Slashdot Mirror
Slashdot IRC Forum Today
Hemos and I are going to try to answer questions today at 3:00 PM EST, on
irc.slashnet.org in #forum. Specifically we're going to try to keep the questions on the subject of subscriptions. There are a lot of misunderstandings about
a few things, and we wanna clear them up. We'll post a log in this story after the forum is done. Any questions can be /msged to Questions the bot and forum discussion can be had in #forum.d.
This was much less intrusive than the awful pop-ups I envisioned when I read about the subsription service. As of the time of this posting the ad is no longer there.
Rob and Gang,
I would not mind paying for a subscription, but I will not pay a subscription just not to see ads. Personally, I can tune them out for $20. You boys and girls need to start your reading here at this article. It represents my views exactly. BTW, do not think about features individually to much, but in the aggregate. Features in the subscription will be the sum greater then the parts. Of course, if one feature costs more then the whole subscription base, then I wouldn't implement it but you get my point.
HT
DotComScoop
Last Friday Slashdot launched its long threatened ad free subscription service.
My first reaction was one of utter amazement; the complexity of the system is absolutely staggering.
'Slashdot subscriptions will essentially let you buy a thousand pages to be viewed without banner ads. And you will have some flexibility to decide what types of pages (Comments, Articles, The Homepage) you want ads removed from, and what types of pages you just want to see the ads.'
Companies such as Salon offer ad free viewing as part of their subscription service, but never has anyone introduced an ad free service that creates a direct link between the level of usage and the cost. Slashdot claims that this is the fairest way to do it, which at first glance may appear to be the case. However, as one reader points out:
'The problem that I see is that under this model, those who contribute to slashdot the most, and make the site what it is, are forced to pay the most.'
To my mind he has hit the nail squarely on the head. A community discussion site is by definition primarily only as valuable as the contributions that are made to it. By tying payment to usage Slashdot has created a barrier to participation. Such a policy isn't community centric.
It is widely accepted that people prefer not to be 'nickel and dimed.' Internet Service Providers charge flat fees, 99% of online subscription services are flat fee based, as are the majority of cable subscription services. Why? Because forcing people to monitor their consumption detracts from the overall user experience.
One thing that you can be absolutely certain of is that Slashdot's new model is not designed from a perspective of how best to serve their readership.
On top of that, there is also the factor that ads can be blocked. Such a painful system can only further encourage the user base to do so.
What I don't understand is why they are being so incredibly negative? This subscription service is lose, lose, lose with no win in sight. Even Salon, whose business model I obsessively criticize, did at least offer something of additional value, if not much, on launching their subscription service.
Slashdot is not the first website to introduce a subscription service in an apologetic, negative, half-hearted, and bribing way. However, they are the only company that I can think of who have launched a service that doesn't add anything to the overall experience.
It is odd to me that many online companies seem to think that the only way to introduce subscription is to take something away from the user. As controversial as this may sound - it doesn't have to be that way.
Slashdot informs us that:
'We are doing our best to learn from the mistakes made by other sites that have started charging for subscriptions. We won't create subscriber only features that cost more to maintain than they generate.'
Why focus on that as the primary mistake that can be made? I'd suggest that alienating your readership is the ultimate sin. Furthermore, whether they like it or not, companies have to invest to gain return. You can't expect people to hand over cash unless you are prepared to create something that is worth paying for.
Slashdot is in a unique position, and one that they should be able to build upon in a positive way. What is shocking to me is that they appear to realize this, yet still insist on acting in this lame manner.
'Eventually we intend to offer additional features to subscribers. Exactly what those plums are remains to be decided: Access to the rejected submissions bin? A 'Gold Star' in your comments header? Karma? (I think that would be hilarious) We really don't know. We'll decide and implement what makes sense as we have time to do it.'
Translated: We have introduced this system as it appeared to be the easiest way to milk our cash cow, and will at a later stage introduce a proper subscription model if and when we can be bothered.
I'm sorry, but my respect for these guys plummeted substantially when I read that. They have a golden opportunity to create a viable business but instead insist on acting like a bunch of amateurs.
Let me make my position absolutely clear. There is nothing wrong with introducing a subscription service, but for god sake if you are going to do so, offer something of additional value. Slashdot's service is stick, stick, stick, and perhaps a carrot later, if you're lucky. You just can't behave like that and expect to be successful. This whole thing is just a mess; poorly conceived, unnecessarily complex, badly presented, and will almost certainly do them more damage than good.
My recommendation: Go back to the drawing board immediately.
The whole point of a website is to turn a profit - I am sure you do it for fun sometimes, but on a site as busy as Slashdot, there must be some astronomical costs.
Those adverts didnt seem to obtrusive IMHO. I dont have a problem with it.
"Hey! Unless this is a nude love-in, get the hell off my property!!"
the End Of All Life as we know it, the sky caving in, instant Armageddon, the Dogs of War set loose and the Gates of Hell thrown wide open - Slashdot is going pay-per-view!!!!!
Well, that's my first response - I'm sure if you attend the chat then Hemos and Taco will say it's not that bad.
insignificant sig
A little bit of karma whoring, but as a SlashNET server administrator I'd like to point out that we have servers in the U.S.A., Europe and Australia. So, use:
:)
- eu.slashnet.org
- us.slashnet.org
- au.slashnet.org
You may also check out our brand new fancy website at www.slashnet.org for more information
--
If code was hard to write, it should be hard to read
/server irc.slashdot.org
[error connecting... subscription not pade]
Damn!!!
On a more serious note i also saw the "test" of that ad this morning and was wondering what the hell it was at first(had a flashback thinking i was news.com for a minute there.. hehe lsd). its not that obtrusive at all.. and personally i don't really mind ads as long as they are not pop up kind...
I caught that 2 second blip where that 200x200 ad was up too. As long as that 200x200 banner stays way the heck below the article posted (as it did when I caught it here) and doesnt do that nasty C-NET (and likewise other news sites) wrap around, i could deal with this. Zophar's Domain did a similar ad placement deal on the side of their site and I have to say, I dont mind all that much.
HONESTLY people. For the websites we go to on a DAILY (or in my case hourly) basis like Slashdot, do you REALLY mind throwing them a bit, even a teansy bit of revenue by allowing them to throw some ads up? I certainly dont. As long as they keep it below the story but before the commentary, and the footprint of the ad doesnt hamper page load times very it isnt much of a bother. Just my 8 braincells
-- -=innocent ramblings from the mind of an insomniatic programmer=-
Ad just don't work. I have *never* bought anything from a banner on any website. More often than not I'm looking for information when I'm on the web, and impulse purchases are the last thing on my mind.
Also, there's no way I'll pay any amount to view a website. Call me a tight fisted git if you like, but there it is. There is always another news site to visit if this one becomes unusable. The only thing that really keeps me here is the comments. I find some very useful information in them on occasion.
So anyway, whats the long term solution? I'd be suprised if that many people pay for a subscription. 1000 pages? Geez, I reload at least 30 times a day. Wouldn't take me long to use up that limit.
How about putting a little FAQ up now, to fend of the most blatant misunderstandings and get the discussion off on a good start? That might to some extent avoid addressing irrelevant issues in the discussion and make it more focused since people come there a little prepared and already have the basics pat. I think there will still be enough left to discuss ...
---
"By the way if anyone here is in advertising or marketing... kill yourself." -- Bill Hicks
15:00 EST == 20:00 GMT hth.. :)
Blaming GW Bush for the Iraq war is like blaming Ronald McDonald for the poor quality of food.
Granted now I never ever click on a banner ad.. But I dunt click on my television screen either(well while sober) but occasionaly i'll see a banner ad and i will type in the url or go to the website if its sumthin i'm interested in or catches my fancy as i'm sure its the same for lots of people.. I wonder if one of the main reasons people don't actually clock on the banners(i know its my reason) is that i don't want them to keep that kinda information on me :) simple as that. but ads are still effective.
On another note, kuro5hin.org is moving to text ads (from no ads). It works under the principle that annoying your readership until they're so pissed that they don't come back anymore is not a good idea. Maybe slashdot could learn a lessons from this...
Why don't we opt in for ads? So far, every time I see someone post about blocking the ads, or eliminating pop-ups - some self-rightous Don ?Quixotes come riding out of the dust and flame those that dare complain about ads.
So why not make them opt in? With all these rabid followers they should be enough to pay the bills around here?
_ _ _ Go for the eyes Boo! GO FOR THE EYES!
Slashdot is a community based site.
Community participation equals a better site.
A better site equals larger reading base.
Take this three statements and apply them.
I won't mind paying 10-20 dollars a year to view slashdot without ads. Period. Anything extra you add to the subscription from there on in is bonus to me.
Now everybody else listen. A site operator that cared more about profits and such would have played his cards differently then Taco and gang have. They would have introduced the most obtrusive and annoying ads possible for a couple weeks claiming "The site needs it to survive." Then a few weeks or so after their introduction, they would have conviently come up with the idea of 'subscriptions'. They would say "Well, you hate the ads, right? Here's how you can get rid of them." In a buisness sense, that would have been the smart move.
But no, as can be seen in Taco's original post, Taco seems to care about fairness first. Letting a viewer base know beforehand, about the obtrusive ads that may plague them? Not a good buisness move. But it is an honest one.
Now what Taco and Co. need to know now is that we don't want pay-per-view Slashdot, we want $20 a year "pay for and forget about" Slashdot. We don't want to be reminded that we just spent $.02 last nite. We just want to know that we are helping.
You really need another option for the poll ... I subscribed but I won't re-up because I don't see the value.
... I don't see the value. I have now seen the ads, and well, I likely won't be back, either. If I have to put up with ads, I might as well go for "real" news sources rather than, well, here. I'm not getting a value for "subscribe for no ads".
The page view thing is good for occasional readers, but you really need a time one, too, if you are going to do this. Any plans?
However, I likely won't be re-upping
If I come back, it will be with an ad blocker.
Face it, people are stupid, and the internet is the place where they all meet.
4 words easily explain why a flat-rate plan will never work for slashdot:
username: cypherpunks
password: cypherpunks
What's to stop someone from signing up with one account and distributing the authentication information to all their friends? Complicated, expensive technical measures I suppose, but that chews away their profit.
I've been thinking about this over the past few days, and I can't think of any way other than per-page that slashdot subscriptions can work. It may very well be that per-page won't work either, in which case we all get a lesson in capitalism.
Ideology breeds Hypocrisy. Just how much is up to you.
hungdude345> What were you guys thinking when you $rtbl'ed those 400 people ? And another thi
'hungdude345' has left the chat room.
bigal30> Yea, what's up that ?
'bigal30' has left the chat room.
CmdrTaco>and furthermore, this new revolutionary pay-per-not-view scheme will increase profits 1000%. Any questions ?
Tired of being "punished" by the Slashdot $rtbl since 2002. I'm now over at http://soylentnews.org/ .
Forget the tiered approach. It's confusing and silly.
/. reader that comes here specifically for his articles. He is fat. Cut him away and gain instant efficiency.
$12 per year, $1 per month, for unlimited access. Cheap, simple and should be profitable.
Even if you keep only 100,000 readers, that's $1.2MN per year. If this scruffy site can't survive on $1.2MN in revenue per year, you have other problems. The easiest remedy to which would be the firing of Jon Katz. Seriously, there is not a single
Knunov
Why do users with IDs under 100,000 or over 700,000 usually have the most worthwhile comments?
I am frankly disgusted by the lack of professionalism shown by the people running this site - it's okay to be kooky when you're running a site as a spare-time activity, and not too bad when it's free to readers and paid for by advertising. I will not pay to support this site when the actual content (excluding Jon Katz, who simply writes unreadable pap) is all written by users, when the spelling and grammer remain at a childish level, when there is no open-ness in the site. The new ads are annoying enough that I now have the Junkbuster running on my machine at work (and have encouraged my colleagues who read Slashdot to use me as a proxy). I am a natural Slashdot reader, a Unix professional (and yes, I take pride in my work - do the editors here?), affluent and free-spending online, but I only come here because of the content which is supplied by the users.
I will not respond to the stick. I will not subscribe to get rid of ads - I have a technical solution to that problem, so why should I be forced into a financial solution? I'm an engineer - I solve things technically.
I will respond to the carrot. Don't say "subscribe or bad things will happen". Say "subscribe and good things will happen". Some possible examples:
Overall, the two main problems I have are that I refuse, on principle, to respond to the stick, but I'd welcome to carrot, and I'd like to see the staff taking things a little more seriously. Not high-and-mighty serious, but trying to do a professional job serious.
Paranoia isn't an infectious condition, it's a way of life
GMT=EST+5
Which would mean 6pm GMT. Work from there
I have a real problem with anyone using ad blockers, especially at community sites like Slashdot.
Slashdot agrees to give you content, if you view the ads. If you don't want to view the ads, don't look at the content. Using an ad blocker just screws Slashdot out of their cut.
There seems to be this view of "I shouldn't have to pay for anything, whine whine whine" (and before you say it: I have bought copies of Slackware, RedHat, Debian, FreeBSD, BeOS, several pieces of shareware...) Well, sorry everyone - things actually cost money. And even if they didn't, it's Slashdot's right to charge if they want to.
If you don't like it, fine, but don't go and screw them out of their cut. That *is* theft, whether you admit to it or not.
As for the subscriptions, I would subscribe, but not on a pay-per-view basis. Monthly, fine, yearly, fine, but not pay-per-view. I won't subscribe with that.
But I'll happily view the ads they send me, and keep up my end of the bargain. Remember, the world does not owe you everything for free.
...but it's being eaten...by some...Linux or something...
but the idea isn't bad.
.75.
example 1: I post once on a new acct, get a five (net points of four), and bingo, my score is four.
example 2: I post 40 times, have the +1 bonus, so after 10 "5" postings, and the rest unmoderated (net: 30), my score is
Which is more valuable? A weighted average with total points makes a little more sense, but only knows what that might be.
ceci n'est pas un sig.
Ask about this before they introduced subscriptions? (Ask Slashot story?) Maybe there would be less constigation about it now. Maybe they might have gotten some useful ideas. There's surely flaws in the current scheme since it requires the people who contribute the most to pay the most. I think they should have unlimited karma accrual (instead of a limit of 50), and that karma should be good for buying pageviews. That would probably be more equitable and probably wiser in the longrun.
I can't do irc, but if someone can be bothered, maybe they could ask about this.
Reliable, Great Value Hosting: $7.95/mo 2.4G/120G
When I pay for any real world publication, I feel very confident that a) The stories are accurate and not-repeats (unless there is new information) b) spelling and grammar is near perfect. Until this site decides to run a professional quality publication, the odds of me paying for it are exactly zero.
The saying goes: you get what you pay for. If I pay, I expect to get more. I expect to get professionalism.
Lawrence Lessig is my personal hero.
Now that's an idea - serve up porn instead of ads!
I've noticed a BIG trend in the post-boom IT industry where those free service providers who rose to the top of their field think that if they start charging, they'll STAY as good as they were. They don't seem to realize that in every single case, they reason they were so popular is that they were free. Take Yahoo! Personals for example. I'll admit it... I had a lot of fun there a few years ago. I met a lot of extremely strange and interesting people through their free service. I've had a very serious girlfriend for the past 3 years now, but I recently poked my head back in there for kicks, to maybe expand my social circle again, and meet some people my g/f and I could hang out with. I posted an ad, and was perplexed at the fact that I got no responses. In the "good old days," I'd get at least 1 a day. Granted, I was single then, and I imagine most people went to Yahoo! Personals to get laid, but still! Then I got hit by a survey (they wanted to know how people liked the new structure) and I discovered that you have to PAY to respond to the ads. Consequence? What used to be a fantastic place to meet psychos and weirdos (and I happen to like weirdos) became a no-man's-land of horny AOL-wannabes where no one connects (and Yahoo! can't be making much money off of it!).
So how does this apply to slashdot? Well, it's great now, because of the, what, 250,000 readers, I'd say a least 1% are contributors, either in stories or in comments. Of those perhaps 25,000, a goodly portion are intelligent, or at least fun to argue with. Also, those perhaps 25,000 community members come up with some very interesting stories to submit, giving us good topics to flame each other about. If Slashdot makes it inconvenient and/or expensive to participate, well, guess what -- participation goes down. Sure, they think slashdot provides such a great service and such great information and they think they can turn a profit off of that, but the proverbial "they" may forget how much of that "provided" value is actually provided by the community which uses slashdot. If the community shrank by 90% (which it probably would if, for example, they REQUIRED subscription), I seriously doubt that slashdot would still hold my interest. Yes, I realize that's not what they're suggesting, but if participation drops by say 33% because they spew ads at non-subscribers, it will have the same effect, to a somewhat lesser degree.
"It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong." --Voltaire
On reflection, they seem to have the right idea. What Slashdot is doing seems doubly alienating. First, you're selling the audience to advertisers with big annoying ads. Then, you're selling the audience the ability to escape the big annoying ads for a fee. Of course, if this works, you make money off both ends. But if it doesn't work, you anger both the audience and the advertisers, who get a feeling that they are being played-off against one another, and neither deriving any benefit from the transaction.
Look, bluntly, I wouldn't pay Slashdot to have ad-free pages. It's just not worth it. People really can give up Slashdot, if it becomes too annoying. I would pay, gladly, a similar amount to do something like Kuro5hin.org is doing - advertise to fellow community members in an affordable way (I would gloriously, with a big smile, pay that sort of money to run a Slashdot text ad about What Happened To The Censorware Project (censorware.org))
I've heard of these guys somewhere... Haven't I?
In all seriousness though, I have no problem with this, you have to get paid somehow, right?
Now, right off, I'm probably among those 3% of high-volume users; I paid the same day it was announced, I only disable ads on the frontpage, and I've used up 149 of my pageviews already. For me, this is looking like around $5 a month if I keep it up.
/. - I find myself surfing less and less to slashdot. No longer do I reload the page just to see if anything new is up; instead, I rely more and more on the rdf feed I have on Evolution. I've also started clicking straight to the stories, rather than go via the frontpage, thereby missing any other stuff happening in my rdf boxes on slashdot.
/. on the list.
/. back, so I'm going to burn through those pageviews I have, and then not pay for another set. If I can get the option to pay per month or something similar - and especially if they eventually implement some interesting perk for paying - then I'm in again. Until then, I just find this scheme cramps my surfing habits too much. Ridiculous, I know.
And that's the problem. As I know I'm using up my ad-free page views - even though I paid only to support
I have a sort of set click routine when I'm bored, where I go through a set number of sites (/., LinuxToday, New York Times, Dn, and so on), lookig for anything interesting to read (this is sort of the same behavior as zapping through the channels on a tv). I've stopped including
Now, I know it's only $5, and I didn't even really pay to remove the ads, but just for supporting a favourite site. It doesn't matter. Psychologically this has set up a resistance to wantonly going to slashdot unless I have a good reason to be there.
The problem is that I'm paying for a set number of pageviews. I estimate (as above) that for my normal surfing habits, it'd cost me about $5 a month to keep this up. I would, however, _much_ rather pay for a set time than for a number of impressions.
I want my
/Janne
Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
I think the word "subscription" is the wrong word to use for Slashdot's new pay-per-view system.
A "subscription" implies that you're receiving something you otherwise wouldn't have received. For example, if I have a subscription to Better Homes and Gardens, I'm getting the magazine at all. If I don't subscribe, I don't get a "free" copy of it in the mail, but with ads.
The same happens with a newspaper. I don't have the time to read the newspaper every morning, so I don't have a subscription to it. I wish that the Dayton Daily News would given me a "free" copy full of ads in case I wanted to read it, but that's not the case.
Calling the new Slashdot system a "subscription" implies that you have to pay for it if you want to read it, which isn't the case. If you don't mind the ads, and even think that some of the ads on Slashdot are worthwhile (like I do), then you're free to not pay. That's not the case with every other subscription-based service out there.
I think Slashdot should rephrase the system as the Slashdot "Tip Jar". If you want to pay $5 into the Tip Jar, Slashdot will "thank you" by giving you 1,000 pages without ads. If you don't want to leave $5 in the Tip Jar, that's fine too.
Calling the current subscription system a "Tip Jar" makes it sound more like what it is - a way to pay for the content on Slashdot if you desire. It's not a requirement to receive content at all.
Just my two cents.
I will respond to the carrot. Don't say "subscribe or bad things will happen". Say "subscribe and good things will happen".
That's what it looks like they're doing, at least from my point of view.
Don't subscribe: things stay as they are, pretty much, with some minor changes in ad location. Yes, minor. The ratio of ad-to-page is probably still pretty comparable. You get a lot of page for a single ad at slashdot.
Subscribe: you don't have to worry about a technical solution to ads.
It's not a bad proposition, I think. Nothing we had before is taken away. All previous services are still available for free. We have the option to buy ad-free pages, or use a technical solution to block ads, or view the ads.
All that happened is that the site added another choice. What's the big deal?
Tweet, tweet.
One change which could be made (and would it be noticed? It could be in place now, for all I know) would be to have paying subscribers get a "live" feed (aka as soon as it's posted, subscribers can read and reply). Logged-in users get a 5 minute delay. AC's get a 15 minute delay. This eliminates some of the first post conditions (maybe a prohibition of anonymous posting in the first 5 minutes or until, say 10 logged comments have been posted is a good idea...), and means that if the trolls want to post early, they'll probably have to pay.
I disagree. One thing which I think is very important is that paying users should not get any preference in that kind of thing - same reason I don't like the "free karma/moderation/etc. for paying users" suggestions. I'm happy to suggest extra access methods for subscribers, but it's important not to swing the dynamics of the site towards paying users.
Most of the things I suggested would, hopefully, be things which would improve the site as a whole, not just for paying users. The only two subscriber-only things I suggested were NNTP access and early web-based access, and in both cases, I effectively meant read-only access. I'd happily have the "reply" link appear at the bottom of a comment served over NNTP - my newsreader is intelligent enough to launch a web browser for me if I ask it to, and I'd like early access on the web to avoid the slashdot effect, not so I could post more quickly.
Paranoia isn't an infectious condition, it's a way of life
I haven't thought all the details through yet, but authenticated NNTP is pretty standard nowadays, and it would have to be authenticated anyway to make sure only subscribers used it. Once I've authenticated to the NNTP server, I expect my standard settings to be applied to the comments I read - I'm quite happy with my normal settings most of the time. It may be possible to implement some of the more advanced features by extending NNTP (in an open way, so it can be implemented by anyway, and in a way which doesn't break non-extended readers), or by overloading existing NNTP functionality.
Hey, I'm not going to write this stuff. I don't speak Perl - if it was Python, I might give it a go - but I am willing to pay for the functionality as part of a bundle :-)
Paranoia isn't an infectious condition, it's a way of life
I cant get to IRC from here so I'll ask here,
I know you guys are looking for other ways of paying the subscription fee besides paypal,
but are there any plans to sell them on thinkgeek ? Technicly that would be pretty easy to do, or am i missing samething here (buisnes/legal) ?
42
Any plans to adjust moderation?
Can only paying members moderate?
Do I get paid to moderate?
I'm a 2000 man.
I'm going to openly admit my willful ignorance of the subscription issue. I probably won't pay for the site, if there's ads, I'll just block them, and if I can't do that, I'll move elsewhere. The value-add to my day right now isn't that high - slashdot is an interesting way to fill boring spaces in work. I might pay for higher quality content, pictures of Jon Katz being forced to read war and peace 5000 times, etc - that would require real editors, producing real content, maybe some technial articles.
There's too many replacements now.. I can just read the EE times all day, too. And block their ads. Ha.
What I see happening here is Slashdot is going to fill up the compuserve model from the old days. For us old geezers (ha, I'm only 25 and feel old) who remember Quantum Link, those services were basically just BBS systems on crack. They had lots of files, lots of people, lots of topics - but they weren't personal. What happened was that small BBSes with people in the local community sprung up like mushrooms after a spring rain. I can see the same thing happening if slashdot goes to a commercial model - there will be an untapped demand, and lots of tools to fill it.
Folks, anyone can run a weblog site now.. I just finished configuring a scoop site (nicer than slash IMHO) for work. It's no big deal to kick a old pentium under a desk and start up a little local community.. this is happening all over as we speak. Slashdot is unique in the sheer volume of people it brings to the table.. anything which impacts the number of contributing users decreases it's only competitive advantage other than brand recognition.
Think long and hard about the subscriptions, guys. There's lots of content that I would pay here, but let me tell you, you're going to need a better carrot than "pay me or look at crappy ads". Make the pitch to the value-added service for the subscription and I might bite though.. for tips, you could start at perhaps letting paying users vote on stories in the submission queue, getting some real stories from real writers in there, and paying SOMEONE to check the front page for errors and duped submissions..
..don't panic
I agree with Wire Tap. (See the parent post.)
Slashdot Editors: You are obviously smart people, but that doesn't automatically mean you know everything. Advertising is a VERY complicated business of creating a connnection between a company and prospective customers. You are showing, very clearly, that you know NOTHING about good advertising. That is entirely okay; no one can know everything about everything.
But, this can have VERY unpleasant consequences for Slashdot authors and the entire Slashdot community. Get help! If you want free help, contact me.
First, I saw the woman whose agency has the IBM advertising account interviewed on the Charlie Rose show. She knows and cares NOTHING about technical products. She is making fools of IBM executives with those stupid ads of dorky-looking guys in space suits.
Slashdot editors, you can let yourselves off the hook. If IBM executives are clueless about technical advertising, you don't need to worry that you don't understand it either. (However, remember that IBM top management is composed of people with no technical background, unlike Slashdot editors. At least you have half the knowledge that is required. Remember that IBM ran OS/2 into the ground with stupid marketing, calling it "Warp", a term for something that is useless because it is bent.)
It may be that executives of your parent company, having failed at their own endeavors, have a subtle desire to destroy Slashdot. Obviously they are clueless about making Slashdot pay a reasonable return. (For example, they try to sell us high-caffeine candy. Caffeine is a chemical made by tropical plants to discourage insects. It interferes with the normal functioning of their nervous systems, as it does human nervous systems. Yes, there are people who buy such things, but those people are misguided. Using strong chemicals to force your body to submit is not a good strategy. Trying to sell things that are bad for the customer is not a good strategy either.
There is a HUGE need for advertising of technical products. There is money in this field! For example, check out the hardware firewalls available, and get advertising from the ones that are good. Plenty of us work in situations where such products are needed. Good advertising, if properly done, is a big help to the reader, not an annoyance.
Maybe now is the time to negotiate the sale of Slashdot to some other company that has a better understanding of the issues. Slashdot is an extremely valuable resource! Yes it has shortcomings (such as editors who don't spell check), but it is extemely valuable!
Board of Directors: I hereby apply to be CEO of Slashdot's parent company. OSDN says it is:
"#2 for delivering people who look for General / Politcal News* "
I kid you not! That's what it says! See the Advertising page.
My first qualification is that I know how to spell the word political.
Slashdot editors: I recommend "Confessions of an Adverising Man" by David Ogilvy. It's an old book, but good. It's a difficult field. Learn it.
Bush's education improvements were
The more the content gets lost in the noise, the more the visitors lose intrest. If this keeps up, it may be time to move on. People are here for the rich content. Over dilute it and the attraction rapidly fades. That's why I do not visit MP3.com. There is no real content. Everyting seems to be a teaser advertisement. TV has become a wasteland of product placement and mega blocks of ads and paid infomercials, I no longer watch it. I'd hate to see Slashdot face the same fate of smaller viewership, thus they must sell more ad space to make up for the lost revenue of fewer impressions, spiral of death. Without viewers the ad space is worthless.
The truth shall set you free!
Woah. A /. user on Windows? Nah... I must not have had enough coffee yet.
:-)
I'm not a prophet or a stone-age man,
I'm just a mortal with potential of a super man.
Hey kiddies, how about a bedtime story?
... Slashdot was a pioneer in the digital "community" game. Information was shared, knowledge was spread, questions were answered, friendships were made, and everything was bright and sunny.
... it just got rid of the ads. And, to drive the point home, the ads started to switch from unobtrusive banners to pop-ups and embedded graphics. "Pay us," cried the Slashdot gnomes, "or we will bother you with intrusive dreck!"
... instead of pity and derision.
Once upon a time there was a website called Slashdot. In fact, it was MORE than a website
Now, everyone knew that bandwidth wasn't free. So Slashdot, like many sites, had banner ads at the top of the screen. Now most users didn't mind the ads at all. They were informative, often interesting, and promoted products that the geeks and wireheads couldn't find anywhere else. Even if they didn't actually click through on an ad, most of the readers saw the banners more as content than advertising.
But, children, there was a fundamental flaw. Unlike virtually every other form of media, web advertising at the time only paid if your readers acted on the ad! So - when Slashdot's corporate masters decided that there weren't enough people acting on the ads, Slashdot moved to a subscription service.
Now, your subscription didn't get you more value, or new content, or even a chance to sit on an editorial board and maybe get rid of that untalented and unreadable hack Katz
Can you guess what happened, kiddies? That's right! All the users, who USED to see the old ads, started blocking the new ads because they annoyed them. And nobody paid for the subscriptions, because you didn't really get anything for your money, and the more you contributed to the community, the faster your subscrition got used up!
Eventually, with the all the new ads blocked, and subscriptions going wanting, Slashdot dried up and blew away.
The moral of the story? If there is a problem with the way the web revenue game works, then FIX the game, don't try and make your users play it. The idea of getting paid ONLY if an ad is acted upon is inane. TV doesn't work that way, radio doesn't work that way, print media doesn't work that way. Be the ones that break the barrier and bring web advertising in line with the rest of the media world. Or go down in flames trying. At least then you would be remembered with respect
-- There are two kinds of motorcycles. 1: German. 2: Crap.
For foo's sake, hire a real editor, not a Perl hacker who ended up running a web site with 250000 readers, and have everything which goes on the front page run by them first. We all know how readable most Perl is - we need someone who's good at writing English!
I dunno. I thought that part of the charm of the place was the inanity. Rob "CmdrTaco" Malda, Jeff "Hemos" Bates, John "CowboyNeal" Pater, Nate "Mixmaster" Oostendo[rp] (yes, some people CAN spell your name) etc. are just "regular guys". Sure, they've got quite an audience, but that doesn't mean the place has to be ultra-serious. Sort of like some anime I've seen. It's just *goofy* and preposterous; and that's what's so great about it!
But, that's not to say that it's always just a bunch of dorks trying to be the first to post to a new story. There are acutal story readers and people who think seriously about whatever are the stories of the day. Just look at the Hall of Fame (and raise your threshhold!).
Sometimes, it's fun just to do something relaxing. Reading Slashdot is so. People who are smart and (mostly) think similarly read and post here. It's fun and relaxing (for me, at least) to read that in which they are interested and what they have to say about it. It seems to me that (unless they got a REALLY good one) a serious editor would remove the fun and put correct spelling and grammar in its place.
So, I think the ads do suck. However, that still will not urge me to subscribe[1]. I can easily scroll by them. The one thing I would reiterate (someone else said it earlier) is that they are poorly placed; like you just plopped them in there. However, they don't really break up the page too much, which is nice.
Hopefully the editors will be able to answer the questions of most people pretty satisfactorily this afternoon.
[1] Completely off-topic: Things are going to get pretty nutty if I have to pay to connect, pay to get any information, pay, pay, pay. It's like the only people making any money are the ones handling the equipment (important as it may be) that transmits intagible bits. Sort of like everyone having to pay the power company or phone company. Funny that some of the most expensive things to regular people are intangible...
Withdrawal before climax is very ineffective and those who try this are usually called "parents."
"This site is not a real community...as a single-minded (close to) autocracy, where the topics of discussion are chosen by a small, closed group, and staying on-topic and within the acceptable norms are enforced by moderators."
Sounds like a community to me. Wherever have you heard of a community that does not try to impose its ideals on its members? Some group of people will always be favored in a community because that is how the community comes to be in the first place. If I don't like what is going on, I move on to somewhere of my liking. If on the other hand I do and I exert pressure on others to think like I do to make myself more comfortable (hence the feeling of being part of the community). Over time (in a sort of evolutionary way) the community agrees more and more on the issues and that's how it solidifies (and stagnates). The only way you can prevent this from happening is via an autocracy, though an open-minded one.
You're right. I made other mistakes, too. The answer is always to have an editor, no matter how good you are at editing your own material. I interrupted writing a letter to a woman friend to write the Slashdot post, so I was too much in a hurry.
Bush's education improvements were
That was quick. Now "political" is spelled correctly. They can't hide that they don't know what they are doing, however.
Bush's education improvements were
It is not. It is pay-per-view. It is disingenuous to say you are offering a subscription when that is not an option. I would happily subscribe at a reasonable fee (say $20-$30 per year), but I am strongly against pay-per-view.
Fair enough, I should have caught that.
But - seriously - I don't expect any renumeration for my posts on Slashdot, therefore I hold myself up to an amateur standard. The 'editors' are paid for their work, and are asking the audience to subscribe (or tip, or however they want to put it), which suggests to me that they should be held up to a professional standard.
Paranoia isn't an infectious condition, it's a way of life
It sounds like you didn't read what he said at all. Or at least you didn't read it with an open mind. Because you certainly didn't grasp what he was saying. I deduce this because you said:
/. subscription service was a missed opportunity to add something truly worth paying for.
/. staff... It was about how you can make a subscription service successful. You do it by making things people want, not by making things they want to get rid of. Because they may not owe us, but we sure as hell don't owe them.
/. would be mentioned on every tech site in existance? Not a chance. Because without the comments -- the community -- /. would just be a standard news portal like Ars, the Reg, or any others, except very, very shitty.
/.), but they add good commentary to their news-linkage. What would /. have, if it wasn't for us? I'll give you a hint: We already know, and it was called "Chips and Dips". Do you see VA paying for that?
/. will be dead in a week. Sure, sure, Taco has to maintain the code and stuff, all of which I don't have to do... That's why he gets paid for his contributions to /., and I don't. That doesn't make me a leech. It makes me a volunteer.
/. how I always have.
These people don't owe us anything;
No shit. He wasn't saying they -owe- us, he was saying charging a subscription fee which doesn't offer you anything is a stupid business model. The
The post wasn't about how the subscription service or the ads are heinous acts of evil by an ungrateful
we aren't a "community," we a bunch of freaking bandwidth leeches who sit here and suck down knowledge and commentary all day.
Speak for yourself, Geek In Training. You may be a leech, but I'm not. I'm one of the apparently less than 3000 (acording to Taco) people who contribute to this site. Depending on who you ask what I post may be worth reading or not, but I'm not a crapflooder and I'm not a troll, and I'm not even a karma whore. I and the rest of those 3000 (minus the crapflooders etc) are the ones who make slashdot what it is.
Do you think that if it wasn't for what we're writting here,
No, I mean really. Would you tolerate a news portal with as many factual errors, spelling and grammar errors, broken links, and repeats if that was all it was? The Reg has a lot of typos (by the standards of journalism, not
So we damn well better be a "community", because if we aren't this site isn't shit. If this "community" gets up and leaves,
Now, I'm perfectly happy being a volunteer. It's not like I just figured out that I am one; if I had a problem with it, I would have left a long time ago. But then you- You say you're willing to let yourself be annoyed into paying money for your volunteer work. You're not going to pay because you're getting something you want, but because you're being poked with a pointy stick until you give them $5 so they'll stop for a while. And the clear message you're giving is "if I don't cough up the dough, then you should just increase the size and pointiness of the stick." Well, you, being just a leech, might think that's okay. Maybe you feel guilty for leeching. Maybe you're just the kind of spineless mark salesmen love who'll buy the overpriced TV just to get the salesman off your back. But I, being a volunteer, have a different view: Fuck that.
/. is a great site. But it's great because of the community, as disparate and cantankerous as we are. Taco and co. -- they provide the means, the capability. We use those means to provide the content. That's what makes this site what it is. And you want to talk about owe?
Forget about oweing. I don't owe Taco shit. Frankly, he doesn't owe me anything either. So given this neutral agreement, why the fuck would I pay this man just to stop annoying me? That's right, I wouldn't. I'll block the annoyance with mozilla, maintain the neutral relationship, and keep using
The enemies of Democracy are
I know there are many ways one can block the ads, personally I'll never do that, slashdot has been nice, and to me that's just not right.
I don't think I'll pay the subscription as it is, I'll live with it instead. Since most of the time I spent on slashdot is reading the forum, I don't see too much obstructions from the ads.
However, if the subscription service gives me a cache of slashdotted sites, suddenly it looks much useful to me.
geek page at KY speaks
I'm just curious how these ads are going to do any good since 50-60% of them point to the company-formerly-known-as-VA-Linux's own sites? How will larger ads help this?
This is an obvious act of desperation. Everyone knows that internet ads no longer pay any money. This is not 1998 anymore. Mostly, the only people who ever clicked on them were the newbies to the internet... and it didn't take long for them to learn their lesson. The rest of the people have either learned to ignore them or they use a proxy server like Junkbuster or Filterproxy .
This is so predictable. They say that history repeats itself, but this is too much for even me to deal with. Most websites that do this are dead within a year. Everybody knows that internet advertisers no longer pay any money. How much money do they expect to make from 0.2 cents a click when Slashdot caters mostly to internet veterans who have either learned to ignore adds or use a proxy server religiously?
Slashdot has become "a victim of its own success." Can you imagine how much money it must cost to pay for their bandwidth alone? If you've done a lot of browsing over the last 5 years and seen this happen to many of your favorite websites you know that intrusive adds are the first step. Next comes restricted usage for non-subscribers. Next comes access denied to non-subscribers. Next comes the obituary and farewells.
Bye bye Slashdot. We knew ye well. :-\
Someone corrected the misspelling of the word "political" on the OSDN advertising page very quickly.
This suggests a game. I've saved the original HTML of the: OSDN advertising page, so I have a record.
The game is this: I will point out the errors, one at a time, and they will correct them, one at a time, demonstrating that they can't see their errors, and shouldn't be in the advertising business. I'll mention the small errors first.
So, here is the next error. The page says
"We are unique"
It is normal to put a period after every full sentence. The period is missing.
I am very much interested that OSDN be a financial success. What is needed now, to get the job done, is a quick sober awakening about the difficulties and complications of technical advertising.
Technical people know very easily when someone doesn't understand their field. It is not possible to write good technical ad copy unless you have a good technical understanding. Most advertising people do not bother to educate themselves. The poor quality of technical advertising brings poor results. That's why technical advertising pays as little as it does, and why it has so many "inexplicable" failures.
Bush's education improvements were
Of course, given how tight lipped they've been so far, we'll see if they say anything about it.
When I was able to do my own spam-armoring, you got a chance to email me. Now you can only hope I see your reply.
Lynx doesn't like your ads. It spews out about 3 lines of text, presumably the picture's URL, but nothing relevant at all. It doesn't make sense. Where'd the text-labels go? Oh, and when you implement them again, please make sure they're easily differentiated from the articles.
Ads don't bother me too much. They bother some people alot. Some of the most vocal users here are almost militant in there views on spam and ads. And now /. is doing the very thing that most people come here to deride. /. is becoming the very thing that it's own userbase depises.
/. isn't the place to build brand recognition within the IT/OSS community across all continents, I don't know what is.
/.'s front page? Being in a non-US country I get the pleasure of paying duty and tariffs despite our wonderful NAFTA agreement. I dont want to pay $50-60 CDN for a bloody t-shirt from thinkgeek. But if I ever want to splurge, I know where to go. Brand recognition.
/. is nice to kill time with, interesting and funny at times. But linking to other site's stories submitted by your own users, then editorially embellishing the headline to get the anti-microsofties frothing at the mouth is not worth a subscription.
If I pay, I never want to see a goatse link again. I dont want to be modded down, in fact a subscription should negate karma altogether. Mod me up, let the thread see the results, but I never wanna have to deal with karma again. Stupid system, I feel like Pavlov's dog.
I want real stories, real editors, real grammar, and real spell-checking. Stories should be spell-checked, and so too should comments. There is nothing worse than having to read thrug sumonz awfull post to figguere out wy thye were modded intrsting.
Threatening to berate me with ads wont make me pay. If TV, print, and radio can get by without click-through, so can the web. A multi-million (maybe billion nowadays?) dollar industry is built up around creating brand recognition. If
You can be sure that when I can scrape enough together every month to afford the $US to buy a rack at rackpace, I will. And guess where the name recognition for rackspace came from? Guess what site I "clicked-through" to investigate rackspace. SLASHDOT.
I put up with (read: ignore) commercials in all media, not just the web. I don't see the advert industry taking a nodedive anytime soon. Radio station *give* money away fer craps sake! I don't drop the mag/newspaper/run out the door everytime an ad for Smirnoff invades one of my five senses, so why should I buy a t-shirt that says "WTF" everytime I decide to see what's on
Do whatever you feel guys, I dont need an ad blocker, my mind does that just fine. I promise not to block the ads, but I won't promise to buy crap I can't afford or don't need. Load it up with banners and javascript to make me click (ala porno) before reading a story. Your users will hate it. And they will go elsewhere. Napster is proof of that.
BTW, did you guys even *try* a tip-jar? ( I realise that maybe this isn't your decision, maybe it's coming from on high, and they want revenue, not tips.) But still...
Here here.
Let's not forget that all the conspiracy bullshit also drives away potential paying customers. You should make some kind of log that records every super-power act that is made.
While I'm bitching, how 'bout skins, or a decent looking layout?
Slashdot 's editors are dickheads
This comment on the parent thread says it all:
... Having to chose either Space Mountain or The Materhorn (but not enough tickets for both). Even if you had ample tickets -- you were still subject to a "nervous tick" that made you think the the tickets were going to run out.
It is widely accepted that people prefer not to be 'nickel and dimed.' Internet Service Providers charge flat fees, 99% of online subscription services are flat fee based, as are the majority of cable subscription services. Why? Because forcing people to monitor their consumption detracts from the overall user experience.
I remember going to Disneyland when you had to buy individual ride tickets instead of "all day passes"....It really made for a "nervous energy" that really took away from the experience
(+1 Funny) only if I laugh out loud.
Could we please do this at some later time, such as 8:00 EST so the majority of the United States could get out of work? I, for one, do not do anthing on IRC while working, and I hope that most of the readers out there do work when they're supposed to, too.
By the way, I don't troll slashdot under company time; this is my lunch break.
There are other /. things spread around on Thinkgeek, since a few of the links from the page above are 404-ed. Personally, I'd buy more stuff from them, but their shipping charges and times are really bad for the UK, so I don't...
Paranoia isn't an infectious condition, it's a way of life
Over the past several months there've been numerous Slashdot discussions about ads, with the uniform conclusion that the more intrusive the ad, the more it sucks, and by extension the more the site using it sucks. And of course, such ads can be readily defeated by using ad blockers or by simply not loading images or javascript.
:(
The ONLY type of ad that has uniformly received POSITIVE comments from Slashdot users is the Google-style text ad.
Not only that, but text ads cannot be blocked, and cost almost nothing in bandwidth. A side effect being they can therefore be offered to advertisers relatively cheaply, which means even one-man shows can afford to buy ads. How many Slashdot users would do so, to hawk their personal products and services (or even their opinions) directly to their best market? Probably quite a few. A million ad sales at a penny apiece is a lot more money than 100 ad sales at $10 apiece, especially when 90 of those 100 get blocked.
You'd think someone upstairs would have noticed all this? Apparently not.
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
To be honest, I'd like to know what the 'editors' do all day - there are 5-10 story posts a day (plus maybe another 5 in sections with volunteer editors), and I really can't work out how that's a full-time job.
Are you kidding? Clearly the editors MUST be unbelievably busy. How do I know? They haven't put in the FIVE MINUTE F'ING FIX for the page widening posts into the lame filter.
To be honest, that pisses me off enough for me to not want to give them money. If they want me to give them money, step 1 is to make damn sure the site runs smoothly.
Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
Why does Slashdot still use MP3 for the "radio" thing, and still use GIFs on the website? I'm sure some readers have their own answers (e.g. "I don't care about having to license patents" or "I still use obsolete software that can't read PNGs and Oggs") but it would be nice to hear Taco's explanation.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
I enjoy slashdot precisely because the stories and comments come from users. Here, at least, comments come truely from the people and are moderated by the people. Not by some all powerful controlling interest.
I do agree, however, that the choice of topics is too-much controlled by a powerful few, maybe by letting everyone at the karma cap vote on which topics get to the home page. I wouldn't want joe anonymous to vote though... Also, super-moderators should be removed, or at least have their moderations show as being from a super-moderator.
Travis
I've written software for many industries (travel, automotive, data warehousing, internet retail, banking, small business, etc.) and the wealthiest companies are the ones with the most Byzantine rules. Taco should be raking in the money soon.
If tits were wings it'd be flying around.
What newsreader are you using? I've got much more power in my killfile than in my preferences on slashdot.
Kill all stories from jamie and michael unless they are about goatse.cx and/or have a comment from Bill Gates.
No problem.
Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
Irony: The same people who decry the power that Disney/M$/foo have to elected officials whose votes were bought have the brilliant idea to grant more power and higher visibility to those on /. who are willing to pay.
Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
Anyway, I thought the whole point was "what I'm willing to pay for". If NNTP access is a premium only service, then so be it.
Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
Speak for yourself, Geek In Training. You may be a leech, but I'm not. I'm one of the apparently less than 3000 (acording to Taco) people who contribute to this site.
Well, until 5 minutes ago, my karma was 50. I've posted almost 200 comments, so I think I'm a contributor as much as anyone.
I wasn't trying to overgeneralize, but I can see how it cam eout that way. But there are a LOT of those mentioned "3000" who come off like elitist, entitlement-complex idiots. "This is our community!! Why should a few editors have so much power, and answer to no one!"
If you don't like the way the lifeguards enforce the rules, play in someone else's pool.
(Now more than ever, I believe (-1) Flamebait == I think you're wrong, but I'm too lazy or stupid to actually post and tell you why. I'll just mod you down instead.)
SlashSigTheorem: Humorous, Political, Critical, Constructive- If you have a
Slashdot is NOT adding popups. They are just adding normal ads like the skyscraper and the big square display ad . Normal ads you see everywhere else, and that already run on Newsforge and other OSDN sites.
These ads run from $90 per thousand (megabanner , one month) and $24 per thousand (below the fold , 1 year). Of course these are list prices, minus potentially deep discounts.
But what of subscriptions?
The slashdot subscription service can be viewed another way: you're buying ad banners for $5 per thousand! (Actually, it's more like $5 per 2000 or 3000, since most pages have several ads.) You're just buying blank space, or absence of ad banners, not actual banners.
Now this is a deep discount by any measure. Is it above the marginal cost of serving the pages? Yes. But is it also lower margin than serving ads? ABSOLUTELY. So the economics are interesting: now, in a period of crappy ad sales, $5 per thousand is a hell of a lot better than $0 (which they get for the Sourceforge ads); but if ad sales pick up, the opportunity cost of giving members such a cheap way to avoid ads could be substantial.
So I actually think slashdot is doing us a favor by setting up the subscription system. And if they tell us fuck you in the process, who cares? It's still a better deal than the alternative.
----
Followup comment: Look at the economics! Slashdot's subscription system may not be the best user interface (I certainly think all you can eat is better, even if it's not the best financial deal for the buyer, because you can set it and forget it) but it is the fairest I have ever seen. Don't like an ad? Pay not to see it, at a discounted price. I don't see how much fairer it could be.
And it's a smart move for the Slashboys because they need the revenue from bigger ads, and if even a few subscribe, it's another revenue stream, which is better than X10 and Casino-On-Net.
Of course people can run junkbuster. And people can take slashdot .rdf's and make alternate sites. Let 'em! They cut down on bandwidth utilization anyway.
The point of this is to allow big ads on the front page, like skyscrapers and square displays. That's what ad buyers want (newspapers and magazines have had display ads of even larger proportions for over a century). And remember what CT said: 82% of readers don't comment - many don't even click through to the stories! So front page ads reach these users.
Without subscriptions, the hue and cry would have been even louder. So by doing it this way, they gave people an alternative; sent pageviews through the roof on a HOF story; and will get some revenue out of it. Makes sense to me.
----
Following up based on this discussion: I do think all-you-can-eat would be better, and I suspect that /. would make more money from me (a heavy user with over 1600 posts, not including the occasional fuck-you posted as AC) from all-you-can-eat than from per-pageview. But if they decide it's not worth it to go that route, I'm okay with it too.
The big problem now is that the ads look weird because the layout hasn't been fixed yet to accommodate them. This too shall pass. Frankly I rather like the ads (notably the IBM ones) - bring 'em on! (I will subscribe however, when I get around to it.)
sulli
RTFJ.
I just recently got to 25 karma, and I noticed some oddities along the way. Sometimes I would get a score of "2" for my post (on my User Info page), but clicking on the link to the post would show it has a score of "4" or "5"!
Why is karma calculated differently from how it's displayed? I've checked the FAQ but couldn't find an answer for this.
Also, I hope they take some of the higher-rated questions from this article so they can answer them, interview-style, for those of us who will not have access to IRC at that time.
I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
First of all, it would have been nice if you did this at a time when most of your viewers are at work. Nobody like to work on weekends, but this is important enough to set up on weekends. BTW most suscribers will be people who are working.
;)
You need Value add for subscriptions work.
1)suscribers get access to a mirror of the links in the story.
2)The ability to not see posts be non-suscribers, regardless of there rating.
3)Email me when a certian story is posted. I.E. if a NASA story is posted, shoot me an email.
4)put suscribers on there own machine when they connect.
5)Invite suscribers to the wedding
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Thank you, Monkeyman334. I had forgotten about Google caches.
Advertising lessons 3 and 4 (Otherwise known as "How not to go broke running Slashdot."):
At the bottom of the OSDN advertising page, it says,
"Why not ask our competitors, they'll tell you we beat them hands down. "
Good advertising is the combination of being very creative about the big things, and getting hundreds of small details right, also. It is best not to use colloquial expressions in advertising, because they presume that everyone knows the meaning. There are many people who read Slashdot for whom English is not their native language. They cannot be expected to know the meaning of "hands down".
Also, this same phrase demonstrates an even bigger defect. Advertising people should read the advertising of their competition thoroughly. If OSDN people had done this, they would have realized that "hands down" is a very much over-used phrase in computer advertising and writing. If you don't believe this, do a google search: hands down. When you use such phrases, you aren't giving the reader fresh thinking.
I care very much about Slashdot, and don't want to see the site be self-destructive. I'm trying to give you some help.
Bush's education improvements were
Where do we go to ask questions about /.? Also - why don't I see "Have you metamoderated" today anymore?
The ultimate network admin tool needs HELP!
Well, until 5 minutes ago, my karma was 50. I've posted almost 200 comments, so I think I'm a contributor as much as anyone.
/. what it is. Remember all that fluff Katz spewed about how great /. was when he first signed on? Well, he wouldn't have been able to say a word of it if we weren't here. Even Katz would have a hard time claiming a geeky news portal/blog was going to change the world.
/., I have zero incentive to pay.
Then you don't think of yourself as a leech. You have to recognize that you, in a small way, also make
I wasn't trying to overgeneralize, but I can see how it cam eout that way. But there are a LOT of those mentioned "3000" who come off like elitist, entitlement-complex idiots. "This is our community!! Why should a few editors have so much power, and answer to no one!"
Which is just a pretty pompous way of saying the truth: Without us special 3000 (heh), this site would be nothing. It would never have been anything in the first place.
If you don't like the way the lifeguards enforce the rules, play in someone else's pool.
You sound as dismissive as Taco. I mean, it's true, but it's still dismissive. I don't want to leave, but if the lifeguard is going to be inflexible like that, it certainly doesn't engender a desire to stay.
Though really, in this case the problem you're being dismissive about is one I can live with. I mean, when faced with the options of annoying ads, paying money, or blocking the ads with 2 clicks in mozilla, it really isn't a hard decision. Which was the original author's point -- since all I'd be paying for is the right to have the site be like it was last week, I don't have much incentive to pay. In fact, since I can just block the ads, and since I have no sense of debt to
The enemies of Democracy are
Hmmm, looks a lot like a verbatim copy of someone's post here on Slashdot:
http://www.dotcomscoop.com/article.php?sid=263
Now I'm pissed. Why *shouldn't* the people who load this site down the most pay their share? Why *SHOULD* the average viewer pay the SAME AMOUNT as someone who loads 50 times as many pages, who loads the servers 50 times as much and costs 50 times as much bandwidth???
No-one would EVER suggest that gasoline stations have a "yearly fee" for everyone and anyone. Delivering the product does have a direct per-unit cost.
Furthermore, I see tons of people who figure that they're "earning something" by posting. What is this, a job for you? You mean you're not posting because you enjoy posting? Because you enjoy talking with your fellow readers? Because you enjoy the pride of having a post positively moderated? The SERVICE allowing you to discuss, post, moderate, filter the comments, and be the center of attention once in a while when you say something others think is worthwhile - this isn't it worth anything to you?
(As it turns out and as Rob's statistics show, MOST of your posts aren't read by the majority of the quarter million users! Maybe your posts in general aren't worth diddly. Maybe it's simply not economical, bandwidth vs content, to )
If you think the price is too high for what you get out of it, then start a competing service where the price is lower (and see how long you last). Put your actions where your mouth is.
If you think that you're "contribution" is worth so much, start a competing service where things are run the way you think they should be.
If you've got some feedback, an opinion, fine, I'm not dissing you. If you think x-cents per 100 KB/page-of-text is too high, fine. You're allowed an opinion, and a choice as a consumer.
But if you're whining and screaming your lungs out like child because you figure you've been so badly done by.... tough.
BTW: If you hadn't noticed, the space where they're putting the ads, that was all empty white space to begin with!!! NOTHING MUCH HAS CHANGED!
And I have to wonder, if Slashdot *had* used any of your hair-brained schemes, how many of you would *still* be screaming your lungs out about the "horrible failings and unfairness" of whatever they chose. (Some people are just like that.)
Someone asked in the IRC chat, "why don't you charge for a @slashdot.org email address". A variant (also suggested) might help -- Say if you have an account, cygnusx, you could get cygnusx at users dot slashdot dot org for $x per quarter/year/whatever.
I know CmdrTaco didn't like that since he "is attached to his email address", but hey -- if it brings in the dough, why look at a paying horse in the mouth?
Thought number 5 about OSDN advertising: Be believable.
The OSDN advertising page, says,
"Average annual purchasing amount for technical products and services in which the OSDN visitor is or will be involved $2.1 million***"
OSDN seems to be saying here that the average of the money spent by each person who views Slashdot pages is $2,100,000. Does that include the trolls? Does that include the ASCII art people? Does that include poor college and high school students? If 9 out of 10 of Slashdot readers bought almost nothing, that means that people like me supposedly bought $21 million worth of technical products and services last year. I didn't.
Bush's education improvements were
slrn
The kill files allow all sorts of regexp matching. I'm sure you can do much more with it than I can (which is mostly killing based on specific user name, and upmodding certain topics)
Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
Sat in for some of the irc, and basically, there ain't no way in hell they are going to delay things for non-subscribers.
Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
Up to a point, true - but how many university machines have routable IP addresses? Home machines hanging off cable modems? xDSL? (Mine is routable) Machines at work (I was at my company over a year before we even had a firewall)? Even most ISPs (at least here in the UK) give each dial-up machine a real, routable IP address.
HTTP is indeed stateless - but that doesn't mean that a process checking page impressions (== perl script calls) for originating IP address can't work. Store IP address and account ID in another table in the db along with a timestamp, and check it each time a page is requested - job done. What does the statelessness of HTTP have to do with that?
Cheers,
Tim
It's official. Most of you are morons.
Having the ability for people to associate my words with my name, and have that association carry between posts? Customization of slashboxes, threshold (set at -1), and other options that make /. a nice place to be?
I had a user name long before there was karma, so your whore-detector is obviously mis-designed from the first.
The enemies of Democracy are
Know what? I put that ad-removing code into my user space... read the IRC log and removed it. Specifically when I read this from Hemos:
"Here's the reality: You block ads. You cost us money. Ultimately, I mean."
This is where you have to stop and think "Hey... if Slashdot DOES go down because of a lack of profits, where will I turn?"
Of course, there are other news places to go to. I visit The Register often. However, Slashdot is, despite any errors in editorials or anything... a truly unique news site. For the years I've been reading, I've been pleased overall. We've all encountered bumps in the road, and that bump in the road for users right now is the ads. Now, of course (which I find it ironic that this comes not long after this, but still) many of you are simply not going to go for the idea of something that was once pratically free and devoid of huge ads to have simply changed on you. You'll cheat the system as much as you can, and for the most part, you'll succeed.
But how much will that accomplish? Realize the plight slashdot apparently is in, and how they need to raise money, somehow. Subscriptions and ads are that way. And while I disagree with a lot of the way they're going to implement them... why not just pick one way, even if you have qualms with it, and just go with it? Put aside your inflammatory, trolling and goatse links for a second and realize that Slashdot is truly a useful resource. If you're going to visit this site, for once prove that it doesn't take sneaky or unethical buisness for something to survive... merely a good product. That is what Slashdot is, and most of you know it: a very good product.
While I personally won't be going for a subscription (16 years old = lack of credit card), I will stomach the ads and probably a lot more if they need it to survive.
Bring out your dead. Bring out your dead.
OSDN: Here's one -- nine pence.
Slashdot: I'm not dead!
AC: Here -- he says he's not dead!
OSDN: Yes, he is.
Slashdot: I'm not!
AC: He isn't.
OSDN: Well, he will be soon, he's very ill.
Slashdot: I'm getting better!
OSDN: No, you're not -- you'll be stone dead in a moment.
Slashdot: I don't want to go in the cart!
OSDN: Oh, don't be such a baby.
AC: I can't take him...
OSDN: Oh, do us a favor...
AC: I can't.
OSDN: Well, when is your next round?
AC: Thursday.
Slashdot: I think I'll go for a walk.
OSDN: You're not fooling anyone y'know. Look, isn't there
something you can do?
Slashdot: I feel happy... I feel happy.
[ AC clubs slashdot to death]
OSDN: Ah, thanks very much.
AC: Not at all. See you on Thursday.