Forum advert banner

What sort of advertising would you find acceptable on the forum?

CTC related services only (eg CDF)
17
13%
General cycling related adverts, as might be found in Cycle magazine.
37
28%
None, leave the forum as is.
78
59%
 
Total votes: 132

User avatar
Si
Moderator
Posts: 15185
Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 7:37pm

Re: Forum advert banner

Postby Si » 8 May 2013, 1:04pm

This thread now seems to be duplicating another: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=75590
Can I ask that posts relevant to cookies in general be made on that thread, and only those which have a genuine link to the OP be made on this. Thanks.

JohnW
Posts: 6450
Joined: 6 Jan 2007, 9:12pm
Location: Yorkshire

Re: Forum advert banner

Postby JohnW » 8 May 2013, 10:44pm

A matter of terminology here - going back to Si's original post - To me, an advert is a commercial intrusion, whereas the header shown on Si's post does not constitute and advertisement - in my estimation.

Other people may not see it the same way, and may define any announcement to be an advert.

Helpful information and/or similar announcements are not what I would define as advertisements.

User avatar
Mick F
Spambuster
Posts: 50984
Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Tamar Valley, Cornwall

Re: Forum advert banner

Postby Mick F » 9 May 2013, 7:24am

Yes John, but the "problem" is:
jonathan.pontet wrote:Thanks to you all for posting your thoughts on this proposal. Just to clarify- yes the intention is to offer this space to external companies for banner advertising.

Many of you receive Cycle magazine and it is the type of adverting that you see there that you can expect to see used in the ads here in the forum i.e. something very much of interest to cyclists.

We don't have an advertiser lined up for now- so we would run ads for CTC's services (Fill That Hole, Stop SMIDSY etc) in the interim.
My emphasis.

Maybe commercial advertising of interest to cyclists is ok so long as it doesn't intrude, but do we want it on this forum at all?

Cycle Mag has loads of commercial adverts. A quick head-count of the latest copy shows 34 full pages of commercial adverts out of 84 pages. That's 40% advertising.

I've nailed my colours to the mast.
I don't want it on this forum.
Mick F. Cornwall

JohnW
Posts: 6450
Joined: 6 Jan 2007, 9:12pm
Location: Yorkshire

Re: Forum advert banner

Postby JohnW » 9 May 2013, 1:00pm

Mick F wrote:Yes John, but the "problem" is:
jonathan.pontet wrote:Thanks to you all for posting your thoughts on this proposal. Just to clarify- yes the intention is to offer this space to external companies for banner advertising.

Many of you receive Cycle magazine and it is the type of adverting that you see there that you can expect to see used in the ads here in the forum i.e. something very much of interest to cyclists.

We don't have an advertiser lined up for now- so we would run ads for CTC's services (Fill That Hole, Stop SMIDSY etc) in the interim.
My emphasis.

Maybe commercial advertising of interest to cyclists is ok so long as it doesn't intrude, but do we want it on this forum at all?

Cycle Mag has loads of commercial adverts. A quick head-count of the latest copy shows 34 full pages of commercial adverts out of 84 pages. That's 40% advertising.

I've nailed my colours to the mast.
I don't want it on this forum.


AND the adverts in "Cycle" do not and cannot interfere with all the other magazines that we read - there's no button which says "...For more information click here......." followed by destruction of your ability to read the magazine - there's no technology that I just don't understand or comprehend waiting between the pages to attack me.

"Commercial" is about money - nothing else - and to quote the biblical reference ".....the love of money is the root of all evil......." - if anyone thinks that "Commercial" is out to do anything but exploit, then I'd say think again.

It's the "commercial" that troubles me. Just when you think you're safe...............

I know, I know, all the intentions are good, and people go onto sites which are full of all kinds of adverts, millions of times an hour : to use the internet we have no choice. Forum members will say that they do that and they don't have problems..............but some people do have problems and I don't want to be one of those "some people"

I don't want to be branded as a "selfish NIMBY" - I appreciate that CTC wishes to make as many of it's features and services self-supporting as possible, but at the same time I believe my approach is entirely reasonable.

I'm with Mick - absolutely.

User avatar
patricktaylor
Posts: 2302
Joined: 11 Jun 2008, 11:20am
Location: Winter Hill
Contact:

Re: Forum advert banner

Postby patricktaylor » 12 May 2013, 11:40pm

JohnW wrote:... I'm with Mick - absolutely.

Me too. I would rather pay extra subs than see adverts on here. They are nothing but dross on web forums. I think this objection applies to web forums more than normal websites because the content of forums is created by member contributors. If a majority of forum voters is against advertising, that should be the end of it.

As regards the main CTC website, I don't spend my own time contributing to it so don't have much of an issue with adverts for commercial services offered by the CTC itself but I don't like adverts for (eg) 'cheap travel insurance' provided by independent companies. The National Trust doesn't do it and neither should the CTC if it wants to look the part as a national charity.

rand
Posts: 318
Joined: 5 Mar 2008, 6:38pm

Re: Forum advert banner

Postby rand » 15 May 2013, 3:24pm

cjchambers wrote:^^ What MickF said.

I actively avoid messy, cluttered forums.
Shameful that it was ever considered and as for there being the slightest possibility that any funds accruing from such unwanted clutter would be used to reduce members subs - I'll take to looking for flying pigs

Rand.

reohn2
Posts: 40711
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Forum advert banner

Postby reohn2 » 15 May 2013, 3:25pm

rand wrote:
cjchambers wrote:^^ What MickF said.

I actively avoid messy, cluttered forums.
Shameful that it was ever considered and as for there being the slightest possibility that any funds accruing from such unwanted clutter would be used to reduce members subs - I'll take to looking for flying pigs

Rand.

+1
-----------------------------------------------------------

JohnW
Posts: 6450
Joined: 6 Jan 2007, 9:12pm
Location: Yorkshire

Re: Forum advert banner

Postby JohnW » 15 May 2013, 3:51pm

reohn2 wrote:
rand wrote:
cjchambers wrote:^^ What MickF said.

I actively avoid messy, cluttered forums.
Shameful that it was ever considered and as for there being the slightest possibility that any funds accruing from such unwanted clutter would be used to reduce members subs - I'll take to looking for flying pigs

Rand.

+1


+2

User avatar
Si
Moderator
Posts: 15185
Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 7:37pm

Re: Forum advert banner

Postby Si » 15 May 2013, 3:53pm

rand wrote:Shameful that it was ever considered and as for there being the slightest possibility that any funds accruing from such unwanted clutter would be used to reduce members subs - I'll take to looking for flying pigs

Rand.



Come now, there is nothing at all wrong with the CTC investigating ideas for raising money - just because they consider something does not mean that they will do it. To suggest that someone's actions are 'shameful' just because they are exploring new ways of making the CTC financially stronger is somewhat beyond the pale. If they didn't bother looking at alternative revenue streams then I would say there would be much more cause for complaint.

As for subs: the CTC has certain activities that it undertakes - these cost money...the money will not come out of thin air. And costs are currently rising. So there is a choice: either it stops doing all the activities that it currently does (for instance it could stop paying for this forum), or it finds the money to do them from somewhere. If it can't get money from other sources then where else will it come from but members' subs. You will have noted the discussion on subs rises at the previous AGMs.
Furthermore, I don't think that anyone has suggested that getting money from new advertising will reduce subs, but it may reduce future rises....this will have no effect on some people, but others are already finding it hard to afford given the current economic situation.

Personally I am against commercial advertising on the forum. I could be persuaded on having links to the 'join the CTC page', StopSMIDSY, FtH, or CDF - as these all benefit CTC members, but I would only be for these if the links are subtle and do not make the forum look horrible. However, I see no reason why we should have a go at people just because they have considered the possibility of inserting adverts.

As it is, we've had a handful of negative responses, but by and large forum members don't seem bothered one way or another....is this apathy or does it genuinely not bother people...who knows.

User avatar
patricktaylor
Posts: 2302
Joined: 11 Jun 2008, 11:20am
Location: Winter Hill
Contact:

Re: Forum advert banner

Postby patricktaylor » 15 May 2013, 4:16pm

Si wrote:... As it is, we've had a handful of negative responses, but by and large forum members don't seem bothered one way or another....is this apathy or does it genuinely not bother people...who knows.

The positive responses are an even smaller handful, and I don't think it's right for anybody to conclude that non-voters aren't bothered - it may be true or it may not, but it's irrelevant so there is no conclusion to be drawn from that. If there's a vote, that is the result, nothing else.

The owners of these forums are clearly not bound by this vote but I reiterate what I said before: it's forum members who provide the whole of the content of this website so the vote should matter IMO.
Last edited by patricktaylor on 15 May 2013, 4:21pm, edited 1 time in total.

reohn2
Posts: 40711
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Forum advert banner

Postby reohn2 » 15 May 2013, 4:21pm

patricktaylor wrote:
Si wrote:... As it is, we've had a handful of negative responses, but by and large forum members don't seem bothered one way or another....is this apathy or does it genuinely not bother people...who knows.

The positive responses are an even smaller handful, and I don't think it's right for anybody to conclude that non-voters aren't bothered - it may be true or it may not, but it's irrelevant so there is no conclusion to be drawn from that. If there's a vote, that is the result, nothing else.

Agreed.

The owners of these forums are clearly not bound by this vote but I reiterate what I said before: it's forum members who provide the content of these forums so the vote should matter IMO.

Spot on.
-----------------------------------------------------------

User avatar
Si
Moderator
Posts: 15185
Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 7:37pm

Re: Forum advert banner

Postby Si » 15 May 2013, 4:41pm

Depends if it's like the fourth official in the rugby: the questions "was it a try, yes or no?" and "is there any reason why I may not award the try?" mean quite different things.

But, you'll note I said "who knows"...because I don't....it's not up to me if adverts are inserted or how the results of this poll will be interpreted, I'm just trying to encourage as many forum users as possible to have a say while the option is there, and furthermore, to have a say in such a way that we can enter into a positive discussion rather than damaging the possibilities of gainful communication by venting low opinion of opposing parties.

JohnW
Posts: 6450
Joined: 6 Jan 2007, 9:12pm
Location: Yorkshire

Re: Forum advert banner

Postby JohnW » 15 May 2013, 5:28pm

Si wrote:...........Come now, there is nothing at all wrong with the CTC investigating ideas for raising money - just because they consider something does not mean that they will do it. To suggest that someone's actions are 'shameful' just because they are exploring new ways of making the CTC financially stronger is somewhat beyond the pale. If they didn't bother looking at alternative revenue streams then I would say there would be much more cause for complaint.............



Well yes you're right Si - perhaps in retrospect, my +another to the "shameful" bit was over the top - and what you say is valid enough, but when commercial influences get involved, they become commercial interests, and all goes pear shaped for the user..........

I really have answered the question that was asked, and given my opinions - I really shouldn't get further involved in the rhetoric, because it doesn't add anything...............I ought to resist.

User avatar
Mick F
Spambuster
Posts: 50984
Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Tamar Valley, Cornwall

Re: Forum advert banner

Postby Mick F » 15 May 2013, 8:43pm

JohnW wrote:I really have answered the question that was asked, and given my opinions - I really shouldn't get further involved in the rhetoric, because it doesn't add anything...............I ought to resist.
Yep. +1

I've said all I'm going to say.
If in any doubt of what I've said ................... I say NO.
Mick F. Cornwall

gordy
Posts: 246
Joined: 2 Feb 2008, 10:29pm

Re: Forum advert banner

Postby gordy » 15 May 2013, 9:13pm

Put me down as a "not bothered."