NEWSCHOOLER'S ADVERTISING QUESTION

.......................................................................

Sick troll thread. Do you know what ad choices is? You obviously don't which is why you thought this thread would work.

Heath has spoken.

I liked when he said we were growing corporately. Made me feel super official and shit.

I just lol'd. ^ What Eheath said.

But seriously, I'm getting a little tired of ads for Muslima.com - Muslim Matrimonials.

But it isn't a correct or logical counter, no matter how true or false it may be.

The question of the hour... FD Wear ads or that?

Note... your muslim matrimonial ads are likely based on your browsing history. Welcome to uncle google and the world of the ad exchanges.

does anybody else get the ads for catheter kits and enemas?

The Muslima women are more attractive but the're almost wearing too many clothes.

This is why ad block rules the web. Some say it destroys free internet, but I say bullshit. People always want to be heard. How do you think websites like Wikipedia keep going and expanding? The constant drive of people wanting their knowledge to be taught and the constant need of others hungry for that knowledge with monetary acknowledgement for a job well done in the form of donations to keep the website going. I try to support NS by keeping ad block off on this site, but honestly, it's really hard. That's why I've donated and will donate more in the future since I recognize a fantastic product when I see one.

The fact that people get mad over ad block is kind of ridiculous anyways. What do you think a 'mute' button is on a remote control? That's your ad block for when you're watching TV. People turn down the radio when ads come on, people skip over pages of ads in a magazine. It's generally accepted that a certain portion of the population will just not stand for ads. Same goes for the internet. Gotta accept that those same people who mute the TV will use ad blockers and there's nothing you can do about it but continue making a fabulous product that will receive support in other ways.


All this to say, your post time is fantastic.

then stop looking up muslim porn on google when you're not on ns

Nah dude I'm always incognito when I look up muslim porn.

I just go straight onto my computer, and type in boobs.com with no incognito because that's how hardcore I am.

So what you're saying is that you want a subscription model.

No ads for a reasonable monthly fee?

Otherwise then yes, adblock is screwing us over. Sure its great for 'the people to give their voice' but if everyone used it we'd shut down in two seconds and the entire legacy of NS would be completely finished.

Money has to flow. To think otherwise is immature. Trust me, the internet is going through a revolution right now where all of the 'free' businesses are realizing that they need to generate revenue or die a horrible and embarassing death.

I disagree. The internet is going through a revolution, but in the complete opposite direction. Open source and free knowledge is the future of the internet. Sites like Wikipedia continue to grow and software like Ubuntu continues to have a growing user base at the fastest rates yet. This will be the future. Sites that offer product for money are a dying breed. Think scientific journal sites as an example. In a very near future it will all be free knowledge and those sites will crash and burn.

You couldn't be more wrong.

Wikipedia regularly begs for donations. Regular donations are no different than subscription... though one is admitting you actually need money the other is pretending like you can exist without it.

Ubuntu as a prevalent OS that actually is going to have a serious user base behind it? Come on... that just isn't based on reality at all. I absolutely agree with you that there is a massive and free movement on the internet. Hell, I think its awesome - and I even participate in it personally. However - sustainable large-scale business needs to have a revenue model behind it. That is the cold facts of life, and eventually people wake up to this fact.

The best thing that people who want a 'free and open' internet could do is agree to subscription models behind the products that they love. If you really like something, then pay a small sub fee on a monthly basis to use it. This actually allows people who work their brains out building it to feed both themselves and their children while working full-time.

If you don't want to pay, then look at a few ads without blocking or complaining.

Life requires money. Its silly to think it doesn't.

well, there's a reason more and more businesses are adopting Ubuntu or other Linux based OS's and using open source alternatives such as OpenOffice instead of MS Office. The numbers are steadily growing.

None of this is based off subscriptions or advertisements, but on donations. Completely different strategy that certainly works well. It means the shitty products die out and the good products succeed. You don't expect everyone will donate, but you have 10 million users and if 1/100 donate each year then you're more than set.

For instance, think of how many people have donated to NS. If once a year you ran a donations campaign to keep the website going you would rake in quite a good amount of dough based on a relatively small amount of users. Simply because it's a good product that people will monetarily support. Maybe it would be enough to cut out the ads before videos? That's be a good start.

Also open source has much more to offer than proprietary. For instance, who here uses VLC? Probably 9/10 people do. About every business that needs a media player has it installed on their computers. This is a great example of open source. Besides video games and some specialty software, there is an open source alternative for about every program the average person uses that in many cases is much better.

Wait another 10 years. Open source and free information will rule the web. Especially with the many people like Aaron Swartz working towards this goal.

There would be no internet with out ad or some kind of flow of money..

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for the open source movement - but its advocates often don't see the real underbellies. Very small amounts of it are successful, and are drastically outweighed by the paid models. Businesses don't use Open Office. Open office is absolute garbage, and its only a tiny fringe that makes that adoption.

Way better in that example is a re-thought revenue model like Google Apps. That has a nice mixture of open-source ethos with a solid subscription revenue model behind it. You get a free product which is ad supported and a paid one that is very reasonably priced. Even then though, most of the business world (yes us included) end up using MS office. Try working with a lawyer and only using open office... you're going to have a bad time.

I also hate to burst your bubble but the donations thing doesn't even come in the remotest neighbourhood of being enough money. We tried this hard for a long time, but donations generate like 2% of the necessary operating capitol to keep the business afloat. Open source companies don't work off of donations either. A couple of hacker projects make money that way until the guy who built it gave up. True open source relies on the 'product halo' to make cash.

Read this article - http://www.extropia.com/tutorials/misc/opensourcebiz.html

VLC is a case where people have volunteered to get together and build something for free. That is totally and absolutely awesome, and hell yes I use VLC. I doubt it will be around forever though... almost anything with no business behind it simply fades away into oblivion.

Open source already rules the web - and I totally agree that an open way to go about things will dominate. However in order to last, it will have to establish business models. If you ask me, that is going to be the 'freemium' model.

You get free stuff that is ad supported, and pay a very reasonable subscription to get the premium features. You can pirate it, but there's no point when its totally reasonably priced, ie. Steam.

I AM NOT EVEN trolling men.

Popping up, moving and making noises? That doesn't sound right. We don't allow ads like that. Grab a screen capture for me and we'll hunt it down.

Also, check your computer for spyware. Plenty of spyware overwrites the ads on websites and replaces them with super gnarly stuff.

I do not know how to do a screen capture. and please dont tell me how.

Maybe it was spyware.

I am greatful for Newschoolers, I am sorry if I offended anyone. I am just concerned about the future of the sport.

The future is not only the athletic or physical realm, but also the other components that make up how it is exposed.  I dont think the elders of the sport would have engineered things to take the course they have. There are tradeoffs for exposure and funding. Was merely what I was saying.

Believe me man, I'm really with you on that comment. Its a very difficult balance, especially seeing as a lot of new people in the sport don't feel as strongly in that way. There's a huge swell of support for the more competition-based approach. I guess by the very nature of freedom, you're free to do whatever you want... even if that is to conform and partake in that corporate stuff.

At least here on Newschoolers, you can take a lot of heart in knowing that we're pretty careful to not let things go too far in the wrong direction. We still have a lot of fight left in us as staff, and as such we try to keep things as 'real' as possible. There is a balance between revenue and 'real'ness, but most stuff without revenue just flat out dies away.

Most scientific journals are extremely expensive, schools just pay for them so students and professors can access them. Those that are free require you to pay to submit a manuscript to them. They have to get money somehow.

what do you mean 'they have to get money somehow'. scientific journals are one of the biggest scams in recent history. This is why: a scientist gets government funding (taxpayer money) to advance research in a certain field. He does his experiments, makes his discoveries, and writes about it. This then gets peer reviewed to assure scientific quality. Then the scientist must pay a journal, yes the scientist pays the journal not the other way around like everything other article, to get his article published. So the journal is already making money off the article they have done nothing for. Then they publish the article. They then charge absorbent amounts of money to those that want to read the article. An article whose research was paid for through taxpayer money. The scientist make absolutely no money from this, the financial backers of the project (you) make absolutely no money off this, in fact both those parties end up paying extra for it.

This is why many universities are starting to push their researchers to NOT publish in journals but completely stay away from them and publish their articles in other methods to make them free to everyone. Oxford is one university that comes to mind that's seen through this scam and is really pushing its staff to publish in their alternative to journals which they make free and available to all.

But yea, scientific journals are an atrocity.

Until recently those free journals did not exist, and many of them (as I said before) require the scientist to pay money to submit their manuscript. Not to mention big name journals have much higher prestige, and your paper is much more likely to be read and cited. An article published in Nature is going to undoubtedly be read by tons of other scientists, as opposed to a paper published in a free journal.

I'm an ecology grad student and am currently working on submitting multiple manuscripts to journals. I know I want my work published in the most reputable journal possible and have the highest possibility of my work being cited. The whole system is messed up- the prices you have to pay to have access to these journals, and that's great that schools like Oxford are encouraging scientists to publish in free journals. But I know at the moment I'm sticking to the status quo to better advance my career, which means publishing in outlandishly expensive journals. And I get paid by government provided grants and stipends, so it is what it is. I know my university encourages publishing in the biggest name journals possible.