Offensive Adverts

Normally I don't even notice the adds they are white noise. I have often wondered why as a subscriber the adds appear at all. Sites I have belonged to in the past have offered free services with adds and then offer no adds and other niceties when you subscribe.

On Firefox try the combination of Ad Block Plus and Ghostery.

On many websites it's necessary to leave Google Analytics unblocked, or links may not work. PU appears to use Google Adsense and Analytics.

I think this is a great idea - I didn't see the adverts here at all, until I started browsing on my phone

I'd be happy to pay for this if it was part of general site improvements now the magazine has folded...

I don't usually notice adverts, but from time to time someone advertises something that I actually want to buy. If I turned off the adverts how would the suppliers ever get to tell me about it?

I'm not sure that there's anything intrisically wrong with advertising - it's what many of us here do when we want to make our photographic services available.

How would we know who SRS were if they didn't advertise? Knowing who they are has been to our advantage...

If you look at the website with the benefit of Firefox + Adblocker, you still get SRS & Foliopics adverts (who pay specifically to advertise here, so I don't mind), but you don't get all the rubbish from Google. In fact, I'd say the site is deliberatly designed to look right and show those links with AdBlocker...

Getting rid of the google garbage also makes the page load quicker, take up less screen space, and you can focus on the forums not on irrelevant distracting and often misleading stuff.

I don't mind sponsored adds they are at least targeted to the site interests, but believe me I definitely don't need to loose weight as fatspider will testify or want lots of Wonga (whatever that is). I very rarely click on any sponsored adds when using Google and have never done so on this site.

[Quote] Flossie wrote:
If you look at the website with the benefit of Firefox + Adblocker, you still get SRS & Foliopics adverts (who pay specifically to advertise here, so I don't mind), but you don't get all the rubbish from Google. In fact, I'd say the site is deliberatly designed to look right and show those links with AdBlocker...

Getting rid of the google garbage also makes the page load quicker, take up less screen space, and you can focus on the forums not on irrelevant distracting and often misleading stuff.[/quote]Yes, that's my experience, too.

Adverts must be geographically oriented, surely. And/or based on browsing history. The ads appearing on my pages are all related to photography, so I'm not bothered.

In fact, I appreciate that these ads help in keeping the forum free.

Btw, I am using Internet Explorer 8.

Adverts are geographically oriented, bacause I can read several photography related ads from Hungarian companies on this site.

And I also appreciate that these ads help in keeping the forum free.

Oh well, never mind. Have you not discovered Firefox yet?

Peter,

I am very happy with IE8, and I don't feel the need to change to something else.

By coming across glowing recommendations of them on a forum dedicated to an obscure photographic brand

By coming across glowing recommendations of them on a forum dedicated to an obscure photographic brand?

I have both Analytics and Adsense disabled and the links on here seem to work fine. YMMV of course

I find adverts from one company in particular (SimplyElectronics . net) particularly annoying. They advertise the Pentax 43mm f1.9 lens at £349, but when you click the link you arrive at their site with item priced at £599.

Mini-rant over

LennyBloke

Have you been defecting to a Leica forum again? Tut tut....