Ads on ERT

[nicholassolutions]

http://www.expertsrt.com/scripts/batalf/batalf_frame1.html

This page is actually serving content (and some great content at that!) off of Batalf's site. However, because that is the case, the page appears to contain an ad, which is against ERT "policy" so to speak. Personally, I think it's great if Alf can generate some revenue for his site this way, but as a matter of precedent, I thought it might be wise to have a discussion about this sort of thing, especially as we get ready to release the custom profile pages for members. I don't have a 'proposal' -- I guess this is strictly a consult...

[coral1]

Interesting point.

To start the ball rolling, I will go with:
On a site that is technically independent, but feeding content, a few ads are OK. Of course this depends on the subjective perception of:

are the ads interfering with finding the content. Either by being in the way, or just so ####### many of them.

are they easily identified as ads. Or are they trying to "pump up the click count" by tricking you.


While ERT itself wants to remain ad-free, it can't really impose this on other sites (other than not linking to them), and ads are a fact of life. So a certain amount of advertising has to be allowed for, or bring the content to the ERT servers, if the ads are a PITA.

[Anonymous]

I think we should think about having ads on ert.

Not external ads, but ads to our own content.

And maybe not immediately.

When we have a larger number of articles/tutorials, we could have a "PHP Month". The "ad" shows something to do with a particular set of articles.

[COBOLdinosaur]

This is a discussion we definitely should have.

I think the issues are the kind of thing that will have to be dealt with by the Governing Council.  As the size of the membership is still small perhaps we should consider electing a small interim Council to guide us through the next 6 months or so.

I am reluctant to make arbitrary decision on things like this because they are community issues and my self interest might get in the way of what the community wants. So having an interim Council would help.

On the specific issue of Alf's site, my view is that if we are going to have external content feeding in, then we decide on a case by case basis whether the content is appropriate in the form it is being offered. That applies not just to fully mounted pages, but also to news feeds.  Some feed have ads imbeded in them, and the terms of use do not allow removal of them. So if we apply our no ads rule to external content then we reduce our sources.

RSS feeds have been a positive thing for us.  The external content pages have given us a boost.  So my feeling is that we should not bite the hand that feeds us(no pun intended).  I don't want to have a ton of ads being thrown at out users, but a lot of content especially from feeds is being financed by advertising, so IMO we need to be selective, but not exclusionary.

We have a resource page with links; are those ads?  In some cases the links are there because they are reciprocal, and get us good placement in directories.  If a page includes the logo for W3C because that page is compliant is that link an ad? Is the logo for the Creative Common Copyright an ad?

Richard mentioned internal ads... a good point.  If we put a small graphic and bit of text on the forum pages to promote a newly written tutorial, does that violate the no ads policy.  Does the "Why ERT is free" page violate the no ads policy by using a text link and ert logo to invite users to come to the forum and register.

Then we have the about to be introduced extended members' profile pages and subdomains.  I have always consider using them for promotion of self and ones business to be a benefit we could offer Mentors.  Does the no ad policy extend to member subdomains.  If I place an ad on coboldinosaur.expertsrt.com am I breaking the rules? If so, then I am already breaking the rules because I promote ERT and SE on my subdomain pages.

The primary source of revenue for this site down the road will be sponsored forums.  Will it violate the no ad policy if we put up something like: "This month we have a featured forum on Database Managment software sponsored by Oracle" with a small oracle logo?  Would it be an add to put: "Visit the PHP forum where Zend Certified Engineer and ERT Mentor Richard Quadling is the featured Mentor of the month"?  For that matter is Richard violating no ads with an avatar that promotes Zend?

Should the rule be strictly ban anything that looks like an ad; ban anything that promotes external products or content; or ban paid ads?  I think we need to know what the community wants.  I think the best way to work through and get a detailed set of guidelines is to elect a Governing council to work through the issues.  A second and workable alternative is to break it down into a series of questions and then conduct votes on the issues to get the rules defined.

This topic is the start of the kind of policy discussion and perhaps debate, that will either make the site a unique democratic model or demonstrate that you have to have a central authority to run things. We need to define some policy, so we need to determine how we are going to do that and get the job done.

[Esopo]

Food for thought,

I have always supported that well targeted ads are an asset, not an annoyance.

A banner that says "Download Firefox and browse safely" in a browsers thread can only do good for everybody.

However, and ad that reads "Oracle uses new technology for advanced table linking" in the HTML area can only be an annoyance.

The balance must be managed carefully, but if done properly ads can be a very good thing to happen to ERT.

[Srirangan]

Frankly I think it's upto the author to decide. During the days I waqs freelancing through college, I had contextual ads on my websites. I needed the money, and I was not forcing anyone to click or see the ads. I believe the author is entitled to some compensation for his good work.

[coral1]

Set up a poll, simmer some more, or pass off to the Council?  :wink:

[seandelaney]

I suggest a poll to be set up, but this is my view

[CrYpTiC_MauleR]

I personally would not want ads of any type on this site. Even if it is related to the content. Its just that ads just add clutter and confusion to the page. ERT needs a clean fresh look without any distractions and be focused on the help and information it has to offer.

[Srirangan]

I personally would not want ads of any type on this site. Even if it is related to the content. Its just that ads just add clutter and confusion to the page. ERT needs a clean fresh look without any distractions and be focused on the help and information it has to offer.

In this case, the first post points to a ERT page which has the authors personal website page framed in. We're talking about ads on the authors personal homepage.  :wink:

[COBOLdinosaur]

Personally, I am opposed to ads on the site, but not promotion of internal item, partners or crediting the sources of free content.  Every time a link to another site is posted along with a favorable comment that can be considered an ad.

However, it is a community issues that has broad impact and defines to some extent what the site is and will be. I think limits, guidelines and definitions are far to complex for a simple "are you in favor of ads onthe site yes/no" type of question.  So how about we do a vote with three options:

• Defer the issues for action by the Governing council.
• Set up a committee to study it and make recommendations that the community can then debate and vote on.  
• Set up a topic devoted to debating the issue with spin off topics as need and votes set for each issue as it matures.

I favour the first but the other two are workable though somewhat more cumbersome.  Part of what we need to do is work out how our democracy is going to work when we have multi-faceted issues that cand be dealt with in a single simple vote.

So shall we ask coral to set up the vote, or do we need further discussion, or do you think the options suck and there is a better way to do it.

Cd&

[seandelaney]

So shall we ask coral to set up the vote

I suggest setting up a poll and i agree with your first point in the list

[Esopo]

How about a system that gives the people an important vote while leaving the results in the hands of the council. I think democracy by itself doesn't work because if everybody in the realm casts a vote on every issues the result is a bunch of votes made mainly by people who don't know what they want and how things work enough to know what they are saying. How could that be any useful?

However, decisions solely made by a council are often deprived from the point of view of the average member, and in some cases the matters being analyzed are as difficult for the council as they would be for the average member.

So, I would recommend something like:
35% of weight on the public vote for all members
65% of weight on the Council votes
And a solution needs to have a minimum of 60% of favor or it has to go back to the studying table (discussions about it, informing people about it, maybe some campaigning in the future, reformulating the question and then recast votes).

[coral1]

This one is going to be fun.

 :scratch:  :scratch:  :scratch:

[Srirangan]

I don't get it. The link in the first post is clearly an ERT page framing an External Site. What right should ERT's governing council have to decide if the External page can have ads or not? Is this not the discreeting of the external page's author?  :scratch:

The only thing ERT's council can vote on is to decide whether ERT should frame external sites with ads or not. :-#