Comments | no_lj_ads: FAQ Updates!

foxfirefey in no_lj_ads

FAQ Updates!

Apr 13, 2006 00:26

Here's a list of all FAQs related to ads now functioning:

Why are there ads on LiveJournal? Who will see these ads?
What are the features of the ad-sponsored level?
What are LiveJournal's guidelines on acceptable ads?
How do I set my ad category preferences? Can I give feedback on ads I see?
How does LiveJournal decide which ads to show me? What ( Read more... )

faqs about ads

Comments 11

Personal sidenote foxfirefey April 13 2006, 07:26:55 UTC

Combined with the new TOS rules, that means my Flashblock extension is now against LJ's rules of TOS, even though it's the only "ad blocking" I use and I have it on because Flash ads drain so much CPU power on my Powerbook.

Other things I can think of that would violate the TOS as worded foxfirefey April 13 2006, 08:13:51 UTC

"Employing and/or providing software programs, browser scripts, or other technologies that serve to block or substantially impair the display of advertisements on LiveJournal pages."

1. Using Opera with the images not loading or iframes disabled. It's a technology that blocks or substantially impairs the view of ads.

2. Browsing with Lynx. Sure, LJ is imminently Lynxable, but I just checked, and Lynx didn't load the Google text ads in an iframe on this site warning about the misleading poetry.com scam that gets served Poetry.com ads through Google.com. Lynx won't load iframes or images or Flash. Looks like using Lynx is now a violation of the TOS--it's a technology that substantially impairs the display of ads.

3. Not having Flash installed. I mean, technically it's a lack of technology, but hey, so is Lynx. And if you can't get around the TOS by browsing LJ with Lynx, then not installing Flash is probably not okay, either ( ... )

Re: Other things I can think of that would violate the TOS as worded foxfirefey April 13 2006, 08:34:27 UTC

And if any of the above are okay, it would be nice to know--it's easy to advice people to use Opera!

burr86 April 13 2006, 07:58:49 UTC

I imagine that the emphasis in the first one is on the "if we determine that they perform acceptably within the LiveJournal site." -- after all, most graphic ads or text ads are going to be HTML or gif/jpg anyway; the purpose of that point is to say "yeah, but if it mucks with the site, no go".

foxfirefey April 13 2006, 08:19:49 UTC

Yes, but a lot of people were wondering what sorts of ads would be allowed; many were hoping for text only.

This answers that. There will be graphic ads, even graphic ads with animations. There will be flash ads. Sure, they have guidelines to try and mitigate the nastiness of those formats, but I can't imagine them not being used.

Caveat foxfirefey April 13 2006, 08:37:58 UTC

...and I know I'm not being reasonable on any of this, since I pretty much think ads muck with the site, period.

ex_uniquewo April 13 2006, 13:46:46 UTC

I'm impressed by the fact that the FAQ carefully avoid to answer the question "Why are there ads?" with "Because we need money, you moron!". No it's for the users. LOL. Oh God the hypocrisy.

I should go through the answers at lj_ads and see if that is what the users wanted but 1) I don't care 2) I doubt they care.

ex_uniquewo April 13 2006, 13:58:00 UTC

On the suject of ads ;-), users will have ads on system-styled comment pages of sponsored journals (we already knew that) and sponsored users will have ads on the portal page I think.
Finally, two types of ads: skyscraper (at the top or on the side I think) and 5LinkUnit at the bottom. 5LinkUnit is new.
They're also developing the event subscription and I hope there won't be ads in those. I don't think it's an issue now but I do think everything is possible in the future.

ex_uniquewo April 13 2006, 14:13:00 UTC

And I think you've guess this was posted before I'd read k1's entry. I'll go hide under a rock now.

foxfirefey April 13 2006, 15:30:48 UTC

Morning, sunshine. No worries. All love.

kunzite1 April 17 2006, 22:44:01 UTC

( ... )