Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Making Banner Ads Suck Less

Posted by Hemos on Wed Feb 28, 2001 09:00 AM
from the the-bad-kind-of-sucking dept.
The unusually-seen Kurt Gray wrote this; it's funny, to the point and more honest than may make everyone comfortable. Everyone knows banner ads suck; Kurt tells you a little more about why they're still around, explores some things that might make them better, and generally straightens the dope. We're doing this in conjunction with K5, who's also got the story. So, hop back and forth, and we can all get a merry meta-discussion going.

My name is Kurt Gray, I'm the lead programmer for OSDN's ad system which serves ad banners on sites like Slashdot, Freshmeat, SourceForge, Themes, and partnering deal with Kuro5hin, etc. I open sourced our ad delivery code sometime last year and have been maintaining it in-house here as well. My quest now is to create a better ad banner delivery system, not only better for you the audience but also more useful to our sponsors. So I have some ideas about our ad system that we want to pitch to you all sitting out there reading this and your feedback on these ideas would be of great value to us. Note that this is being posted to both K5 and Slashdot because we want to get feedback from everyone we can.

First let me address two issues that have been discussed on Slashdot just recently on Micropayments instead of ads and Ad banners may soon get bigger and how these issues pertain to ad banners on the OSDN sites.


Why run ad banners? What about a tip-jar, or subscription fees, or micropayments, or donations, or bill-the-ISPs instead of ad banners?

When you're running a web site, depending on your content, your audience, the size of your staff, your overhead costs, the size and nature of your audience, and many other factors, it might be possible to get by on just subscription fees, or micropayments, or some other revenue model that does not involve selling banner ads. But the size of the audience on OSDN's web sites and the nature of the content within is such that the subscription models break down. For a network of this size and content ad banners are the only realistic way to cover costs and hopefully earn a little profit (someday we hope). Another way of looking at it is to ask yourself why does Yahoo, CNet, and ZDNet still rely on banner ads? Because for a web sites that have a lot of traffic no one has proven that there is a better way to earn more revenue with less overhead. In any large media company, advertising is it. Even with print magazines the subscription fees and cover prices don't come close to covering the costs for a large circulation magazine: the subscription fees and cover price is just a barrier-of-entry to assure the advertisers that the readership paid to read the content and therefore is the right audience to see their ads.

....but ad banners don't work! There's too many ad filters now days!

Yes, a lot of people, even entire ISPs, have ad filters and proxy rules to block out banner ads but even still there are plenty enough ad impressions delivered every day. In fact those who filter ads are doing web publishers and advertisers a favor by making sure that no time, bandwidth, or impressions are wasted on people who definately will not respond to any kind of ad. So please, filter the ads out if you feel that strongly about it, in fact, I'll pitch you some ideas further on in this article in which our ad system could help you filter out the ads which is why I'm posting this.

...but too many people ignore banner ads, and nobody clicks on them! Advertising sucks! Free your head! Prioritize, man!

Yes, many people, including myself, scroll right past banner ads and ignore them completely. But chances are you did glance at many of the ads in a web given page, perhaps you saw a logo or brand name. In that sense the ad delivered just what it intended. It's called "branding": advertising for the sake of increased brand recognition and its most of what large advertisers hope for when advertsing in any medium including the web. Smaller advertisers will obsess over response to each ad, whether that be a click, or even a sale, and thus they become very unhappy when the click-thru is not to their satisfaction. So just because click-thru percentages are low across the board doesn't mean Internet advertising is doomed, but rather advertisers expectations and ad pricing schemes are changing accordingly. The smallest fish in the pond may be doomed but the pond remains.


What can we expect from OSDN web sites as far as ad banners? Bigger fatter ads? More ads per page? Flashing noisy ads that will read my browser cache and report all suspicous keywords to the NSA?

As you might expect, we are debating internally what OSDN sites can do to stay competitive in the ad banner business. Right now we are not competitive in many areas: we only accept the most basic ad formats, most OSDN sites only accept one ad size, our average click-thru rate is as low as anywhere else, and our rate card prices are higher than most. We've been able to get away with it so far because our web sites are very well known and our audience has just the kind of demographics advertisers drool over, but lately its become a buyers market, the ad budgets are drying up and the few big advertisers still spending online are having their way with the web publishers left groveling for the business. It's times like these when advertisers can force outrageous new ad formats down the throats of the web publishers, and other web publishers are stepping up their ad offerings to entice advertisers to their space -- it's a free market economy after all.

So what are we doing about it? First we're telling our sales people to go after more main stream advertising accounts: entertainment, auto makers, food and beverage, whatever we think fits our audience. Second, we're looking at which newer ad formats and what we're willing to accept. Third, I have to rewrite our ad delivery system to improve our ad targeting: platform targeting, geotargeting, and topic targeting at the very least. Along these lines I also have some ideas I want to bounce off you there reading this here article...


Let the users control the ad delivery. User preferences. Ad filtering. User feedback. Interactive, or as George W. would say "Interactivfulness"


Here's a few scenerios, ideas I've been pitching around:


Comment forums for each ad banner:

What if you could comment on the ad banners, such as each ad banner has its own discussion forum? So if an ad bothers you, offends you, confuses you, entices you, anything about that ad, you can speak and be heard. Let's face it, many ad banners suck because nobody tells the ad agency that the creative needs improvement. On the other hand the ad may be messing with your browser and you just want someone to know about it. Or maybe you wanted whatever was being advertised, you clicked, and you still didn't get the information you were looking for, the ad feedback forum would be the place to get a response on that.


Turning off annoying ads:

Suppose you become absolutely sick and tired of seeing that "Fawking DSL!" ad or that "Punch the monkey" banner, suppose you could click a link right next to the banner "Never show me this ad again or I swear I will lose it and someone will have to call security." And you just click that link and bam, you'll never see that ad again. The number of people who turn off a particular ad could be a way of truly knowing how counter productive certain ads are.


Choice of ad topics and categories:

What if you could select which kinds of ads you want to see, and which kinds of ads you don't want to see? For example what if you could explicately set your ad preferences so that you're are more about networking, movies, gadgets, and events but you don't want to see ads for alcohol, web design, or luxury items... and these ad preferences would apply to you within whole OSDN network of web sites. Would we use your information to for demographic studies? Yes absolutely, we'd tell advertisers that we have X number of people over here who explicately told us that they'd prefer to see ads about their kind of product. The overall effect we won't waste our effort chasing after advertsiers that have nothing of interest to our community and we won't waste your bandwidth downloading ads you don't want.


What about ad system karma?

I'm thinking there could be a point-based reward system that gives you credit for everything you do that helps our advertising business. As you accumulate karma points in our ad system you could redeem them gain access to an extended set of features in the ad system itself...

To increase your ad system karma you could (Hypothetical examples)

  • 1 point for every time you load a paid ad
  • 0 points for clicking on an ad (I don't want to encourage excessive ad clicking)
  • 50 points for loading bigger ads
  • 100 points for loading a pop-up ad
  • 500 points for filling out an advertiser's survey
  • 100 points for loading a Flash ad
  • 300 points for posting a meaningful critique on an ad
  • 200 points for alerting us if an ad is broken
  • 500 points for helping us test an ad before it goes live
(Just assume for the sake of this disussion that this point system is mostly immune to people running bots to accumulate points. We're still in hypothetical land here.)

Redeem your points to gain access to such features as (Hypothetical examples)

  • Turn off all ads
  • Upload your own ads
  • Get stats on the ads you uploaded
  • Specify which sites you want your ads to run on
  • Whetever else anyone can think of...
Note that this entire karma point system is just my own personal ideas and not officially sanctioned by anyone else working here. I figured I'd bounce this off you all out there in the audience and see how it plays with you all.


How would ad system karma affect web site user karma?

It wouldn't. The ad system is totally disconnected from any web site user database. Our ad system runs ads on many web sites, so even if we felt compelled to tie it into the user accounts of any web site it would be a lot of work, too much work, and I don't see any reason to even attempt it.

So the ad system would have its own user accounts independant and unrelated to web site accounts. Does that complicate things? No, the ad system user account is low maintenance, transparent, maybe as simple as cookie, nothing too visible, not in your face all the time nagging you to come play. The ad system preferences web page could be one click away, simple web form, nothing too fancy.


Hey I don't like you spying on me! I'm going to wear a metal bowl on my head and warn the others that you're all sneaky opportunist-type people. You are one of them.

That's OK. I have my metal bowl on too. As far as these ad system ideas go, you wouldn't need to have an ad system user account if you want to be anonymous and outside the loop as far as the ad delivery goes that's fine. This user account would be something you'd actively choose to create, and if you don't bother doing so then fine, you're anonymous, unknown, you'll see the normal general rotation of banner ads, and maybe later hopefully you'll find that out food tastes better when you try out some of these features and take advantage of the bonuses.


We're a community, damnit! We're not your ad-clicking sheep! If you can't sell ads then that's your problem! One day this web site will be free of your commercial opportunist tryannical business, all the trolls will leave, this site will be cool again, and then food will taste better!

These web sites have grown way beyond the realm of affordable to operate by volunteers and donors. If OSDN and/or VA collapsed someday then the OSDN web sites would not be simply released back into the wild but rather be liquidated as assets to the highest bidder, and you can bet the new owners would gladly run these sites into the ground for every last penny they can quickly earn from them. So at least you can be glad the original founders of these web sites still work here and they care a lot about how this web site works for you, the community. And if we're not able to turn a profit here despite our best efforts, whoever ends up grabbing our helm here will most likely toss this whole crew overboard, and I can assure you that the new crew will care far less about "community" then we ever did. But that's not your problem anyway because there are plenty of other web sites out there like this one, and if you log off now you may even discover that there is whole world of amazing life outside the Internet, I don't know much about that myself so I can't descibe it to you but I've downloaded pictures of it. So is this as good as it gets for these web sites? No, we can do better here, and last week resolved to be a lot more focused. We're determined not to give Jesse Berst and his ilk any reason to gloat.

So I can't think of what else I was going to pitch here. So please if you have feedback on any of the ideas pitched above then post them here.

Kurt Gray, OSDN, ad system engineer

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Making Banner Ads Suck Less | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 326 comments (Spill at 50!) | Index Only | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold:
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1) | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5
  • Re:Don't worry by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:13AM
  • Re:Ad karma? by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:12AM
  • Re:Ad Karma? by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:29AM
  • Re:Ads I hate most by David Rolfe (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @09:35AM
  • Re:I Love Banner Ads by David Rolfe (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @09:52AM
  • Banner ads using CSS -- Re:*sigh* by David Rolfe (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @11:56AM
  • Read this Kurt Gray by David Rolfe (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @12:17PM
  • Re:What To Do, What To Do by dair (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:19AM
  • Re:What about Soup Kitchens? by Have Blue (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:50AM
  • Re:I'm not an evil person! by Stormie (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @06:37AM
  • Re:Targeting by Dave Fiddes (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:59AM
  • Re:Stop complaining about banner ads by Stephan Schulz (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @08:59AM
  • Re:Editorial by Enahs (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @09:06AM
  • I might stop filtering... by singularity (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:26AM
  • Re:Hybrid approach by Eck (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @09:05AM
  • Re:My early experiences with Web Ads by cpt kangarooski (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @07:38AM
  • Re:Karma? Don't you learn? by Howie (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @06:13AM
  • ISPs with ad-filters? by Tal Cohen (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:17AM
  • Zippy fortunes suck! by illtyd (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:32PM
  • Re:sounds great by einstein (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @11:26AM
  • Re:Uploading your own ad? by Sloppy (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @08:42AM
  • Popups Would Make Me Filter by Bob9113 (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @07:52AM
  • May be a combination of all? by Fulcrum (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @09:49AM
  • Why Not Try Alternative Methods by Grail (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @01:51PM
  • Re:Don't worry by Chmarr (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @08:19AM
  • Re:Don't worry by Chmarr (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @06:54AM
  • Re:Crass American Commercialism. by brunnock (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:41AM
  • The ads I want to see? by faster (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @08:54AM
  • Re:Ad Karma? by IsleOfView (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:35AM
  • Animated GIF Suggestion by kence (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @07:35AM
  • privacy vs. tailoring by nchip (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:49AM
  • Re:Ad Karma? [OT] by plaa (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @01:51PM
  • Ads shouldn't waste my time by Mike Van Pelt (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:55PM
  • Show me the content!!! by ericlondaits (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:36AM
  • Tee Hee... by johnnie (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @06:50AM
  • are you insane?! by johnnie (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @07:01AM
  • Suc fees by laptop006 (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @01:48PM
  • What Users Want by Snafoo (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @07:46AM
  • Specifying Interests by west (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:44AM
  • Reward for Karma - Exceptional Ads by west (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:55AM
  • Give me my idiot box by girth (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @07:33AM
  • Great idea! by MasterAlex (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @07:08AM
  • Re:What To Do, What To Do by kahuna720 (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:23AM
  • Re:What To Do, What To Do by Asgard (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @01:54PM
  • Re:Advertising wouldn't be so bad if it was target by birder (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:45AM
  • Re:I Love Banner Ads by Marasmus (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @06:38AM
  • New Legal Precedent! by Marasmus (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @07:19AM
  • Re:A different kind of Ad-Karna: Clue-Karma by Kintanon (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @08:26AM
  • Rate the product, not the ad by Morel (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:05AM
  • Standardize on Clickthroughs by matthewcraig (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:07PM
  • Damn the unreliability of the Internet by bachelor#3 (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:27AM
  • Ways of helping people use ads by bko (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @10:07AM
  • Uploading non-ads by bko (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @10:21AM
  • Re:I Love Banner Ads by Brandon Hume (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @07:33AM
  • what's behind the ad? by mach-5 (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:44AM
  • Karma is a two-way street. by diggem (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:53PM
  • Privacy: Who targets? Who keeps the info? by Tau Zero (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @11:12AM
  • Blink, blink by Eric Seppanen (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @08:09AM
  • Re:I Love Banner Ads by Gunzour (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:47AM
  • Text banners and mailto links by dimgian (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @08:16AM
  • text based adverts by Chris_Keene (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @07:07AM
  • Why bother with link ads? by mr (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:29AM
  • Re:Advertising wouldn't be so bad if it was target by biglig2 (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:16AM
  • Re:Targeting by mcrandello (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @09:11AM
  • Re:Advertising wouldn't be so bad if it was target by ChristTrekker (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:38AM
  • Re:I'm not an evil person! by ChristTrekker (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:05AM
  • Filtering, comments, and searching sound good by sabaco (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @08:08AM
  • Re:Advertising wouldn't be so bad if it was target by nwetters (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:09AM
  • Subscriptions don't cover costs? Uh... by Kombat (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:43AM
  • Re:What To Do, What To Do by Banjonardo (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:38PM
  • Re:Ad karma? by Sc00ter (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:56AM
  • Great idea... kinda by Tinfoil (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:11AM
  • Re:Ad system feedback by flame_spirit (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @01:58PM
  • Why post this story just look at the poll? by Oztun (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:05AM
  • Re:Interesting Banner Ad.. by Ryan_Singer (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @01:22PM
  • Relationships by kc0dxh (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:27AM
  • The Reality is... by MadMorf (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:29AM
  • Great ideas by uberchicken (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @08:49AM
  • Well, I have to... by morpheus_ (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @07:11AM
  • ObCrossreference (Re:Ad system feedback) by lord kiwano (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @07:48AM
  • Re:Stop complaining about banner ads by pallex (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @08:03AM
  • Re:I Love Banner Ads by pallex (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:24AM
  • Re:Stop complaining about banner ads by pallex (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:27AM
  • I know! by SpanishInquisition (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:05AM
  • Show me the ads! by Tarkwyn (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @12:09PM
  • Re:What To Do, What To Do by ogre2112 (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @02:33PM
  • Did you run Solaris? by JiveDonut (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @07:33AM
  • Make banner ads WORK for the user! by Com2Kid (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @01:11PM
  • Thanks by binford2k (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @07:43AM
  • opera 5 by kel-tor (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @06:07AM
  • I have to agree by woody_jay (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:15AM
  • Some great ideas here by the_crowbar (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:46AM
  • There are some good ideas here by fedos (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @06:25AM
  • Re:Ad system feedback by defective (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @07:39AM
  • How I feel... by robhu (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:48AM
  • I filter relentlessly by nycdewd (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:17AM
  • Re:*sigh* by nycdewd (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:27AM
  • Re:A different kind of Ad-Karna: Clue-Karma by spooge21 (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @07:39AM
  • Web Banners Are just like tv ads. by jm91509 (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @07:44AM
  • I'll worry by LoonXTall (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:36AM
  • Put in proper ALT text on the graphic ads by LoonXTall (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:40AM
  • Ways to improve banner ads by Gonarat (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @08:40AM
  • Re:Crass American Commercialism. by Karl_Hungus (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @06:35AM
  • Ads should have karma too by ferreth (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @06:20AM
  • Uploading your own ad? by Akardam (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:20AM
  • Ah, I think I see... by Akardam (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:39AM
  • User defined ads are a good idea by Jetifi (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:05AM
  • Targeted is actually pretty nice by yostinso (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @06:29AM
  • Re:We're not eyeballs. by TrumpetPower! (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:06AM
  • Re:We're not eyeballs. by TrumpetPower! (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:11AM
  • free ads by vattervi (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @06:11AM
  • Re:I'll give you some advice for free. by 7-Vodka (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:58AM
  • Re:I'll give you some advice for free. by 7-Vodka (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:59AM
  • Re:Persistent Ads by Jason Levine (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @06:27AM
  • Anybody remember eBay/AOL? by AnalogDiehard (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @07:34AM
  • Re:A different kind of Ad-Karna: Clue-Karma by Denial of Service (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @08:12AM
  • What I'd like to see... by mgkimsal2 (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @08:08AM
  • I Feel For You by evolspit (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @06:17AM
  • Re:I Love Banner Ads by CoreyG (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @07:33AM
  • Re:How to make banner ads suck less by rabidcow (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @09:44AM
  • Re:I'm not an evil person! by GreenHell (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @06:18AM
  • Hmm, we should willing create accounts with ads... by AmigaAvenger (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:17AM
  • Re:Don't worry by Steve Richards (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:18AM
  • Re:What To Do, What To Do(P2P variation) by dolphinuser (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @07:13AM
  • Re:My early experiences with Web Ads by feorlen (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @06:55AM
  • Re:Karma-type systems require tuning by update() (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:59AM
  • AMEN to that! by coig (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:29AM
  • Mozilla 0.8 and Banners by n7lyg (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @08:11AM
  • Interesting... by mckinlay (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:18AM
  • Re:Uploading your own ad? by bigjames (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @06:07AM
  • Re:What To Do, What To Do by Squeekybobo (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @09:32AM
  • Re:Ad Karma? by Cyclopatra (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:10PM
  • Redirection is another issue that needs a fix. by Kasreyn (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @12:06PM
  • Nope, sorry, the monkey takes the cake by Kasreyn (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @12:09PM
  • Re:I Love Banner Ads by OblongPlatypus (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:42AM
  • Glass Houses by CygnusTM (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @09:43AM
  • Re:We're not eyeballs. by xjimhb (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @06:09AM
  • ya, i got a comment about the adds i see ... by LifesABeach (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @07:59AM
  • No time! by NineNine (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @08:14AM
  • Very nice work! by OlympicSponsor (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:20AM
  • It can't be done by OlympicSponsor (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:56AM
  • Re:Ad karma? by dynamanga (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:12PM
  • Re:My early experiences with Web Ads by oconnorcjo (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @07:07AM
  • Re:Karma? Don't you learn? by UberLame (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @08:59AM
  • When banner ads work by CustomDesigned (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @07:28AM
  • Re:So many naive Slashdotters by chris_mahan (Score:1) Thursday March 01 2001, @09:37AM
  • New Revenue by chris_mahan (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @03:57PM
  • Re:So many naive Slashdotters by chris_mahan (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:11PM
  • Re:The problem is far deeper. by chris_mahan (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:19PM
  • Make banner adds suck less? by jstockdale (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:30PM
  • User Controlled Advertising by Peejeh (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:09AM
  • Re:What To Do, What To Do by Pogue Mahone (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:06AM
  • Ad targetting by Wavemaker (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:24AM
  • more control == more acceptance by oogoody (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:01AM
  • Re:We're not eyeballs. by oogoody (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:05AM
  • Re:Nope, sorry, the monkey takes the cake by bitdaemon (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:06PM
  • Editorial by Dick Richards (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:06AM
  • Re:Editorial by Dick Richards (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @08:38AM
  • Re:Editorial by Dick Richards (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @09:31AM
  • Re:Targeting by dthv (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:56AM
  • An ad I'd like to see by Anne_Nonymous (Score:1) Thursday March 01 2001, @05:00AM
  • Re:Crass American Commercialism. by RevDobbs (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:20AM
  • Win/win demographics and less tracking by ehud42 (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:56AM
  • Re:What To Do, What To Do by masq (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:07PM
  • Internet is DEAD by Jesus IS the Devil (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:46PM
  • Re:Stop complaining about banner ads by SumDeusExMachina (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:12AM
  • Re:Stop complaining about banner ads by SumDeusExMachina (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:15AM
  • Stop complaining about banner ads by SumDeusExMachina (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:14AM
  • The anti advertising by CrackElf (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:36AM
  • Interactive ad management by CyberDawg (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:36AM
  • Logic. by Iscon in Siiscon (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:19AM
  • Re:Crass American Commercialism. by Lord Hugh Toppingham (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @06:12AM
  • Re:Crass American Commercialism. by Lord Hugh Toppingham (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:25AM
  • Crass American Commercialism. by Lord Hugh Toppingham (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:20AM
  • Re:Crass American Commercialism. by Lord Hugh Toppingham (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:44AM
  • Re:karma vs money vs GOOD ADS by redgekko (Score:1) Monday March 05 2001, @01:00AM
  • Advertizing Dynamic by PingPongPhil (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:28AM
  • What about Soup Kitchens? by PingPongPhil (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:33AM
  • Re:Ad karma? by criswell4096 (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @06:33AM
  • OSDN Ad Forum Sites by criswell4096 (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @06:58AM
  • Re:Hybrid approach by criswell4096 (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @07:05AM
  • Community Art? (was: Re:Uplosd your own ads?) by criswell4096 (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @07:08AM
  • Re:Interesting Banner Ad.. by ksanjabi (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @07:51AM
  • Maybe even worst by mauitime (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @07:32AM
  • Re:Targeting by khat5 (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @01:29PM
  • Targeting, Usability and Targeting by wackybrit (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @02:38PM
  • You pay either way by LachlanM (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:31PM
  • Re:What To Do, What To Do by stinker (Score:1) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:42PM
  • Re:Uploading your own ad? by Hemos (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:33AM
  • I'm not an evil person! by Stormie (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:13AM
  • Re:Ads I hate most by Tim Doran (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:14AM
  • Brilliant! by Tim Doran (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:57AM
  • Re:Ad Karma? by Kurt Gray (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @11:30AM
  • Re:Ad system feedback by Kurt Gray (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @11:42AM
  • Re:Persistent Ads by Kurt Gray (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @12:36PM
  • Re:Hybrid approach by Kurt Gray (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @12:59PM
  • Re:Ads by Kurt Gray (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @01:49PM
  • Re:We're not eyeballs. by McKing (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @06:11AM
  • Advertising is immoral and should be illegal by AxelBoldt (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @07:17AM
  • Fake Windows Alert by MoNickels (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @10:15AM
  • Re:Preferences by Jason Earl (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @08:43AM
  • Symbiosis by Pseudonymus Bosch (Score:2) Thursday March 01 2001, @04:00AM
  • Re:Preferences by booch (Score:2) Thursday March 01 2001, @07:35PM
  • general feedback by MoNsTeR (Score:2) Thursday March 01 2001, @08:43AM
  • Give me an option by PD (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @06:36AM
  • sounds great by einstein (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:12AM
  • The problem is far deeper. by neutrino (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @06:49AM
  • I click about once a month by peter303 (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @06:18AM
  • Re:Don't worry by Bearpaw (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @06:26AM
  • Re:Logic. by Bearpaw (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @06:30AM
  • Re:Ad Karma? by Xerithane (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @08:49AM
  • Re:Persistent Ads by doom (Score:2) Wednesday March 07 2001, @03:28PM
  • Karma-type systems require tuning by bee (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:21AM
  • that's just plain wrong by Shoeboy (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:12AM
  • ALT text by LYM (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @06:24AM
  • Re:Stop complaining about banner ads by Black Parrot (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @06:06AM
  • Re:I Love Banner Ads by Black Parrot (Score:2) Thursday March 01 2001, @12:14PM
  • Re:Stop complaining about banner ads by Black Parrot (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:26AM
  • Re:I Love Banner Ads by Black Parrot (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @06:00AM
  • Good ideas, but not my main problem with ads by Gallowglass (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:15AM
  • Any feedback is success. by TheDullBlade (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @07:18AM
  • A step further... by plaa (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @02:46PM
  • Re:My early experiences with Web Ads by Wah (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @11:30PM
  • Re:Ad Karma? by generic-man (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:11PM
  • Re:User Controlled Advertising by Russ Nelson (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:29AM
  • Is it crazy to want advertisers to know about me? by jefftp (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:29AM
  • Re:Targeting by Snafoo (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @07:40AM
  • Re:bad troll! by wiredog (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:12AM
  • Re:Don't worry by wiredog (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:15AM
  • How to Advertise by drivers (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @08:28AM
  • bad troll! by oneiros27 (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:06AM
  • Ads by Hard_Code (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:14AM
  • Slashdot Users as 'Organization' by zairius (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:59AM
  • Won't work is karma is worth nothing... by JPS (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @07:05AM
  • List of banner adds on the site? by eviljav (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:58PM
  • Slashdot Potential. by DeadSea (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @06:22AM
  • Advertisers pay for this kind of info by doonesbury (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:42AM
  • Feedback! by wowbagger (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:55AM
  • Re:Preferences by jesser (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:25AM
  • Re:My early experiences with Web Ads by jesser (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:46AM
  • Ad feedback is good, pop-up ads are evil. by settonull (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @06:01AM
  • My three cents (inflation) by Eric Seppanen (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @07:35AM
  • Re:What To Do, What To Do by JWW (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:18AM
  • Re:Go ahead on this post by Cplus (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @07:57AM
  • Concept and graphic design critiqueing by Cplus (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @08:08AM
  • Ads I hate most by cowwie (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:11AM
  • web sites "too big for volunteers" by stu72 (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @08:28PM
  • Re:What To Do, What To Do by gargle (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @06:38AM
  • Re:Targeting by irksome (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @07:12AM
  • Wow, what a prediction. by Richy_T (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @06:49AM
  • Re:Karma? Don't you learn? by oojah (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:32AM
  • Re:Crass American Commercialism. by DarkProphet (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:56AM
  • You have to change the ad content by TheMCP (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @06:03AM
  • Advertising Slashboxen. by Satan_Bunny (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @08:57PM
  • Animation by pjrc (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:48AM
  • well... by Bad_CRC (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:26AM
  • Re:Targeting by a_bastard (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:31AM
  • Simple solutions by fleener (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:15AM
  • Re:sounds great by John_Booty (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:43AM
  • Suggestions by plover (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @09:45AM
  • Re:Good ideas, but not my main problem with ads by peccary (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @07:27AM
  • Re:Logic. by peccary (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @07:35AM
  • quite by streetlawyer (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:47AM
  • thanks for asking by jayfoo2 (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:27AM
  • Scary!!! by the_other_one (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:11AM
  • Re:Interesting Banner Ad.. by Erasmus Darwin (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @02:27PM
  • Uplosd your own ads? by Happy Monkey (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @06:38AM
  • We're not eyeballs. by TrumpetPower! (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:56AM
  • We're not eyeballs. by TrumpetPower! (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:01AM
  • Re:Ad system feedback by Luminous (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @06:07AM
  • Get Rid Of This Ad Now by sulli (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @01:34PM
  • Prior Art by sulli (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @01:51PM
  • I'll give you some advice for free. by 7-Vodka (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:56AM
  • Re:My early experiences with Web Ads by CraigoFL (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:32AM
  • Re:Ad karma? by micromoog (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:38AM
  • Re:A step further... by DickBreath (Score:2) Thursday March 01 2001, @04:30AM
  • Re:Ad system feedback by DickBreath (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @02:58PM
  • Re:Logic. by DickBreath (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:56AM
  • Suggestions for ad karma by DickBreath (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:05AM
  • More on Hybrids... by TOTKChief (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @08:12AM
  • Re: Remembering ads for later clicking by n7lyg (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @06:50AM
  • The main problem - trust by Matthias Wiesmann (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:26AM
  • Go ahead on this post by OlympicSponsor (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:18AM
  • *sigh* by Death of Rats (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:18AM
  • Here Are my thoughts As another webmaster by G00F (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @07:27AM
  • Slashdot's the only site... by gcash (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @06:01AM
  • Hi Hemos by Ananova (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:15AM
  • I Love Banner Ads by qpt (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:12AM
  • What about a combination approach? by frosh (Score:2) Wednesday February 28 2001, @06:00AM
  • by Wanker (17907) on Wednesday February 28 2001, @08:15AM (#396074)

    This would work best in conjunction with a link to show detailed ad information, in particular the "classifications" the ad company has supplied to reach their target market. (i.e. "perl", "hard drives", "CPUs", "php", "developers wanted", "snack foods", etc.)

    Classifications are usually created not by technicians, but by some marketing drone who probably has a hard time spelling CPU. A discussion forum and the ability to moderate up well-classified, interesting ads would help good ads get a better clickthru.

    The big problem with moderation like this is that each company pays for a certain number of impressions. If their ad sucks, and gets moderated down, the OSDN may not be able to meet their stated number of impressions before the end of the ad campaign.

    There needs to be some way to provide positive motivation for companies to put up "good" ads. Rather than fiddling with the ad frequencies, perhaps OSDN could just create a "showcase" page which shows the ads in order of their moderation totals. "Good" ads could be recognized and "bad" ads would also be recognized. ;-) Another thought might be to give the highest-rated ads additional run time for no charge. Perhaps the best ads could go on the front page and all the others would only be shown deeper in?

  • by Valdrax (32670) on Wednesday February 28 2001, @07:25AM (#396075)
    Well, if you're willing to try out Mozilla, they've added hidden preferences in release 0.8 that will let you turn that off. They say that there will be a UI for it soon. The description can be found here [mozilla.org].

    Trust me. It works great. I've been using Mozilla as my regular browser since 0.7 came out, and it's come a long way since the M## builds.
  • This is spam! (Score:3)

    by wiredog (43288) on Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:12AM (#396076) Journal
    #define troll

    I saw it over on Kuro5hin already! ;) And, after all, cross posting is spam.

    #endif
  • by gotan (60103) on Wednesday February 28 2001, @08:40AM (#396077) Homepage
    Ok, i was always curious about that "How tough is Linux" banner ad, the colors are nice, the animation is funny, but not too flashy, and it made me a little curious. But my general rule is: "clicking on an ad brings you somewhere you don't want to be, so don't do it".
    Now, maybe just to have a say in this thread i clicked on the ad. Where it got me was a page where i could subscribe to a magazine. The page promises it'll take only 5 minutes and it's free anyway, so what have i got to loose? Well, the answer is simple: time. I don't want to wade through a tediuos subscription process before i can even have a look at the content. The whole experience is analogous to being invited somewhere i'm not too willing to go anyway, and then run into a locked door.
    I don't know if the site is interesting or not, maybe later someone tells me it's interesting and i'll subscribe. But after they got my attention so far that i "clicked through" why don't the make every effort to use that very short attention span the everyday websurfer has for anything he's not actively searching and present something that might catch my interest and draw me in?
    And mind you, i don't find Linux Benchmarks (the main argument for subscribing) uninteresting at all, i'd just have liked to look at some before subscribing. I even bothered to look at that frontpage for something that would lead me to some examples at least (better would have been the possibility to view it without subscribing).

    Other click-through experiences so far have been:
    - The site that pops up 3 windows all over the screen, and whenever i kill one it spawns two more. (no more javascipt then, ok)
    - The site that requires me to download a plugin before i can even start entering it, let alone navigating.
    - The site that requires my undivided attention in terms of bandwidth to even load the front page for some minutes. (Ctrl+W)
    - The site which has it's code so botched up, it crashes my Browser
    - The site that decided this is the place i want to be and made itself a oneway road (disabling the back button)
    - The site that enlarges my Browser window across the whole screen (Ctrl-W even before the content loads)
    - The site that opens up in a new window (if i want that i'll do it myself, thank you)
    - The site that has so many banners on it's front page i can't even find the way to the sites' content.
    - The site that first requires a subscription before i may enter (and i thought you wanted me here, apparently not)
    - The site i just can't figure out what it is for, or what it tries to sell, but it's flashy and tells me i should bookmark it
    - The site that can only navigated by opening a new window for each klick
    - The "under construction" site
    - The "server not found" site
    - The "404, page not found" site

    Admittedly, sometimes i get someplace useful (freshmeat), but that place i would probably have stumbled over anyway even without a banner to click, either because friends tell me, or i find it in a search query, or it's linked from somewhere.
    So after all these experiences with ad-clicking i wonder that people still click on ads at all, since more often than not it will just take some time to load, and if the Browser survived ... Ctrl-W.
  • free ads (Score:3)

    by jesser (77961) on Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:05AM (#396078) Homepage Journal
    I like the idea that I might be able to try out advertising for parts of my site without putting any money up front. That would allow me to get some idea of what parts of my sites people like and which parts they think are pointless. I don't make money off of my website, but if I got a lot of positive feedback (through e-mail or through a slashdot forum devoted to my ad), I might pay a reasonably low rate to keep running these ads, just because slashdot has turned me into a positive-feedback whore :) Or maybe I'd put ads on my own site or do something original like buying a .com or .org domain name for myself, who knows.

    I can just see future conspiracy theories: the karma cap is part of a master plan to deprive karma whores of the positive feedback they love so much, and make them post ads for their own site (which previously got one hit a week), first for free, and later for money.

    Some people might even put up humorous ads that don't link anywhere, just to burn off ad karma. This could be a good thing: it might get people to look at the ads instead of just scrolling past them, and it would be entertaining. But it might also mean that the exchange rate of points for ad views would have to be low. (As long as nobody tries to advertise the goatse site with what looks like a thinkgeek banner ad, I'll be happy.)

    What do you think of letting slashdot users who don't have anything of their own to advertise give their ad points to someone who's advertising a "completely free" site (no ads, not selling anything)?

    (Btw, does anyone know the minimum amount of money you have to put into a Google adwords [slashdot.org] account to try out an ad?)

    P.S. I'm over the karma cap, so please accuse me of not-very-subtly plugging for my site rather than karma whoring.
  • Lynx (Score:3)

    by epcraig (102626) on Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:25AM (#396079)
    Banner ads on Lynx are a waste.
    Apparently, the only text available is limited to "Click Here!"
    I somehow doubt that many using text browsers ever "Click Here!".
    Now, I ask you, why not include a hint of what you're advertising? For all I know I might be missing something historic, perhaps the first Microsoft ad on slashdot. (I still like the C'T Mutant Penguins, that ad pegged Linux, if only by accident).
  • I have to agree... (Score:3)

    by sherpajohn (113531) on Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:55AM (#396080) Homepage
    I think that the user-based ad system is one of the most interesting ideas I've heard in a long time. It completly changes the dynamic of the advertising relationship.

    I am one of those weirdos who actually goes out of his way to experience certain forms of advertising, while avoiding others. I frequently spend decent amounts of my time howling with laughter and amazement at ads I view on adcritic.com [adcritic.com], while at the same time most of the TV I watch is taped, so I can skip over the same annoying ad that gets shown 6 times during a one hour prime time show.

    How does this relate to banner ads this article and comment by Hemos? well, I like choice, be it what sort of products I am exposed to, or what sort of advertising I like...what if there was a way to give a hint of some fancy high end flash type ad through a little banner? I might click on it, if I think the art looks really cool...if I saw ads that categorized accordning to some preferences I had specified, or were geographically targeted (upcoming conserts,movie times...whatever) I would surely be more likely to click-through.

    All in all, I have to say I was very impressed, and quite amused with the honest and interesting ideas proposed here.

    Going on means going far
    Going far means returning
  • Free (as in ads) (Score:3)

    by paulywog (114255) on Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:17AM (#396081)
    It seems to make some sense that people in support of the Free Software and Open Source movements should also be in support of a user-based ad distribution system -- it promotes a certain freedom of choice.

    I don't mind seeing adds. There are some adds that I see and make me aware of something I've never seen or heard of before. But then there are other ads that just piss me off. Popup adds are especially bad, in my opinion, because I hate those extra windows just flying up without my permission. Some people hate banner ads because the sit there and flash their obnoxious message on the page you're trying to read.

    So, what should a customizable, user-based ad system provide:
    • Obviously there have to be ads involved, or the advertisers won't be very accepting. Perhaps users shouldn't even be given the option to completely turn off ads.
    • Users should be able to select what kind of ads they want to see. If I only want to see Linux hardware ads, that's what I should be able to see! Advertisers should be mostly OK with this - it's the most targeted advertising system you can have. The disadvantage is that there's less cross-selling going on for the advertisers.
    • The user should be able to customize how those adds appear.
      Location inline on the page,
      In a new window,
      All adds in one separate window,
      Text based,
      No animation


    What else? Maybe we should have an opensource project to develop a better advertising system. Then there can be a nice little backdoor that will spam the advertsing company employees with thousands of ads every day.

  • Re:I have to agree (Score:3)

    by Luminous (192747) on Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:22AM (#396082) Homepage Journal
    I have a similar experience to this. But in my case, I will be working on a project and need something. I remember that somewhere on one of the sites I visit I saw an ad for something that might help me. But since the ad banners rotate, I spend a lot of time reloading webpages. If a website could keep and index of advertisers it would help refine that process. At this time I have no need for the QuestionExchange, tomorrow I might, but do you think I'm diligent enough to write down or remember the details of it? Click thru rates depend upon me clicking, at this second, on the banner. But at this second, I am more interested in responding to the forum, not exploring ads.
  • Re:Targeting (Score:3)

    by billcopc (196330) <vrillco@yahoo.com> on Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:05AM (#396083) Homepage
    I have to agree, interesting ads regularly obtain my attention. Without advertising I would never have heard of many sites which I visit regularly, or certain products that are innovative and that I wouldn't have looked for on my own (software/hardware/whatever). However there is at least one type of ads I truly hate, the misleading ones that are made to look like a clickable form or those damned scrollbar things. Although I'm not fooled by these mock ups, i'm sure many others can't tell the difference, the non-technical ones especially. That's pure deception and it's just shy of fraud.
  • I wish targetted ads work!

    Do you know what I want to see?

    I want to know about shows and performances in my area. If the Circus comes to town. If Cirque Du Soleil is playing. If Stomp! or whatever hot new show is there.

    I want the link to connect to a ticket office, to schedules and fares, to a map service, and reviews of the performance.

    I want to know about music performances as well, of Taiko drums and Chinese acrobats and martial arts tournaments in the area.

    How do we get the banner ads to work like this?

    For product or services, I rely on Google. I want a new video card? I do a Google search on the appropriate websites. I look for "video card reviews performance price"

    But for topical, local, and timely information, Google isn't very good.

    And I don't want to be always trawling various ticket sites for what's new. I just want to know if Disney's Lion King on Ice is in the area, or something.

    I'm sure that's worthy of advertising as much as anything else!

    Geek dating! [bunnyhop.com]
  • by Technician (215283) on Wednesday February 28 2001, @06:08AM (#396085)
    I prefer the manufactures to have a web site properly listed with a search engine. If I want Ink Jet refill ink or Toner, I'll search for the best deal including shipping, bulk pricing, tools & supplies. Make sure the prices are listed. If the web site is only a brand impression site, I move on to products I can compare. Without prices, the product is not considered. What could better for advertisers than shoppers that are actualy looking for the product? Be there when I search! People who have to take the risk of entering a credit card online are not likely to impulse buy products. Banner adds are not the same as a Point Of Sale display ad in a store designed to generate an impulse purchase.

    Net savy shoppers who do shop online rarely take the first product offered. It's seldom the best deal. Excessive advertising usualy indicates cheap goods with high markup and low value. Common examples are the flashy bouncing credit cards and of course the punch the monkey, mouse etc.

  • Targeting (Score:3)

    by Ananova (255600) on Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:10AM (#396086)
    People don't, I think, mind ad banners. In fact, they will click on them if they are interesting. For instance, I clicked on an ad for an interview with John Carmack the other day because it was interesting.

    If you give people interesting ads, they will click. It's different to the real world. Since the success of ads is measured by clickthroughs (i.e. internet advertising is a direct sales route), then what you have to do is give people things they are directly interested in.

    So things like those ads for $10 pearls, will fail on /., at least by the direct sales=success approach of the internet (cf. other media, where it's indirect growth that is measured), but an advert for a book about Perl might succeed.

    As to successful indirect advertising (increasing sales, although not through clickthroughs), this is a different issue, and depends on a level of obtrusiveness that internet ads don't have. You can't make a catchy ad to sell rubbish on the internet, simply because that kind of full screen, 3-minute TV ads don't work, because you only have a few pixels on the screen.

    Thus although traditional advertising is about selling people things they don't want, when selling online, you have to try and sell people things they do want - it's just a matter of finding the right people. And this, of course, is where profiles come in.

    For the success of sites such as /., advertising must be effective, and to do this, advertisers need to know about you. The number one priority for online advertisers is to get the right ad in front of the right person, and for this ad cookies are vital for the survival of advertising-supported websites.
    --
  • by ksanjabi (320941) on Wednesday February 28 2001, @07:33AM (#396087)
    >I think it was for HP, but that wasn't important The fact that you remembered that it was from HP was a sign the ad worked as intended. The "Invent" campaign you mention for HP was a pure branding campaign that supports HP's new tagline "Invent." HP didn't ask you to click on it, and if you ignored it or if you decided to mess around with it, that is your choice. This banner and some others that my company did for HP can be viewed at: http://www.freestyleinteractive.com/demos/hp/ [freestyleinteractive.com]

    Karim
  • Re:Targeting (Score:4)

    by Black Parrot (19622) on Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:22AM (#396088)
    > People don't, I think, mind ad banners.

    I mind them.

    One reason is the distracting animations that make it hard to read the content I went to the site to read in the first place. Another reason is that I do most of my surfing over a dialup connection to a not particularly fast ISP, and I dislike having to wait for images to download just so I can read the content I went to the site to read in the first place.

    Notice that a solution to both of my complaints would be to use simple text for ads. Sometimes "simpler" works better than "in-your-face". Text ads may not be quite so quick to catch the eye, but then they aren't catching my eye at all as it is. (I turn off automatic image downloading, and I quit visiting sites altogether if they make me wade through too much annoyance to get to the subject matter.)

    --
  • by Black Parrot (19622) on Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:45AM (#396089)
    > In effect, people who block banner ads are biting the hand that feeds them in a most immature and selfish manner.

    Is it also immoral to get up to take a leak during a television commercial? Or to use "technological means" to flip to another station?

    --
  • Preferences (Score:4)

    by lal (29527) on Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:26AM (#396090)
    I occasionally click ads on Slashdot or News.com; hardly ever on Yahoo, Salon, etc. Why? Because Slashdot is targeted to some of my interests.

    Given the opportunity to specify interests for all OSDN banner ads, I'd do it. I think it would increase click-thru in addition to letting you shop around a targeted demographic. Seems like a win-win. Bring it on.
  • by Shotgun (30919) on Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:20AM (#396091)
    - Fill them with pornographic images

    But, wouldn't this make them suck more?

    I'm sorry. I just had to ask.

  • Ad Karma? (Score:4)

    by Relic of the Future (118669) <dales@dig i t a l f r e a ks.org> on Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:13AM (#396092)
    So, if I spend months and months downloading all kinds of annoying ads, then, in the end I'm rewarded with the ability to... not have to download annoying ads. Ummm. Why don't I just filter them before hand and not bother? If you want to reward people for seeing ads, have you considered going for something concrete, like, I dunno, a free /. t-shirt, or discounts on whatever it is your advertisers are selling?

    God does not play dice with the universe. Albert Einstein

  • by Bad_CRC (137146) on Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:35AM (#396093)
    This reminds me of a recent commercial by IBM where they paraded dozens of consumers in front of the camera complaining "I want advertisers to know about me, about what I like, about what I buy, about my habits."

    It literally sent chills down my spine. But, I guess there are many people who do follow that belief. Personally, I'm not the kind of person who would be comfortable going into a shoe store and having the person there know every kind of shoe I had owned, or to have telemarketers quote to me which magazines I had ever held subscriptions to, or any one of dozens of other examples where my right to privacy was taken away.

    ________

  • by atrowe (209484) <adam@arowe.org> on Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:21AM (#396094) Homepage
    I, like many other Slashdot users, find myself mildly annoyed by most of the banner ads served on Slashdot.

    (Slashdot Cruiser, anyone).

    Perhaps this wouldn't be such an issue if I weren't stuck on a 33.3 dialup connection, but as it stands, even with the "Light" version of Slashdot selected in my user info, some of the articles can take several minutes to load.

    Obviously if Slashdot is to remain a free website available to anyone, they need to keep banner ads on their site, so what can be done to alleviate some of the annoyance that current banner advertising can cause? I propose a targeted advertising system that tracks user's preferences based upon the stories they read most often. This would require placing another cookie on a users computer with a unique ID string that Slashdot would use to keep track of what Slashdot stories a particular user reads. Let's say for example you frequently enjoy Slashdot's Anime section. Your cookie would reflect this information and you would be delivered ads for new Anime releases at each page load. Of course you would have to read logged in, but I believe most if not all readers do this anyway.

    A system of this type shouldn't be terribly hard to implement, considering Slashdot already organizes stories by category, and it should not be too taxing on Slashdot's servers. I know I would be more likely to click on, and lessly annoyed by banner ads, if they were advertising products I had a particular interest in.

    Just a suggestion, does anyone else have any input on the subject?

  • by update() (217397) on Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:14AM (#396095) Homepage
    The introduction of karma in Slashdot was an interesting psychological experiment - look how nuts people can go over something that has absolutely no value. I mean, I know I can't do anything with it but I've still effectively retired my low-four-digit-id account in large part because I've been conditioned to value karma and it bothers me at some level to see it get whittled away.

    Anyway, the lesson is that you can't "just" introduce some scoring system without people getting crazy over it. If you decide to go with such a plan, get ready for ad karma whoring, trolling, bot and script hogging and all the rest of the headaches that are going to accompany it.

    Unsettling MOTD at my ISP.

  • by airlie (234849) on Wednesday February 28 2001, @06:02AM (#396096) Homepage
    How about giving me a compelling reason to look at banner ad's?

    Maybe every 50th ad check my email account and use the banner ad space to tell me if I have new mail.

    Occasionally stick the latest Slashdot topic or CNN News story in the banner ad space. Not as an ad for Slashdot or CNN but because I specifically requested periodic updates from those sites.

    Soon I'll get in the habit of actually checking the ad banner for items of interest instead of ignoring it so throughly that I'm not even aware there is one.
  • by Eoli (320216) on Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:17AM (#396097)
    - Filter them out, or

    - Enforce the "1 x 1 pixel" banner standard, or

    - Pay me $1 for each banner viewed, or

    - Fill them with pornographic images

    I think those are the only real options here.
  • by Hemos (2) on Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:00AM (#396098) Homepage Journal
    I think that the user-based ad system is one of the most interesting ideas I've heard in a long time. It completly changes the dynamic of the advertising relationship.

    Why?

    Because web advertising has been basically like TV or print - an ad is displayed and people can click or not. TV doesn't even have that option, but print can send back requests for more info. What can we do here? Click on an ad - that's been the only method of communication.

    Me, I like to see *some* ads. I've found good companies and stuff I didn't know about through some of the ads. But I'd much prefer being able to do more then click or not - being able to request more info, or being able to to *turn off* a bad ad would rock. It's a system that I think would be worth implementing - not because I work on the web sites, but because it's something I'd like to have as user.

  • Hybrid approach (Score:5)

    by Sloppy (14984) on Wednesday February 28 2001, @06:27AM (#396099) Homepage Journal

    But the size of the audience on OSDN's web sites and the nature of the content within is such that the subscription models break down.

    Maybe if you rely exclusively on subscription, it doesn't work. I suspect that relying on ads won't work either. But you're thinking to narrow -- why not have the best of both worlds?

    Slashdot uses a login system, so that people can set their preferences. It already serves dynamic pages, based on who is reading it, anyway. It would be trivial to modify it so that it serves an ad-free page to people who paid a subscription, and an ad-cluttered page to everyone else.

    People who hate ads but are willing to pay, win. People who hate paying, but don't mind (or would rather filter) ads, win. Slashdot gets revenue, and wins. Everybody wins.


    ---
  • by Shoeboy (16224) on Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:26AM (#396100) Homepage
    Here's a few scenerios, ideas I've been pitching around:

    Comment forums for each ad banner:

    Great idea! The best part is that you've already tested it here on slashdot. Nearly ever article posted during the "Slashdot Cruiser" campaign contained at least 3 comments about what a horrible idea that was. Clearly you can leverage your existing expertise in this area.

    Turning off annoying ads:

    I've got a better idea, how about we see hot horny women and get fired? I think this could be a great experience for us to share together.

    Choice of ad topics and categories:

    Will hardware manufacturers that don't suck be an option? Cause while I'll probably never pay 10% more than the standard price for a "server" that has an asus desktop motherboard and a VA Linux case badge, I do like computer hardware ads. I just like them from real companies like Dell and Compaq that don't charge extra for printing "Linux Powered" on the outside of the box the computer ships in.

    What about ad system karma?

    Would that work like the slashdot karma system? Cause the idea of ad system bitchslapping is scary. I can handle a default posting score of -1, but I'd hate to have 20 popups on slashdot just because Taco got pissed at me.

    1 point for every time you load a paid ad
    0 points for clicking on an ad
    50 points for loading bigger ads
    100 points for loading a pop-up ad
    500 points for filling out an advertiser's survey
    100 points for loading a Flash ad
    300 points for posting a meaningful critique on an ad
    200 points for alerting us if an ad is broken
    500 points for helping us test an ad before it goes live


    The look on Larry Augustin's face when OSDN starts turning a profit: priceless.
    There are some things that ad karma can't buy. For everything else there's mastercard.

    I understand that you're brainstorming here, but your ideas are pretty silly.

    --Shoeboy
  • by wiredog (43288) on Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:14AM (#396101) Journal
    Who's this 'hemos' guy and how'd he get uid 2? After all, we never see the slashdot crew posting to their own site, so he can't be one of them.

    Desperately trying to dump karma so he won't be called a karma whore

  • by peccary (161168) on Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:11AM (#396102)
    When web sites first started putting up gif advertisements, the WSJ Interactive had tasteful black-and-white 1-inch ads very much like the print version.

    Then they went to color. "Ok, just taking advantage of the medium," I thought. Some of them were informative, and I occasionally clicked through.

    Then they started flashing at me, trying to get my attention. Hello! I'm Trying To Read, Here! It was worse than being in a room full of toddlers. I was quite disappointed that a
    • newspaper publisher
    of all possible outfits, was destroying the reading experience in this way. And I told them so. Naturally, they ignored me.

    And so I installed an ad filter and now I don't see a single one of their blessed ads, or any one elses.

    The web ad industry is its own worst enemy.
  • by SquadBoy (167263) on Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:22AM (#396103) Homepage Journal
    Yes to be able to turn off that "Hot Horny women" ad would be a *very* good thing. OTOH I really like the Despair ads. :)
  • by Golias (176380) on Wednesday February 28 2001, @07:16AM (#396104)
    From the article: So if an ad bothers you, offends you, confuses you, entices you, anything about that ad, you can speak and be heard. Let's face it, many ad banners suck because nobody tells the ad agency that the creative needs improvement.

    Sorry, but I don't think you can afford my consulting fee.

    The ad agency will have to figure it out themselves. That's what they get paid for.

  • Ad karma? (Score:5)

    by micromoog (206608) on Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:08AM (#396105)
    Redeem your points to gain access to such features as (Hypothetical examples)
    • Turn off all ads
    • Upload your own ads
    • Get stats on the ads you uploaded
    • Specify which sites you want your ads to run on
    • Whetever else anyone can think of...

    Sorry, but I've gotta say the "ad karma" idea is exceptionally bad. The only way I'm going to spend my time rating your banner ads is if you:

    • Pay me money
    • Pay me money
    • Pay me money
  • How about a karma system for the advertisers!

    People "moderate" their ads. They accumulate good karma for being good citizens.

    Web site visitors can set their viewing threshold. Don't show me ads from advertisers unless their karma is over 20. Or maybe the ad score is over 3, etc.

    Just imagine a moderation system for ads...
    (Score -2, Obnoxious)
    (Score -5, Company is a scumbag)
    (Score -3, Tries to pretend the ad is interactive)



    Those who can, do. Those who can't, get their MCSE.
  • Ad system feedback (Score:5)

    by DickBreath (207180) <danny@suEINSTEIN ... minus physicist> on Wednesday February 28 2001, @05:33AM (#396107) Homepage
    Kurt, I like the ideas in your article.

    This would be a huge improvement over the way web advertising works now. It could even lead the way for others to follow.

    I would dearly love the ability to click "Never show me this ad again". I would dearly love to be able to send feedback directly to the advertiser, especially if I knew it didn't go to /dev/null. And especially on an ad I felt strongly about. (And maybe the advertiser could accumulate clue-karma for sending me a personal reply to the message I personally wrote them.)

    I can imagine myself commenting negatively on ads more than positively. But that might change as advertisers accumulate more clue-karma. I can mostly imagine commenting negatively on ads that look interactive, but aren't. Obnoxious blinking ads, etc.

    Just because advertisers don't have something to sell that I want, isn't my fault. Really. It isn't.

    But some advertisers seem to think that they can persuade me to buy if they can just be more obnoxious and in-my-face than the other guy. I have news for them.

    When advertisers have something I'm actually intersted in, then I'm interested (sometimes) in their ads. And (gasp!) I sometimes click through!

    I have a few more ideas to suggest:

    How about a page I can go to that is just full of ads! I can then immediately pick out the obnoxious ones and immediately click "Never show me again". This should give the advertiser some feedback.

    When I click never show me this again, maybe I could optionally enter some feedback as to why! I find this ad offensive. I'm not interested. I think the techniques used in the ad demonstrates that your company is scum, etc.

    Maybe I could rate ads, with a simple drop down menu? The higher I rate an ad, the more frequently I see it. This is simply a more fine grained version of "Never show me this ad again".

    I might be willing to let advertisers (who haven't yet offended me) contact me. The problem with the way this works now, is that advertisers get your contact info. They then violate the trust you put in them, and you can't retract your contact info. What if the contact info could go to a trusted intermediary? I'm willing to let Acme Co. contact me, as long as they don't offend me. When they do, I tell the intermediary to remove me from their mailing list. This works great until the intermediary violates my trust.

    That's maybe the core of the problem. Advertisers have violated people's trust so much, so many times, and in so many ways, that nobody trusts them anymore. Maybe they could earn that trust back, and people might not think so lowly of them.

    Maybe I could go to a special page on your site, and indicate, "I'm in the market for a hard drive.". Then over the next week, I would get ads from advertisers who think they might have something of interest to sell me.


    Those who can, do. Those who can't, get their MCSE.
  • Don't worry (Score:5)

    by Steve Richards (211082) on Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:17AM (#396108)
    I find this entire article vaguely amusing. Sure, you can ask your users what they want. Just don't expect it to get you anywhere.

    Remember, you run this site. You can do whatever you want with it. There is absolutely no need to ask the users' permission to do anything. The servers are your property, the code was written by you, and everyone is reading this website and posting here at your sufferance.

    You can't depend on the readers to run this site for you. What do us readers want? A site that's never down, with all sorts of features, that's easy to use, with responsive management, and no banners. Is that realistic? No. Are users interested in sitting down and facing harsh, ugly reality and thinking hard about these issues to the degree that's necessary to formulate even halfway decent proposals? Of course not. And it's unrealistic and dangerous to expect essentially apathetic (and very self-interested) parties to give you good advice.

    In the end, the success or failure of the banner system is up to you. You can't rely on the users, and you can't blame them if you fail. But there's a ray of hope here too - you also have the freedom to ignore them.

    I hope this is in some way helpful to you.
  • Persistent Ads (Score:5)

    by LinkDog (249517) on Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:56AM (#396109)
    When I read print articles I notice ads and return to them later. The problem with web ads is that I must act now or lose my chance. What I would like is a hybrid dynamic/static ad system. The ad itself can be random, but once I've seen it, it should remain each time I return to a specific page. Thus I can remember I saw the ad for FooCorp Widgets on the Slashdot article about Ginger and track it down days, weeks, or months later.
  • by tonywestonuk (261622) on Wednesday February 28 2001, @04:47AM (#396110)
    I saw a banner ad that was quite interesting - I think it was for HP, but that wasn't important. The ad itself was a paper plane simulator, with two controls to increase/decrease the length of the plane, and its wingspan. When you were happy with your 'design', you pressed 'go' and the paper plane was thrown, its tragectory plotted with a dotted red line... Altering the controls changed the way the plane flew logically. Unfortunetly, when I left the page, and came back, the ad had changed, and no amount of reloading the page would bring it back.... I think I did go to HP's web site to try and find it again.... but without luck. The morral - instead of trying to sell us somthing with a electronic 'poster' -give us somthing to play with. The computer medium is by its nature interactive - if the ad's arn't then we skip over them though pure bordom.
(1) | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5