hundred people all on one computer?

For that matter how often can a user view the site before they are stealing, in your mind. Because most of those views cost EN World money and generate no revenue. Should a person read each page only once a day to prevent that loss of ad revenue?
Ads don't cache. Caching is stopped by using a timestamp as part of the URL to fetch the ad. Therefore each view is counted so their use of the same computer doesn't affect anything.

[Varaj]

Ads don't cache. Caching is stopped by using a timestamp as part of the URL to fetch the ad. Therefore each view is counted so their use of the same computer doesn't affect anything.

But the same user cannot hit refresh over and over and rack up 1000's of hits. People paying for the ads essentially count unique hits in a given time period, correct?

So 100 people browsing the site from the same computer and browser count as one view, correct?

Is that stealing or not?

[Vizzini]

But the same user cannot hit refresh over and over and rack up 1000's of hits. People paying for the ads essentially count unique hits in a given time period, correct?

Actually they can.

So 100 people browsing the site from the same computer and browser count as one view, correct?

No, they don't.

[FeatsofClay]

We'll just have to agree to disagree I guess. Blocking ads incurs a cost onto the site that cannot be recovered. .


How much does Russ pay when someone blocks an ad?

[Vizzini]

How much does Russ pay when someone blocks an ad?
Answer: No single raindrop causes a flood.

That is one occurance, or even a few hundred is insignificant. If the blocking rises over a certain threshhold then the loss becomes problematic.

[FeatsofClay]

Answer: No single raindrop causes a flood.

That is one occurance, or even a few hundred is insignificant. If the blocking rises over a certain threshhold then the loss becomes problematic.

A complete non-answer. You say it cost the site. How much? How much does he pays when someone uses an ad blocker?

I think he may not make as much, but I theorize it costs him nothing.

If not making money is a cost than it costs me not to run Microsoft.

[Vizzini]

A complete non-answer. You say it cost the site. How much? How much does he pays when someone uses an ad blocker?

An ad exposure is worth around $0.00014. So when one goes missing it is next to nothing. However, when a million go missing then it's a significant chunk of change ($140). The site is charged for those page deliveries whether they have an ad or not.

I think he may not make as much, but I theorize it costs him nothing.

Your theory is wrong. It is also as absurd as claiming "A grain of rice is worth nothing, so a barrel of rice is worth nothing."

[Name Lips]

Wait, ENworld gets paid when the ads are displayed, not when they're clicked? That's a new one for me. I turn off ads because I don't click them. Very rarely is there an ad that genuinely informs me about a product I'm genuinely intrested in purchasing. I think I've deliberately clicked on... TWO banner ads since I've been using the internet. I don't think I actually bought anything from either site.

So I tend to block ads. They clutter up my screen and distract me with pretty colors and flashing text when I'm trying to do something fun (and occasionally useful). They don't stop bothering me when I click on them, but they DO stop bothering me when I enable adblock.

But it's a little different if you somehow manage to get paid just by having people view the ads, instead of by people clicking on them. In that case, adblocking them does actually subtract from your revinue. It's odd to me that I am supporting a site via advertising, even though I'm not purchasing any of the products.

I guess the theory goes that if I don't see the ad, there's absolutely no chance of me going to that site and buying the product. If I can see the ad, at least there's a miniscule, theoretical chance of that happening. I can respect that logic. At least, I can respect it the same way I respect people's logic for buying powerball tickets.


At any rate, my wife is a member of a teacher forum that lets you read topics for 2 minutes if you have adblock enabled. Then, just as you're getting into it or thinking of starting a reply, it actively redirects you to a "please disable your adblock software" screen. It doesn't even wait for you to browse away from the page you're reading! Maybe you can look into something like that (but I'd recommend a longer time - like 10 minutes) so people get a taste of what ENworld is all about and can actually weigh whether or not to bother with the adblock thing.

[Name Lips]

The night I posted that I was upset and didn't think it through.

The story of your online life, man... :lol:

[FeatsofClay]

An ad exposure is worth around $0.00014. So when one goes missing it is next to nothing. However, when a million go missing then it's a significant chunk of change ($140). The site is charged for those page deliveries whether they have an ad or not.



Your theory is wrong. It is also as absurd as claiming "A grain of rice is worth nothing, so a barrel of rice is worth nothing."

So, asking again.

What does it COST him. How much does he pay?

He pays for the server (which he doesn't, it was paid for by voluntary donations). This is a "cost". What does he pay when someone uses an ad blocker?

It isn't a difficult question.

[FeatsofClay]

TV execs have already collected their money from advertisers before the ad airs though, so this isn't a valid comparison. Internet advertisers don't collect any money until the ads are displayed.

.

Really? Russ doesn't bill until AFTER the ads are through their run? Are you SURE he doesn't charge first and display after?



If there was another revenue stream available I'd use it. .

Like, say, donations and Account Upgrades?

It is one of the few businesses I have seen where people make thousands of dollars in donations.

Donations Received or Pledged: 11/23 update - 375 people, and $13,310!

[Vizzini]

So, asking again.

What does it COST him. How much does he pay?

He pays for the server (which he doesn't, it was paid for by voluntary donations). This is a "cost". What does he pay when someone uses an ad blocker?

It isn't a difficult question.
You're being intentionally obtuse. Further, the exact hosting costs of the server are none of your damn business.

[Singularity]

Tempest in a teapot, guys. It's all just flashing wallpaper to me.

[Varaj]

Actually they can.



No, they don't.


Really? EN World is stealing from their advertisers.
To be frank I don't believe you on that. I have a very hard time believing that EN World advertisers count impressions as you suggest.

[Varaj]

Wait, ENworld gets paid when the ads are displayed, not when they're clicked? That's a new one for me. I turn off ads because I don't click them. Very rarely is there an ad that genuinely informs me about a product I'm genuinely intrested in purchasing. I think I've deliberately clicked on... TWO banner ads since I've been using the internet. I don't think I actually bought anything from either site.

So I tend to block ads. They clutter up my screen and distract me with pretty colors and flashing text when I'm trying to do something fun (and occasionally useful). They don't stop bothering me when I click on them, but they DO stop bothering me when I enable adblock.

But it's a little different if you somehow manage to get paid just by having people view the ads, instead of by people clicking on them. In that case, adblocking them does actually subtract from your revinue. It's odd to me that I am supporting a site via advertising, even though I'm not purchasing any of the products.

I guess the theory goes that if I don't see the ad, there's absolutely no chance of me going to that site and buying the product. If I can see the ad, at least there's a miniscule, theoretical chance of that happening. I can respect that logic. At least, I can respect it the same way I respect people's logic for buying powerball tickets.


At any rate, my wife is a member of a teacher forum that lets you read topics for 2 minutes if you have adblock enabled. Then, just as you're getting into it or thinking of starting a reply, it actively redirects you to a "please disable your adblock software" screen. It doesn't even wait for you to browse away from the page you're reading! Maybe you can look into something like that (but I'd recommend a longer time - like 10 minutes) so people get a taste of what ENworld is all about and can actually weigh whether or not to bother with the adblock thing.

Many web advertisements are charged by impressions. CPM is the industry term (Cost Per Thousand (M is roman numeral for thousand)) for the practise. What it is you pay x amount for one thousand impressions. An impression is usually a unique view of the ad in a given time period. Counting impressions is always tricky and somewhat controversial. EN World uses doubleclick for ad delivery and doubleclick closely guards how they count impressions. They most certainly do not, as Vizinni indicated, pay for every view. Fancy counting is done to prevent cheating by publishes.
It is important to note that doubleclick is considered one of the most grievous violators of online privacy around. They have gotten much better since they were sued in several large class action lawsuits but are still not considered good by any stretch.

[Enk]

Really? Russ doesn't bill until AFTER the ads are through their run? Are you SURE he doesn't charge first and display after?

I'll get corrected if I'm wrong, but the business model on ad impressions is that the payment is made, then the impressions are put into cycle. The cost for Russ for adblocks isn't direct, its the opportunity cost as the projected impressions/hour lags behind, meaning that Russ no longer has adequate adspace, and can't sell as many impressions in the future.

[Varaj]

I'll get corrected if I'm wrong, but the business model on ad impressions is that the payment is made, then the impressions are put into cycle. The cost for Russ for adblocks isn't direct, its the opportunity cost as the projected impressions/hour lags behind, meaning that Russ no longer has adequate adspace, and can't sell as many impressions in the future.

That is generally how it is done.

On a side note, if Vizzini is to be believed on how EN World counts impressions
based on the information from
http://www.enworld.org/index.php?page=ads

EnWorld should make $3699.90 a month at the minimum.
(10,000,000 page views every month / 1,000,000 impressions) * $369.99

That is unless they run out of advertisers and at that point no ads should be displayed for at least part of the time.

Leads me back to my question, is more than one person using the same computer stealing.

[Name Lips]

If I open several copies of firefox with adblock enabled, and set them up to infinitely refresh enworld pages all day, am I stealing a LOT?

[FeatsofClay]

You're being intentionally obtuse. Further, the exact hosting costs of the server are none of your damn business.

I woulod assume by obtuse you mean "not clear or precise" which is exactly what I am trying to be. The server was baought and paid for by donations. And you stated quite publicly that it "costs" Russ when someone sues an ad-blocker.

How much? Very clear, very precise.

[Varaj]

I woulod assume by obtuse you mean "not clear or precise" which is exactly what I am trying to be. The server was baought and paid for by donations. And you stated quite publicly that it "costs" Russ when someone sues an ad-blocker.

How much? Very clear, very precise.

Bandwidth is the issue. I'm guessing they ran out of donation money to cover bandwidth long ago.

There is no exact way to calculate what the cost to EN World for using an ad blocker but there is lost revenue for it being used.

If they normally go through 5,000,000 impressions a month ad blockers might slow it down to 4,000,000 impressions a month. At the current cost of ads on EN World that has cost EN World $369.99 in ad revenue for that month without a drop in bandwidth usage.
It gets more complicated because it is unlikely that even kicking every ad blocker off EN World would drop the bandwidth usage low enough to change the bandwidth costs.

But if a high enough percentage of EN World users started using ad blockers the incoming revenue could drop significantly.
The complaint of revenue lost is real, calling it stealing is not. :)

[FeatsofClay]

Bandwidth is the issue. I'm guessing they ran out of donation money to cover bandwidth long ago.


The complaint of revenue lost is real, calling it stealing is not. :)


Do you pay for bandwidth if you own the server?

I have no delusions that there is a lack of income. :) My point is that there isn't a cost.

[Varaj]

Do you pay for bandwidth if you own the server?


Yes, yes you do. The cost of bandwidth for a site like EN World is several times the cost of the server each year.

Everytime somebody visits a site it costs the site owner money.* That is why image linking is considered rude.


*In a simple way of looking at it.

[FeatsofClay]

Yes, yes you do. The cost of bandwidth for a site like EN World is several times the cost of the server each year.

Everytime somebody visits a site it costs the site owner money.* That is why image linking is considered rude.


*In a simple way of looking at it.


Beautiful explanation. Appreciated.

[Pigs in Space]

If I open several copies of firefox with adblock enabled, and set them up to infinitely refresh enworld pages all day, am I stealing a LOT?

I don't know, but you and I should start a website...

[Space Cadet B^3]

There are ads on the internet?

[Trainz]

There are ads on the internet?

Oh look everybody! BBB is using FireFuck! He's SOOOOO cool!

Wow!

:tongue:

[Space Cadet B^3]

Hey, you're messing up my Doc Midnight impersonation! ;)

[Kastil]

Hey, you're messing up my Doc Midnight impersonation! ;) I don't get it

[The Winslow]

Actually they can.
No, they don't.

So, you could leave an old computer somewhere to automatically refresh the front page every two seconds and it'll make a lot of different ad hits, meaning more cash for Russ?

[obryn]

Will that drive people off the site? Damn straight it will - but such with such users gone the bandwidth usage will decrease and the hosting rates will drop. I'd rather not see costs offset that way, but given the choice of seeing the site go down because it can't be funded any longer I'll settle with being an asshole and villain I guess and driving off users who are such special snowflakes that they can't be bothered with the ads everyone else sees.
Hmm, I don't know how to put this except to say that it's short-sighted.

For a forum, the more people you have - the more posts you have.

The more posts you have, the more people read them - up to a point.

While you are correct that people running adblock are not directly contributing to the site's revenue, you are ignoring the fact that they contribute to the site's content.

-O

[Lisa Nadazdy]

I've never clicked on an ad in my life, except maybe by accident, and I've certainly never bought anything via that route. It's like fucking spam in my email- kill it and block it, as it's worthless to me. I am in no way obligated to view the ads.