Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Slashdot.org News

Slashdot IRC Forum Today 356

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This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Slashdot IRC Forum Today

Comments Filter:
  • Ads test (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Mattygfunk ( 517948 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @08:32AM (#3117508) Homepage
    I'm not sure how many others saw this today but I believe that one of the /. editors had a little test of the new ads today. I clicked on the Xft Hack Improves Antialiased Font Rendering story and just below the story (but before the first comment) was an ad. It was about 200 x 200 pixels and I think off the top of my head it was an IBM ad.

    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.

    • Re:Ads test (Score:2, Interesting)

      by albalbo ( 33890 )
      I think they're tossing around with the html code live :( They keep moving, and at least on my system (Galeon/Moz 0.9.8) they don't render at all correctly...
    • Re:Ads test (Score:2, Interesting)

      by yobbo ( 324595 )
      just as i read this now there's a huge sourceforge ad, below the story and above the comments.

      sure, it's huge, but if the ads don't get squeezed in between stories on the front page, or comments in the talkback, i don't see this as being too intrusive.

      but then again, i'll make alot of concessions to justify not paying 5 bucks a month :)
    • Re:Ads test (Score:5, Insightful)

      by The Blue Meanie ( 223473 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @08:44AM (#3117538)
      I believe that one of the /. editors had a little test of the new ads today.

      I saw it, too. Hey, I really enjoy reading Slashdot, and if this is what it takes for them to survive, I'm fine with it. It certainly wasn't as obnoxious as it could have been. And think about it - at least they're going to give you the option of subscribing to make the ads go away. How many sites you visit every day don't give you a choice about it at all?
    • This was much less intrusive than the awful pop-ups I envisioned when I read about the subsription service

      Yes, pop ups are either:

      a) Intrusive

      or

      b) Disabled

      With the typical /. viewer, I'd suspect mostly the latter.

      Michael
    • Re:Ads test (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Wire Tap ( 61370 )
      Actually, the code went live yesterday afternoon. I can't remember which story it was exactly, but around maybe 3-5 PM eastern yesterday (5 March 2002) is when I started to see the large ads under the story. I really don't think they are effective... in fact, they look rather cartoonish. Not to mention completely out of place. Did the Slashdot crew come up with this scheme, or was it some hapless advertising agency? If it was the latter, here is my suggestion: fire the crew, and find someone with a little more sense about them with respect to these sorts of things. The ads are HIDEOUSLY out of place. Let me say it again: they look dumb where they are.

      This is not meant to be a flame/troll/whatever the moderators come up with next - this is my honest opinion. Sure, I don't like any ads at all, but at lease the popup ads were done in a respectable manner - and they didn't look silly.

      Come on guys, fix this up. It's awful; and you are more than likely going to lose a great deal of your community, soon. Then what will you do? The site, devoid of content, won't be worth a dime, and your precious scheme will have failed you. Get it right before it becomes too late.

      • 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 [osdn.com].

        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.
    • Re:Ads test (Score:2, Interesting)

      by ultraw ( 99206 )
      The add is based on some javascript-code. Disabeling javascript allowes you to read slashdot, but remove the adds. Just checked it in Opera, and it works...

      And as a extra help to addbuster programs, the add-code is delimited with some explicit comment-lines in the html-code.

      But after all, I don't think this is much of a problem. I was allready used to reading the story, and then using page-down to skip to some comments. As long as the add doesn't come in between the comments, no problem here... And /. needs money, just like everyone else. There are two places where the money can come from: The readers, or ads to pay for the fee the readers should pay.
    • Re:Ads test (Score:5, Interesting)

      by MobyDisk ( 75490 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @09:52AM (#3117854) Homepage
      And the ad is from doubleclick no less.
    • 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.
  • by Hangtime ( 19526 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @08:35AM (#3117518) Homepage
    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.
    • I'd just like to say one thing: "Quantity != Quality". Just because you read/write comments more than anyone else on /. does not necessarily mean that you're contributing more than anyone else.
      • by Hangtime ( 19526 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @08:46AM (#3117548) Homepage
        Good point as well. I think it would be very easy to find out who is contributing the most. Take the sum of moderation points over a certain amount and divide it by the number of submissions and you get the Quality of a contributer. Also, you could look at different categories as I spoke about in a prior discussions and find subject matter experts and they get free subscriptions [slashdot.org]
        • by mckwant ( 65143 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @09:16AM (#3117654)
          but the idea isn't bad.

          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 .75.

          Which is more valuable? A weighted average with total points makes a little more sense, but only knows what that might be.
    • 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.'

      Indeed. Though there is a simple solution here - give free credit for moderated-up comments. OK, that adds a whole new dimension to the idea of "karma whoring". But even so, it's only a few percent of the total population, and it's the same fraction that's likely to use their own technical work-around [junkbuster.com] for the ads. You could do a lot worse than to give Constant Writers a break.

      Sig: What Happened To The Censorware Project (censorware.org) [sethf.com]

    • by Knunov ( 158076 ) <eat@my.ass> on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @09:07AM (#3117621) Homepage
      Forget the tiered approach. It's confusing and silly.

      $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 /. reader that comes here specifically for his articles. He is fat. Cut him away and gain instant efficiency.

      Knunov
    • I agree a great deal with Hangtime's comments. As a paying subscriber to wsj.com (who spends as much time here), there's $5 a month that probably belongs to /. out of my budget.

      Not only am I troubled with the odd "ad-free views" system which is counterproductive to better customers (hey, do I get credits for metamoding?) ("don't make us show you this ad! really! pay up or it'll be the X10 cam, animated in a 2 Mbps flash download! bawahaha!"), but I think the fact that a revenue source such as advertising is being used as a threat to Slashdot's subscribers represents a serious lack of sound business judgement.

      So here are a couple more suggestions:

      Don't make ads the enemy

      Really, either ads are good or they're bad - let's not get into a false duality like the taxation of cigarettes ("let's raise taxes to increase revenues and stop people from smoking").

      In my case, I find myself clicking on one and looking at a vendor about once a week on Slashdot - this is more than I do on wsj.com. In fact, because wsj.com has so many ads, I tend to tune them out, but Slashdot's ad commands a bit more attention. Litter the page with popups, minimizable side-banners and other garbage and you'll quickly see people tune out. Are your sponsors paying you more for your placement than wsj.com? I'd bet you get more readers, but even more important to your advertiser, they're not competeting with 10 other ads on the screen.

      Avoid measured use models

      Measured use minimizes participation and drives your customer out the door. Look at US West's Citynet in Minneapolis and Omaha as a very important lesson for Slashdot - they created a BBS with dozens of local merchant-sponsored portals for chat, news, etc., and charged $0.10 or more a minute to subscribers. It died a very ugly death. Consumer perspective was "like hell I'm going to pay a dime a minute to chat with people on the XYZ radio station's board."

      "Boot Katz" and other creative programs

      Let subscribers pay money in dollar votes to select a destination to send Katz to for a year. Will it be a cannibal-infested island in Indonesia? A cave labeled "Osama is here" in Afghanistan? A Turkish prison? Let us vote with our bucks and split the take with Katz's travel expenses.

      Pay for frills?

      How about putting anonymous posting into the premium category? Moderating ought to require premium level too, but metamoderating should be free.

      Get a fuzzy head in there with you

      You really need to get yourself a marketing ace (your ad attitude and susbcriber program screams as if it was written by techgeeks - understand that both types of personalities have their purpose). Push the edge beyond the common send-us-money pleas. Ebay auction off Taco's first monitor. Sell sponsorship on your "Post Comment" and subject bars. Why not have the "IBM Metamoderation Machine" and other sponsor items?

      Really, the approach I saw being taken was a certain path to failure chosen by technical guys who mean well but really don't understand consumers. Perhaps you stumbled across your success, but don't screw up a free lunch now.

      *scoove*
    • 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.

      It's worse than that. The users have already started posting ways to defeat advertisements [slashdot.org], and the suppression of this information is quickly underway as well. It's the "Battle of Slashdot", and it's counterproductive.

      This audience is different than others. This is the home of "Fair Use", and a subscription system based around altering how a Slashdot reader views the site is probably going to be met with... custom software to view the site.

      I liked Rob's description of the subscription service as a "donation" and the ad removal as a kind of perk. I think that if any minor change could be made, the widespread application of this verbiage could clear a lot of things up. You're not buying a page view for $.04, you're donating to Slashdot, and they're trying to say thanks.
      • I liked Rob's description of the subscription service as a "donation" and the ad removal as a kind of perk.
        Yeah, that was a nice little spin, wasnt it? A rather large for-profit corporation, OSDN [osdn.com], biggest open source company in existence except maybe RedHat, passing off a new way to make money as charity. From the dropping-a-few-bucks-in-the-guitar-case dept ...? Please. Only if your guitar case, pathetically cheap as it is, is publically traded [yahoo.com] on Wall Street.

        Oh, wait, you were serious. Sorry youre so gullible.

    • This comment on the parent thread says it all:

      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 ... 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.
    • by Sloppy ( 14984 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @12:44PM (#3119072) Homepage Journal

      '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.'

      The problem with this comment is that it completely misses the point.

      You aren't paying for Slashdot content. You're paying for the service. That is critical, and if you don't understand that, then subscriptions and ads indeed won't make any sense. So either accept it or reject it. (And if you reject it, then why are you here?)

      Those who contribute the most content, use the most service, thus they should pay the most for the service. When you post something to Slashdot, you're costing Slashdot money.

      As a seperate issue unrelated to server and bandwidth expenses, Slashdot does have some content problems. The editorial aspects are very poor quality (examples: see Taco's spelling, how he uses the word "then", and how well-checked things are before they're posted to the front page). And people who supply content (either as story submissions or informative comments) are not compensated for their effort, other than ego-stroking (e.g. seeing your name in lights, seeing your karma pinned at 50). (That people think ego-stroking isn't enough, is interesting, considering how many "open source" advocates there are around here.) Now, this is worth talking about and addressing. But it is a seperate issue from the server and bandwidth expenses.

  • 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.
  • by MartyJG ( 41978 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @08:43AM (#3117534) Homepage
    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.

  • by Wizard of OS ( 111213 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @08:45AM (#3117541)
    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 [slashnet.org] for more information :)
  • /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 [zophar.net] 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
    • I agree - there are many worse ways that they could have handled their banner ads (interstitial for example, or moving around the page, as I've seen on certain other sites). However, I'm really not convinced about the efficacy of graphical ads at all.

      For a start, graphical ads are easy to block (by not loading images). Secondly, they miss out part of the audience (those using non-graphical browsers). Thirdly, the animated ones are almost entirely annoying rather than informative - and irritation is not an emotion I'd want associated with my product, were I advertising. Fourthly, the companies that control graphical banner ads (doubleclick et al) have a very bad privacy reputation. Fifthly, banner ads have been around for so long that most people just filter them out automatically - it won't take long for that to also happen to the new, larger graphical ads.

      The most effective ads that I've seen recently have been those on Google [google.com]. Because they are actually related to the search you have entered, and because you don't feel that they are being forced upon you. I've found myself clicking on several in the last month - I can't remember the last time that I actually clicked on a graphical banner add, but it was certainly more than 18 months ago.

      Kuro5hin [kuro5hin.org] has recently introduced subtle text advertisments on its main page. They are not targeted, so they are less useful than Google's ads, but I'm still more likely to look at them than I an to look at a banner ad.
  • by Psiren ( 6145 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @08:51AM (#3117556)
    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.
    • Ads do work.... (Score:3, Insightful)

      by phunhippy ( 86447 )
      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.

      • Re:Ads do work.... (Score:3, Interesting)

        by mjh ( 57755 )
        I never ever click on a banner ad.

        Really? Wow, whenever I want to buy something from thinkgeek, the first thing I do is reload /. a bunch of times until a thinkgeek ad comes up. Then I click on it and place my order. I do this specifically because I like /. and I want to see them generate some revenue.

    • It's not a question of "Working." Advertisers gave up on the idea of click-throughs a long time ago. Now what the advertisers are looking to generate are impressions, or number of ads viewed per period of time. Yeah, the company gets money from click throughs, but they also get money for having it on the page in the first place. I don't know how the finances work tho.

      triv
    • Instead of simply taking what the banner ad company offers, state prime realestate has premium rates. Everyone has seen pages of nothing but banner ads. Placement value on those pages is about zero. Slashdot should not get the same rate for a banner ad impression that a sleasy site with 20 banners lined up top to bottom gets because slashdot has premium realestate. The ad does not get lost in the clutter. Charge for the valuable space. Slashdot is the superbowl of the tech crowd. I'd hate to see it become a late late show ad placement discount repository like AOL. Here at work there are many cubes with calanders from Dispair. Guess where they found the ad for the calander? I rest my case.
  • by gotan ( 60103 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @08:52AM (#3117559) Homepage
    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 ...
    ---
  • Text ads. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by guhknew ( 123675 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @08:54AM (#3117568)
    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...
    • Re:Text ads. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Kanon ( 152815 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @09:24AM (#3117688)
      Have you seen their new text ads? They don't get in the way, don't jump out of the screen screaming at you and most importantly of all have actually been interesting (The ones I've seen so far). I've been clicking them for the curiosity value.

      They have a page where anyone can buy their own ($12 for 4000 impressions). http://www.kuro5hin.org/submitad

      Now *that's* how it should be done. I hope it works for them.
  • Opt in? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by the_Bionic_lemming ( 446569 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @08:54AM (#3117569)
    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?
  • About the Subs... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Tranvisor ( 250175 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @08:54AM (#3117570) Homepage
    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.
  • by Mynn ( 209621 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @08:58AM (#3117588)
    You really need another option for the poll ... I subscribed but I won't re-up because I don't see the value.

    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 ... 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".

    If I come back, it will be with an ad blocker.
  • Pay per page (Score:5, Insightful)

    by mikej ( 84735 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @08:59AM (#3117594) Homepage
    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.
    • Re:Pay per page (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Ed Avis ( 5917 )
      If there's a shared 'cypherpunks' (or even 'cipherpunks') account you couldn't use it to post messages, or set preferences. It would be no better than Anonymous Coward, worse in fact since there'd always be some loser changing all the preferences to weird settings (block all stories _except_ JonKatz). All it would give you is no ads, and you can get that anyway with Junkbuster or Mozilla.

      FWIW: Personally I'd pay for the ability to post to Slashdot by email, treating it as a kind of mailing list. If they threw that in as part of a fixed-rate subscription package I'd sign up at once.
    • That's reasonably easy to combat, if you don't mind a quick and dirty solution - have something make a note of the IP address used to access pages under that account. If it changes too rapidly, block it.

      What constitutes "changing too rapidly" is pretty subjective, but one possibility is that pages are accessed using that login from 2 IP address within 10 minutes of each other. That would at least prevent people from distributing account info on the 'net, and would confine it to a few friends who even then have to either co-ordinate their browsing, or all have the same apparent IP address (ie be behind the same firewall/NATing router, etc)

      Nothing too complicated or expensive about that, at least in its most basic form.

      Cheers,

      Tim
  • 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 ?
  • by Dicky ( 1327 ) <slash3@vmlinuz.org> on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @09:09AM (#3117625) Homepage
    I've been reading Slashdot for quite a while now (yes, I've got a low UID - I started reading before UIDs existed). Sure, I refresh a lot, but it's mainly the front page, since so much of the content seems to be uninteresting to me nowadays - I don't know if it's my interests which have changed, or Slashdot's focus, probably a bit of both. I don't post too much any more, partly through dispair at the inanity of much of the content, partly through my growing annoyance with the way the site has been run, and largely because I choose to post in other fora, mainly on two mailing lists which constitute real communities, one a Linux list within my company, the other being the list of my LUG. This site is not a real community, and will never be - it may have been at some point in the past, but it certainly isn't now, 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.

    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:

    • 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!
    • NNTP access. The excuse - and it has only ever been an excuse - for not providing one has been that no-one has worked out how to force ads down people's pipes over NNTP. I'll subscribe, so get no ads, but I want to read over NNTP.
    • More real, technical content. Get rid of Katz, and pay someone with a clue to write interesting stuff.
    • More open-ness. I want to hear what's going on, what's coming up, what's a problem, what's an unexpected bonus. I want an open discussion forum about the site - not one to constantly attack the 'editors', meaning they enter the discussion on the defensive, but an open discussion. 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.
    • Early access to stories might be nice, so paying customers get to at least try to avoid the slashdot effect.
    • I won't pay using PayPal - I know this has already been covered. I would really prefer not to pay using Dollars - I'm not in the US, and I don't really want to pay commission on my subscription. I reckon that taking Dollars, Canadian Dollars, Pounds Sterling and Euros would cover a very large majority of the Slashdot readership, whould encourage non-US subscriptions (over half the people on the 'net aren't in the USA). I've done a little bit of work for a charity on an on-line donation page, and we can take Dollars, Pounds, Euros are Shekels (it's a Jewish charity...) easily enough.
    • I want some status info. Number of subscriptions, number of subscribers (these two are different - think about it), ideally some proper financial info like costs/revenue. I understand that the latter may be hard, but I would really like the other two.

    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.

    • 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?
    • by leviramsey ( 248057 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @09:41AM (#3117786) Journal

      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.

      • One change which could be made [...] 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.

        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.

    • 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 [slashdot.org] (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...
    • "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.
    • Here here.

      Let's not forget that all the conspiracy bullshit [slashdot.org] 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?
  • GMT=EST+5
    Which would mean 6pm GMT. Work from there
  • by Dimwit ( 36756 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @09:11AM (#3117632)
    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.
    • 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.

      It's not theft! Slashdot has chosen to put their website on the internet, accessible to everyone. I have the right to control what happens on my computer and no website has the right to force me to view advertising. If Slashdot wants to charge for access then they can shut off public access and only allow those with subscriptions to view the site. But as long as their site is publicly accessible, they have no right to complain that people are looking at it. And again, I have the right to control what I download and what is displayed on my computer, so if I want to block the ads (which I already do) then I'll do it.

    • One time, I taped a TV show using my VCR, and later on, when I played it back, I fast forwarded the ads! I stole the TV show! Mwuahahaha!
  • Why didn't they... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by darkov ( 261309 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @09:16AM (#3117659)
    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.
    • Ask about this before they introduced subscriptions? (Ask Slashot story?)

      From this article [slashdot.org] on October 22, 2001:

      Last up, I'm gonna talk a little about advertisements and subscriptions. Slashdot continues to grow: our traffic has increased by like 10% in the last few months, and simply selling the banner ads you see on top of each page isn't going to be enough to keep us afloat if we keep growing. And selling banner ads in 2001 is an awful lot harder then it was in 1999.
      The change will be a different ad size on the article page. Currently we have the standard banner size on top of all pages, but soon the article pages will instead have those huge square things that you see on CNet or ZD. I know this will be unpopular with many people, myself included, but when we make the switch, we will also have some sort of subscription system where you can pay a fee to disable them honestly. (No I don't know how much yet!)
      Just to shut down the conspiracy theorists, nobody is forcing us to make these changes: The navbar. The new ad formats. The subscription system. I could just say 'No' to changes like these. But Slashdot is now four years old ... and I want it to still be here four years from now. I hope you can understand the expensive reality associated with making this site happen every day for a quarter of a million readers.
    • by Tony Shepps ( 333 )
      There is a very serious disconnect between the /. editorship and the /. readership.

      I suspect that the first 1000 "shots" in this disconnect were shot by the readership, because we are a serious pain in the ass. We carp. We moan. We complain. We whine. Nothing is good enough for us.

      Such is the geek nature; our personalities cause us to question every system and complain without concern for the social niceties.

      I would imagine that after a few years of dealing with such a readership, one might grow quite thick skin and have absolutely no concern for their whims and desires. In fact, one might even want to "punish" the group for whom nothing is quote good enough or free enough. ASK them what they want? No need; they speak up all the time and their concerns, so much that it's a constant, painful din.


  • 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.

  • by Jus'n ( 85372 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @09:23AM (#3117684)
    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.
  • by Seth Finkelstein ( 90154 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @09:23AM (#3117685) Homepage Journal
    For some other ideas, check out how kuro5hin.org's text ads [kuro5hin.org] are working. I swear, I'm finding the text ads sometimes leading to sites more enjoyable than the stories.

    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) [sethf.com])

  • I've heard of these guys somewhere... Haven't I? [slashdot.org]

    In all seriousness though, I have no problem with this, you have to get paid somehow, right?
  • by JanneM ( 7445 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @09:30AM (#3117711) Homepage
    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.

    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 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.

    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 /. on the list.

    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 /. 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.

    /Janne
    • "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 find myself surfing less and less to slashdot."

      Maybe THAT is the plan - reduce bandwith usage and thus lower the cost of operating slashdot. It isn't about the $5 - that's just a side benefit.

      ;-)

  • by _Bunny ( 90075 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @09:32AM (#3117723) Homepage
    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.
  • by tiltowait ( 306189 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @09:53AM (#3117858) Homepage Journal
    Since the announcement Friday, a few people have posted that they've paid. The PayPal description of the OSDN shows:

    "User Status: Verified Business Member (1)"

    Indicating that so far (1) Verified PayPal members have paid that seller.

    Does this mean only one person has subscribed so far? No.

    "New transactions are added after 30 days after their transaction, to ensure that the Reputation Number reflects successful transactions."

    So we can check back in a month and verify roughly how many readers have subscribed via PayPal.
  • by eXtro ( 258933 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @09:55AM (#3117873) Homepage
    I won't contribute to slashdot because the most fundamental thing which makes slashdot is broken: the discussions. There's not much more give and take because moderation is essentially designed to reward the views held up by the bulk of the population rather than the highest quality contributions to a discussion. It's no longer a discussion if one side is silenced, its a monolog. All too often slasdhot has become a group-think monolog unfortunately. As the nom de plume substrate I used to be a frequent slashdot reader and poster, at least until they broke moderation. Moderation started off with good intentions. First posts, and people who missed first posts were starting to interfere with the user contributed dialog that made slashdot what it is. A handful of moderators were picked, then that was expanded to 400. I'm not sure whether substrate was one of the 25 or the 400, but moderation worked differently then.

    For the most part moderators treated the 4 goals as gospel. They'd moderate up good commentary even if they didn't agree with it. 400 moderators can't keep up with a forum that grew as quickly as slashdot did, and its also a bit elitist when you've got a specially selected group of 400. It would also be an impossible amount of work for the people who do the selecting as well to expand the hand-picked bunch as the user base and hence number of posts grow.

    They opened up the flood gates and gave everybody a chance at moderation. If everybody obeyed the 4 golden rules of moderation then there would be no problem, the system would work flawlessly. People don't though, most people vote from their feelings. Since slashdot is a huge community with a demographic skewed towards certain views, and now with a huge community of moderators, the good and proper moderations (moderate quality, not the point of view) were reduced to the noise level in the moderation system.

    Then metamoderation was introduced. Everybody gets the chance to moderate the moderators. You now have the ability to slap bad moderators wrists. The only thing is, you're still dealing with a statistically skewed base of meta-moderators. The same people who moderate do the meta-moderation, so now the noise in the system, those that moderate quality, are not only silenced by the majority but penalized as well. It put certain people, such as myself, in a double jeapordy situation. If I post responses which aren't in line with the concensus reality that is slashdot I might get up-moderated by a few people because they agree with me or (hopefully) because I expressed myself well, but because of the much larger group of opposing views who have a huge combined pool of moderation points its easy to be moderated back down. If I choose not to contribute to the discussion and instead moderate, meta-moderation will result in lowered karma as well, since statistically, moderating up quality comments is against the largest distribution of slashdot users. After losing around 20 points of karma in a week I started to rethink things. There was a hard karma cap, and I was beyond this cap, so my karma would now only go downards. This in iteself didn't bother me. But in a way this would eventually silence me if I only moderated the way I felt moderation should be done or if I kept posting to interesting discussions. There were cheats I could do, but I refused to do them (overrated/underrated moderations aren't impacted by metamoderation if I recall correctly. You can post anonymously and moderate the same dialog, something that is frequently done and the moderators even confess to). Instead I retired substrate and created this account. I contribute to the discussions much less and I read slashdot much less frequently. I refuse to moderate since I feel moderation is fundamentally broken.

  • Karma (Score:2, Funny)

    by petis ( 139263 )
    Perhaps this will help:
    Everyone starts out at $0
    Offtopic: $10 per mod point ($100 if first post)
    Flamebait: $20 per mod point
    Redundant: Ten pop-up ads for each new page.
    Troll: $50 per mod point

    Sum up at end of month, send a bill, collect a couple of billions. ;-)
  • .org? I think not. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @10:21AM (#3118024)
    Slashdot has every right to move to an ad-based, profit-making paradigm. But shame on you for your logo...shame on you for your .org.
  • subscriptions (Score:2, Insightful)

    by kuiken ( 115647 )
    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) ?

  • Any plans to adjust moderation?
    Can only paying members moderate?
    Do I get paid to moderate?

  • by xtal ( 49134 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @10:25AM (#3118055)

    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 [eetimes.com]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..

  • by geekboy_x ( 410674 ) <geekboy@netcom.ca> on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @11:05AM (#3118382) Homepage
    Hey kiddies, how about a bedtime story?

    Once upon a time there was a website called Slashdot. In fact, it was MORE than a website ... 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.

    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 ... 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!"

    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 ... instead of pity and derision.

  • by PrimeEnd ( 87747 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @11:27AM (#3118522)
    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.
  • ad blocking (Score:2, Interesting)

    by doubtless ( 267357 )
    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.
  • 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?
  • by Anonymous Coward
    How much time do you really think slashdot has left?

    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 [junkbuster.com] or Filterproxy [freshmeat.net] .

    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. :-\

  • Why should I subscribe when I haven't been able to metamod for 6 weeks now?

    Of course, given how tight lipped they've been so far, we'll see if they say anything about it.

  • Lynx and the Ads (Score:2, Interesting)

    by MrZaius ( 321037 )
    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.
  • bye bye slashdot (Score:3, Insightful)

    by underpaidISPtech ( 409395 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @11:59AM (#3118728) Homepage
    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.

    /. 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 /. isn't the place to build brand recognition within the IT/OSS community across all continents, I don't know what is.
    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 /.'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.

    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...
    • by Kallahar ( 227430 )
      Personal story: I put up a tip jar on my site, ZERO donations in two months. Then, I put up paid banner ads. I now make over $10 a day off the ads.

      In my case, the people that can afford advertising are the businesses, who consider it a cost of doing business. From the user's perspective it's simple an out-of-pocket expense for something that was free anyway.

      So you'd like to hope that people would donate, but in my experience it just doesn't work...

      Travis
  • At 3:00? (Score:2, Interesting)

    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.
  • Value add (Score:4, Insightful)

    by geekoid ( 135745 ) <dadinportlandNO@SPAMyahoo.com> on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @02:57PM (#3120032) Homepage Journal
    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 ;)

He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion

Working...