The Strange Case of the Missing Ads

Well, I wouldn't say we lose nothing unless by "we" you mean "the tropers." The lack of Google Ads on the forums WILL hurt financially, I imagine.

I don't see why.

I mean, we might have to put up with ads in the posts again to make up for lost revenue, but I can deal with that.

Besides, which would you rather buy, a subscription to Evony or a PS 3?

That's what I thought.

I spread my wings and I learn how to fly....

The email registration is the least trouble, we are all e-mail registered on dozens of sites.

Unfortunately Amazon ads bring a lot less money than Google's.

edited 28th Oct '10 8:36:51 AM by EternalSeptember

It will hurt, the amazon ads might work better for people like me who have TV Tropes white listed for adblockers, but leave a java blocker on.

Fight smart, not fair.

Yes, which is why it'd be a huge problem if we switched over entirely, but we're not, just switching over a fraction of it.

I don't see any reason to worry if that's what we're doing

I spread my wings and I learn how to fly....

Hell, if the Amazon ads run in Java rather than Flash, I'll welcome them as our new Evil Overlords. But that's a digression.

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"

Previously, we had precisely enough ads to cover our expenses. If now even a fraction of these ads worth less, we are in the red.

I guess some cost-cutting can be done, so the site won't go bankrupt, but it will still be tough.

edited 28th Oct '10 8:41:57 AM by EternalSeptember

Then what's getting cut?

I spread my wings and I learn how to fly....

Step one: Cut every thread anyone cares about-

:D

Dunno, a few weeks ago Fast Eddi threw out the older threads, I guess it will be something like this.

I wouldn't care if we just auto-pruned stuff. It's not like threads past Page 3 get necro'd with any purpose often anwyay.

I'm more concerned about active content being cut.

edited 28th Oct '10 8:44:51 AM by SpainSun

I spread my wings and I learn how to fly....

If stuff gets cut, it'll probably start toward the NSFG side of the wiki and the Just For Fun side of the forums. The issue here isn't server capacity so much as it is the total package: machines, bandwidth, etc. Reducing our bandwidth package (caveat: I'm running with what I know from the info Eddie's given us) would mean we can handle less traffic, which could cripple the site during peak hours. Trimming our server configuration means we are reducing the load capacity of the site, so features might have to be cut.

It's a zero-sum game: balance revenue with site capacity.

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"

Oh....

Is any of that likely?

I spread my wings and I learn how to fly....

Regarding plan from posts 302 and 365- could we force people on the click through page to experience a pop-up ad before they get through to the adult only content? Donating members getting a cookie that gets you through without the ad? Just like Salon.com does? That might generate revenue and protect Google's policy.

Placing click-through ads on the adult content warning page is a flagrant violation of Google's policies as I understand it. The ad could come from somewhere else, of course, but not Google.

Anyway, the opt-in in user profiles would bypass the whole shebang and make the site operate transparently. It's still an open question whether we need the warning page to be a soft or hard block. A soft block is simply, "This link directs to mature content; are you sure?" while a hard block is, "Go get registered and opt in if you want to see this."

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"

I see, so it's not like when I have to delete data make space on my hard drive, but we might have to cut the pages that too many people download, regardless of their size.

Making They Call Me Tomu's comment a "Funny Aneurysm" Moment.

edited 28th Oct '10 8:53:23 AM by EternalSeptember

Late to the party question: What happened to the bit where the Google algorithim auto-detected potenitaly NSFW content and put nonprofit PSA ads on the page?

Ok, I really shouldn't have taken yesterday as my day off the computer for reading day. From basic reading, I've gathered 3 basic facts.

A) Google is being stupid about their advertising and has pulled from the site. People are desperately backing up the pages for the NSFW tropes and then they'll be cut, so that we can get the ads back.

B) We now have Amazon ads for the time being, but they don't pay nearly as much and our buffer is going to fail sometime in November.

C) We're splitting the site in order not to lose content, and instituting an e-mail requirement for editing. No more anon editors.

Oh, forgot one.

D) This is totally @#&%ed up.

How can we help? Is there a list of tasks that can be done? Has the word gone out through @tvtropesnews?

"The fact that your food can be made into makeshift bombs alarms the Hell out of me, Scrye." - Charlatan

In theory, that algorithm would still apply if we were able to get Google ads served, but the problem is that apparently Google doesn't think that's enough.

You skipped too much.

A) Google is being stupid about their advertising and has pulled from the site. People are desperately backing up the pages for the NSFW tropes and then they'll be cut, so that we can get the ads back. Google is enforcing existing policy, which was overlooked previously. We don't know why. There is no need to hurriedly back everything up; we are not cutting any content yet, and there will be adequate warning for anything that is cut.

B) We now have Amazon ads for the time being, but they don't pay nearly as much and our buffer is going to fail sometime in November. Correct.

C) We're splitting the site in order not to lose content, and instituting an e-mail requirement for editing. No more anon editors. False, false, and true. The site is only going to be split in terms of which pages are considered "mature content" and require opt-ins to view. Such pages cannot run Google ads.

To help, be patient. We're working out technological solutions to these issues. In the meantime, you can work to identify pages that might fall under the mature content filter and either remove suspect content or add them to our list so we can easily flag them when the system goes live.

edited 28th Oct '10 8:59:55 AM by Fighteer

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"

"What happened to the bit where the Google algorithim auto-detected potenitaly NSFW content and put nonprofit PSA ads on the page?"

IIRC that only detected NSFW in the URL s, like Lolicon, but this one was the result of more through check.

edited 28th Oct '10 9:01:21 AM by EternalSeptember

So we're not getting anything cut?

I spread my wings and I learn how to fly....

The possibility was discussed of offloading adult content to another wiki, but that's only going to be necessary if our plan of firewalling it on this site doesn't meet Google's requirements.

No, the filter hit words on the page as well. It was pretty strong about detecting forum threads with naughty content, for example.

edited 28th Oct '10 9:03:48 AM by Fighteer

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"

Random thought: Is it just me, or teasing porn trope titles, but demanding registration to actually read them, sounds hilariously similar to what actual porn sites do?

I really hope we don't have to cut content. Forum pruning is bad enough as it is. I don't think we will be cutting any wiki content, though.

I do consider this to be a fairly serious potential handicap to the site, and I am angry with Google. While I understand their position, by kowtowing to the Culture Police and the Moral Guardians they are perpetuating and implicitly supporting censorship, and I'd rather we didn't do the same. Some content which Google's policy finds objectionable is actually entirely relevant to our mission, and I don't want us to become unable to describe tropes and works that involve "objectionable" content, or even to have to jump through hoops to do so. It sounds like it's going to be a huge nuisance.

I tried to donate but Paypal rejected my card.

Regarding UTs, is there any reason we can't just make them click an "I have read and agree to comply with the ToS" box before editing a page? Or do we want to lose anonymous editing anyway?

That can't be the case, because some pages of forum threads received the public service ads when discussions turned a bit risque.

Welcome To TV Tropes | How To Write An Example | Text-Formatting Rules | List Of Shows That Need Summary | TV Tropes Forum | Know The Staff

Let's hope nobody mistakes TV Tropes for an actual pornsite.

The problem is that Unknowns have no accountability for their edits. We've seen the damage a vandal operating from dynamic or proxied IPs can do; the solutions on our end to this problem are needlessly draconian. For better or for worse, most wiki require registration to edit; we were an exception in this case that cannot remain if we want to continue getting Google's support.

edited 28th Oct '10 9:07:02 AM by Fighteer

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"