The Strange Case of the Missing Ads

Re:#372: Yup. The only thing that seems certain at the moment is that anonymous editing will be a thing of the past. We need to be able to show that an editor has — at least in theory — agreed to our ToS.

Not that we give a rusty fart. Google has to be able to say diligence was given.

edited 27th Oct '10 9:57:29 PM by FastEddie

Once again, ninja'd by the man himself.

edited 27th Oct '10 9:57:49 PM by Madrugada

^^^ We can still do it, you know.

edited 27th Oct '10 10:03:15 PM by RocketScience

Ok the rusty fart comment amused me.

What do you mean by Still it?

Amazing how a missing word can totally change the meaning of a sentence.

"Re:#372: Yup. The only thing that seems certain at the moment is that anonymous editing will be a thing of the past. We need to be able to show that an editor has — at least in theory — agreed to our To S."

Unfortunate, but understandable. Hope this not impact significantly number of contributors.

^I just want to know if we have to send in our Email addresses once the changes are in effect.

Most likely, yes.

Would it be possible to just use a cookie that's used when somebody clicks an "agreed to TOS" button?

ahh still do it. Ok Understood.

The having to cease anon. editors gave me a bit of personal irony.

So what are the possible methods to be used for registration? The obvious was already mentioned a form of submit your email and agree to the TOS sort of thing.

^^ Actually, that could potentially work. But we'd still have to collect an email address, right?

edited 27th Oct '10 10:10:58 PM by RocketScience

I'm thinking a page that says

Hi, the system doesn't know you. If you want to edit, you'll have to sign in, create an account, or read through and accept the terms of service.

Still looking for a way to do accounts without having to do a stinkin' email loop. Clicking to say you've read the terms of service will likely be part of it.

Might be selfish of me, but one term of service might be "Keep track of your own password!"

^ Would enjoy that. No email required - something that surprised me when I come to site. Very rare, but email requirement kinda useless with free ones everywhere.

I not sure how email add to security here.

To S, maybe?:

• Keep track of your password

• Do not link to NSFW sites- this will have your post be thumped and your sorry butt banned.

• Do not discuss NSFW subjects. Consequences are the same as above.

• If possible, keep vulgarity down to a minimum, as censors take care of any language anyways.

• Keep discussion civil.

• Pay tribute to the mods every ninth of May.

edited 27th Oct '10 10:23:34 PM by Chubert

First, wouldn't Plan 302 cause a bit of a problem? Namely, you'd make less money since less pages have less ads.

Second, what about an Anonymous User, err... username? What about a username and password that would be listed in the Terms of Service? It probably wouldn't work, but it is a suggestion to throw out.

^^ The forums would be ad-less, so maybe #2 and #3 can be relaxed there? And no censors. Nobody wants them, nobody likes them.

edited 27th Oct '10 10:30:24 PM by RocketScience

So my name wouldn't be kosher anymore or was that just a joke?

Pretty good chance the forums will carry ads from Amazon Affiliates (like today) or another ad network, so they won't be entirely unsupported.

No way we're coming out this without a reduction in revenue, though. We don't know what the other networks might pay or what percentage of pages will need to be in the non-Google area, but it will all add up to "less."

edited 27th Oct '10 10:47:17 PM by FastEddie

^^ You usually a lurker anyway. ;)

"Second, what about an Anonymous User, err... username? What about a username and password that would be listed in the Terms of Service? It probably wouldn't work, but it is a suggestion to throw out."

Call it "user", password "password"?

edited 27th Oct '10 10:47:17 PM by Meophist

My first thought is TV Tropes Is Its Own Personal Army. But objection #1 is civility and objection #2 is in a 16 page threadhop, someone probably already suggested it and got it shot down.

Also no matter how strong we are, Google is just stronger.

Google could buy TV Tropes if they thought there was money in it.

@394: Alternate revenue stream be nice. Maybe we best try start something?

G Adless forums means number 2 and number 3 are idiotic drivel. My bad.

edited 27th Oct '10 10:48:57 PM by Chubert

Although I still wonder what this means for works pages. Miij's thoughts on the matter still worry me.

On a more helpful note, I'd be more inclined to donate to the wiki if I was able to easily find a way to make a donation smaller than the "lump sum turns off ads for 3 months."

If I could do it in one-month intervals, it'd be more feasible on my wages.