• Due to ongoing issues caused by Search, it has been temporarily disabled
  • Please excuse the mess, we're moving the furniture and restructuring the forum categories

Dumb, dumb, dumb, de dumb, dumb.

The Atheist

The Grammar Tyrant
Joined
Jul 3, 2006
Messages
36,189
Why forum ads are a joke; a really, really bad joke:

findapsy.jpg


Here's a case of a thoroughly reputable company, Finda - which runs a business directory - advertising its wares on the net.

This is exactly the type of company you'd want to have advertising on your site - a high volume, well-known internet publication. The bad news for JREF, of course, is that the preponderance of psychic stories means that psychic ads will always feature here.

Block finda.co.nz and miss lots of potential clicks from Kiwi viewers.

While the NZ market is infinitesmal, I'll take large bets that the same kind of thing happens wherever your ip# happens to suit.

Oh for the days when scepticism occupied the higher moral ground.
 
I don't think it's a problem except from the financial standpoint that much of the audience here would not be inclined to click on such a link. If you're worried about appearing to endorse each particular advertiser, put a short disclaimer in the box that reads:

The JREF does not choose what ads are displayed on the site. They are chosen automatically from a large and diverse pool of advertisers who have requested their ads be placed on pages containing words or phrases found on this page, regardless of context. No endorsement is implied.
 
So how would you have them raise revenue, TA? Magic?
Good question. I would happily pay a subscription, but can see that the vast majority would not. I have read previous threads on this topic, and just wish there was a way of preventing silly ads like the one in the OP from appearing.
 
Ya' know...I really don't understand the people who get all upset (and sometimes self-righteous) about some of the ads that appear in the forums now.

Yeah, ads for psychics and other miscellaneous woo are rather out of place.

Ya' know what? When I am in China, pretty much every site that I go to that has Google ads sees that my IP address is in China, and then gives me ads about how to get a Chinese bride, or getting acupuncture in China, or offering me a book to understand the "mysteries of the Chinese woman".

I have never once thought that any of those ads were endorsed by or in any way connected to the site that I was visiting. Its never even crossed my mind. Nor have I ever been offended or upset that a site I was visiting happened to display such an ad.

Seems like no matter what the JREF does, there are gonna' be people criticizing them (hey there, TA!). They are a non-profit organization, that provides a wide variety of valuable services (including this forum); and they need money to cover the costs for those things.

TA jumped all over James Randi for taking what he thought was a disproportionately huge salary for himself (and initially, I agreed...until I looked further into it), despite the fact that the salary James Randi received from the JREF was less than the amount of money he receives for his appearance fees and other income. In other words, if he simply kept the money that he receives related to his own actitivities, he'd be making more money than he does from his JREF salary. Its not a case of the JREF losing money to support James Randi; its a case of James Randi losing money to support the JREF.

And of course, we have all the hoopla from people who paid money specifically to support the forum, and then got upset because the powers that be don't run the forum the way that they want. Pretty much the same thing, in my opinion, as the guy who gets pulled over by the police, and then informs the officer that since he pays taxes, and the taxes pay the policeman's salary, that therefore the policeman works for him, and should do as he says. Supporting the forum financially does not in any manner, shape, or form give you 'voting rights', or control over how the forum is run. And if you're giving money in the expectation that it should give you a voice, then I say you're an idiot. By that logic, all Sylvia Browne would have to do would be to donate more money than you, and then she'd have more say in how to run the forums than you do.

Which is all somewhat tangential, yet nevertheless related.

The JREF has found another way to support the costs of running and maintaining these forums. Its a very commonplace and normal method -- ad revenues. Nothing terribly new, or controversial, or unethical, etc., about that. It decreases the burden on the JREF, who can then use their money for other things; and it decreases the burden on forum members to support the forums financially.

Yeah, its not perfect. We get these ads popping up that promote the very people/organizations/products that James Randi and the JREF seek to debunk.

So what?

Are more people going to head off and join Sylvia Browne because they saw a link to her site here? Very highly unlikely. More likely, if people click on the link at all, is that they'll also check out what people in the forums have to say about her. And that, I thought, is what we want.

Oh, but we're pushing them higher in the search rankings! We're helping them make more money!

The impact we're going to have on their search rankings will be minimal at best. And money? Anyone who goes and gives money to them was going to do so anyway. And meanwhile, rather ironically, this forum and JREF's activities are going to be funded, in part, by money that those people have had to pay to have their ads displayed.

Seems to me that the money's flowing in the right direction.

Now, if TA or anyone else can present evidence that people are seeing these ads and actually believing that it is endorsed by the JREF, please feel free to present that evidence, and I'll be willing to consider altering my position. But right now, the only response that it engenders in me is a momentary chuckle, at just how funny it is for an ad like that to be appearing in these forums.

A quote from TA's OP: "Oh for the days when scepticism occupied the higher moral ground"

Yeah, yeah, TA. I once found your posts on this stuff humorous...now I just find it boring. Instead of the constant attempts to reveal how much more finely tuned your moral senses are than everyone else's, why don't you simply go an set up your own non-profit skeptical organization, and run it the way that you think it should be run?

And the same to all the other critics.

I run a non-profit organization of my own, and I always have people second-guessing me, and telling me how I "should" be doing things. Ironically, pretty much every person that feels they have the 'right' to tell me how to run things are people who are not running such an organization themselves...in fact, it is almost inevitably those people with the least actual experience who claim the most expertise and moral superiority in telling me how I should run my organization.

For the record -- I do not agree with everything that the JREF does; and I've made my opinions very clear in those cases when I've disagreed. And I've incurred the wrath of others (not the JREF staff, or forum moderators) for daring not to simply bow in obeisance to the dictates of the powers that be. But the difference, to me, is that I don't even try to say that "This is how the JREF should be run". What I say is, "This is my opinion". I express that opinion, explain it, and then move on. I continue to support the JREF; but if I were to reach the point where I felt that the JREF was being run in an immoral or truly objectionable manner, I would leave the JREF, and this forum...and either find another one that better suited my personal preferences, or start one up myself.

There are issues that I feel are worthy of discussion and debate; there are policies and practices that, personally, I'd love to see improved or changed.

But ads?

Seriously people...there are a million issues of greater importance and significance -- to ourselves, to JREF, and to skepticism -- than these stupid ads.

And hopefully, if nothing else, the sheer length and monotony of this post will shut this particular topic down.
 
Last edited:
If you're worried about appearing to endorse each particular advertiser, put a short disclaimer in the box that reads:

The JREF does not choose what ads are displayed on the site. They are chosen automatically from a large and diverse pool of advertisers who have requested their ads be placed on pages containing words or phrases found on this page, regardless of context. No endorsement is implied.

Yeah, something like that would salve my annoyance, and doubtless some others.

Another thread complaining about the ads? Haven't we got tired of this already?

Clearly, no.

How much is too much?

How many threads on Sylvia Browne or bigfoot is too many? How many threads are there on religion? It has a whole forum dedicated to it, but nobody seems to tire of posting in it. There are over 493,000 posts on religion so far and I doubt there isn't a single comment which hasn't been made hundreds of times.

Ya' know...

No, I don't. I gave up reading wall of text posts years ago.
 
To Wolfman,

And yet many people have justified the relentless assault on those deemed to be "trolls" on the basis that lurkers may read their posts and think there is something to them.

Yes members and regular posters know the ads are not endorsed by the JREF, but does everybody?
 
Ya' know...I really don't understand the people who get all upset (and sometimes self-righteous) about some of the ads that appear in the forums now.

Yeah, ads for psychics and other miscellaneous woo are rather out of place.

Ya' know what? When I am in China, pretty much every site that I go to that has Google ads sees that my IP address is in China, and then gives me ads about how to get a Chinese bride, or getting acupuncture in China, or offering me a book to understand the "mysteries of the Chinese woman".

I have never once thought that any of those ads were endorsed by or in any way connected to the site that I was visiting. Its never even crossed my mind. Nor have I ever been offended or upset that a site I was visiting happened to display such an ad.

Seems like no matter what the JREF does, there are gonna' be people criticizing them (hey there, TA!). They are a non-profit organization, that provides a wide variety of valuable services (including this forum); and they need money to cover the costs for those things.

TA jumped all over James Randi for taking what he thought was a disproportionately huge salary for himself (and initially, I agreed...until I looked further into it), despite the fact that the salary James Randi received from the JREF was less than the amount of money he receives for his appearance fees and other income. In other words, if he simply kept the money that he receives related to his own actitivities, he'd be making more money than he does from his JREF salary. Its not a case of the JREF losing money to support James Randi; its a case of James Randi losing money to support the JREF.

And of course, we have all the hoopla from people who paid money specifically to support the forum, and then got upset because the powers that be don't run the forum the way that they want. Pretty much the same thing, in my opinion, as the guy who gets pulled over by the police, and then informs the officer that since he pays taxes, and the taxes pay the policeman's salary, that therefore the policeman works for him, and should do as he says. Supporting the forum financially does not in any manner, shape, or form give you 'voting rights', or control over how the forum is run. And if you're giving money in the expectation that it should give you a voice, then I say you're an idiot. By that logic, all Sylvia Browne would have to do would be to donate more money than you, and then she'd have more say in how to run the forums than you do.

Which is all somewhat tangential, yet nevertheless related.

The JREF has found another way to support the costs of running and maintaining these forums. Its a very commonplace and normal method -- ad revenues. Nothing terribly new, or controversial, or unethical, etc., about that. It decreases the burden on the JREF, who can then use their money for other things; and it decreases the burden on forum members to support the forums financially.

Yeah, its not perfect. We get these ads popping up that promote the very people/organizations/products that James Randi and the JREF seek to debunk.

So what?

Are more people going to head off and join Sylvia Browne because they saw a link to her site here? Very highly unlikely. More likely, if people click on the link at all, is that they'll also check out what people in the forums have to say about her. And that, I thought, is what we want.

Oh, but we're pushing them higher in the search rankings! We're helping them make more money!

The impact we're going to have on their search rankings will be minimal at best. And money? Anyone who goes and gives money to them was going to do so anyway. And meanwhile, rather ironically, this forum and JREF's activities are going to be funded, in part, by money that those people have had to pay to have their ads displayed.

Seems to me that the money's flowing in the right direction.

Now, if TA or anyone else can present evidence that people are seeing these ads and actually believing that it is endorsed by the JREF, please feel free to present that evidence, and I'll be willing to consider altering my position. But right now, the only response that it engenders in me is a momentary chuckle, at just how funny it is for an ad like that to be appearing in these forums.

A quote from TA's OP: "Oh for the days when scepticism occupied the higher moral ground"

Yeah, yeah, TA. I once found your posts on this stuff humorous...now I just find it boring. Instead of the constant attempts to reveal how much more finely tuned your moral senses are than everyone else's, why don't you simply go an set up your own non-profit skeptical organization, and run it the way that you think it should be run?

And the same to all the other critics.

I run a non-profit organization of my own, and I always have people second-guessing me, and telling me how I "should" be doing things. Ironically, pretty much every person that feels they have the 'right' to tell me how to run things are people who are not running such an organization themselves...in fact, it is almost inevitably those people with the least actual experience who claim the most expertise and moral superiority in telling me how I should run my organization.

For the record -- I do not agree with everything that the JREF does; and I've made my opinions very clear in those cases when I've disagreed. And I've incurred the wrath of others (not the JREF staff, or forum moderators) for daring not to simply bow in obeisance to the dictates of the powers that be. But the difference, to me, is that I don't even try to say that "This is how the JREF should be run". What I say is, "This is my opinion". I express that opinion, explain it, and then move on. I continue to support the JREF; but if I were to reach the point where I felt that the JREF was being run in an immoral or truly objectionable manner, I would leave the JREF, and this forum...and either find another one that better suited my personal preferences, or start one up myself.

There are issues that I feel are worthy of discussion and debate; there are policies and practices that, personally, I'd love to see improved or changed.

But ads?

Seriously people...there are a million issues of greater importance and significance -- to ourselves, to JREF, and to skepticism -- than these stupid ads.

And hopefully, if nothing else, the sheer length and monotony of this post will shut this particular topic down.

Tl;DR.

I'm having enough trouble reading atm without walls of text, no matter how well written.
 
Moving thread to appropriate section - this is not a moderation issue, but a decision made by the JREF.
 
I'm pretty much with Wolfman on this issue - and I'm patient (or bored) enough to give him the courtesy of actually reading it. No, I don't think it's appropriate that woo ads are on the site, but there's not a great deal that can be done about it. So I choose to get over it. It doesn't bother me, I don't ever see them, so I don't see what business it is of mine. As chill said, it's a decision that is made by the management of the JREF, and I'm a guest in their apartment.

So you know what? I'm going to check out the ads periodically, and every time I see a good, non-woo ad, I'm going to click on it. That'll give more benefit to the JREF than any number of rants about the bad ones.
 
If anyone ever sees such an ad as per the opening post, then send an e-mail to Jeff Wagg giving him the URL and he can stop it. No point in starting a thread.

I wonder how much revenue is generated by these ads?
 
If anyone ever sees such an ad as per the opening post, then send an e-mail to Jeff Wagg giving him the URL and he can stop it. No point in starting a thread.

I wonder how much revenue is generated by these ads?

I wonder how many times we have to keep pointing out Jeff said to email him about these things so he can make sure they're removed before people will actually do that.

I guess it's more fun for some to find somethign to complain about than take part in the decided upon fix.
 
Um, can anyone tell me how to find these ads? I went to the forum home page, logged off, like I was supposed to do, but I still didn't see any ads. :confused:
 
In the short time that I've been back lurking on the new-style forums I've
not seen one of those ads (sorry, the Google word for them is "creatives")
that hasn't been for some woo stuff. Today it was something about
testing if you have super powers and another for homeopathic books. It's
rather inevitable when your pages contain so many woo buzzwords and
when the small-ads market is dominated by woo-quackery.
 
I don't understand the fuss.

Quite the opposite - I click on woo-woo Google ads whenever possible. It costs them money with zero chance of them getting a farthing from me. That's a good thing IMHO.

As for Google ranking. If anyone here thinks that sceptics out-number the woo-woo minded they are living in cloud-cuckoo land.

Religious ads and woo-woo ads (same really) - Click away.

:D

ETA: Last time I looked the cost to get most woo-words into a reasonable high position of priority with Google ads is anything from $4-$8 per click. If I have time I will go and look again.

ETA: Looked - Example - Psychic Healing has an estimate of £2.50 - My currency conversion was out of date - That's about $3.60. If I can waste $3 of a psychic healer's money - I'm quite happy. I'm still happy if it's only a few pennies.
.
 
Last edited:
I used to be OK-ish with the idea of the ads, until I happened to be logged out one day and saw a huge banner ad here for utter woo, disguised as science. It was 'how to improve your career and intelligence using subliminal mind control like they do in advertising' or some such.

I wrote a pretty long personal email to JREF which I haven't sent for various reasons, but the main gist was:

1) the ads are not aimed at nor being seen by the regular members, but those who come across the site by accident or lurk. These people are, in my opinion, probably more likely to be swayed by the ads than we are. This has the opposite effect to the educational benefits a forum like this has. A colourful, authoritative ad has more impact than a text argument from a stranger. If someone is Googling for a topic and finds 'James Randi Educational Foundation', how are they not going to assume the ads are endorsed? What kind of educational foundation would let ads for the things it opposes on its site? The idea is absurd, so I believe any lurker or fence-sitter who sees the ad is likely to assume it's OK.

2) the members here, those who post, are generating the content from which the keywords our taken. It's JREF's platform, but it's our content, and the 'our content' part is the bit that's being used to generate woo advertising. If most posters here write about things that they consider harmful to society, how is it not a betrayal of our hard work to promote those self same harmful things to the very people we seek to educate?

I don't want to debunk psychics if I know that my words will encourage ads for psychics. I don't want to write here about homeopathy if those posts will attracts ads for alt med.

I have written here about subliminal advertising. It's a topic that even many skeptics are unaware is bunk. I have debunked it here and there have been threads about it where regular posters and newbies alike have learned something. And yet the huge banner ad I saw as per my first paragraph extolled the virtues of subliminal advertising as though it was the truest thing in the world.

I immediately felt guilty for ever having written about it here. My desire to educate others about a pseudoscience actually resulted in a big brassy advert for that very thing.

I'm not posting so much lately, and hardly on 'serious' topics.
 
I concur with TK. These ads can only give disinterested spectators the misleading impression that JREF is a reasonably open minded organisation.
 
Choosing to raise money this way was the second-worst decision (#1 being hiring Phil Plaitt over moi) the JREF made in 2008.

But because I'm always logged on it drops off my radar until I log on at a friends house and an ad for a psychic is at the top of the page. Then I roll my eyes and sigh. We don't let Montel Williams use the excuse "hey, it's business" when he has Sylvia on. The JREF knows full well what kind of ads this website will attract because of keywords. They should just say "at the moment this advertising model doesn't work for us" but they're taking the money instead. Jeff can do his best to screen out the bad ads but they're still going to get through. There's just too many.

How much does the JREF make each time someone clicks? Are we talking pennies here? fifty cents? Is it worth it? If the JREF gets a check for $500 at the end of the month how many people does that represent who visited the JREF and instead got lured to a site promoting nonsense. And if one of those people gets sucked into it and gives those hucksters money, buys their books, calls their psychic lines, gives up their medicine and starts popping homeopathic remedies...ugh. Shameful.

Sometimes you just want to yell: How could the website of one of the most famous skeptics in the world advertise woo on its homepage!

Remember that open letter Hal Bidlack wrote to Montel about honor? It's great reading.
 
I concur with TK. These ads can only give disinterested spectators the misleading impression that JREF is a reasonably open minded organisation.
(bolding mine)

Are the two sentences in your post directly related? Do you think Teek believes JREF to be something other than "reasonably open minded?" Would it be fair to characterize you as "unreasonably" open minded?

What kind of ad would you consider so unsupported by evidence and rational thought that you would consider it inappropriate? Or were you simply attempting to throw out an insult at Randi/JREF (or troll - ymmv)?

CT
 

No, I don't. I gave up reading wall of text posts years ago.

Dear Cthulhu, I was hoping I'd avoid that kind of crap here. *sigh*

I used to be OK-ish with the idea of the ads, until I happened to be logged out one day and saw a huge banner ad here for utter woo, disguised as science. It was 'how to improve your career and intelligence using subliminal mind control like they do in advertising' or some such.

I wrote a pretty long personal email to JREF which I haven't sent for various reasons, but the main gist was:

1) the ads are not aimed at nor being seen by the regular members, but those who come across the site by accident or lurk. These people are, in my opinion, probably more likely to be swayed by the ads than we are. This has the opposite effect to the educational benefits a forum like this has. A colourful, authoritative ad has more impact than a text argument from a stranger. If someone is Googling for a topic and finds 'James Randi Educational Foundation', how are they not going to assume the ads are endorsed? What kind of educational foundation would let ads for the things it opposes on its site? The idea is absurd, so I believe any lurker or fence-sitter who sees the ad is likely to assume it's OK.

2) the members here, those who post, are generating the content from which the keywords our taken. It's JREF's platform, but it's our content, and the 'our content' part is the bit that's being used to generate woo advertising. If most posters here write about things that they consider harmful to society, how is it not a betrayal of our hard work to promote those self same harmful things to the very people we seek to educate?

I don't want to debunk psychics if I know that my words will encourage ads for psychics. I don't want to write here about homeopathy if those posts will attracts ads for alt med.

I have written here about subliminal advertising. It's a topic that even many skeptics are unaware is bunk. I have debunked it here and there have been threads about it where regular posters and newbies alike have learned something. And yet the huge banner ad I saw as per my first paragraph extolled the virtues of subliminal advertising as though it was the truest thing in the world.

I immediately felt guilty for ever having written about it here. My desire to educate others about a pseudoscience actually resulted in a big brassy advert for that very thing.

I'm not posting so much lately, and hardly on 'serious' topics.

I was about to agree with Wolfman, but you actually raise some very good points. Now I'm pretty ambivalent about the ads... not for me personally since I never see them (even if logged out, there's always adblock :P), but for the lurkers and chance-found visitors. Hmmm...
 
The JREF website advertising woo-- Oh well, business is business. Anything for a buck--Wouldn't a thunk it--

As an aside: plumjam, you crack me up. :D
 
If anyone ever sees such an ad as per the opening post, then send an e-mail to Jeff Wagg giving him the URL and he can stop it. No point in starting a thread.

Utterly pointless exercise, and possibly self-defeating.

Pointless, because the real purveyors of "woo" have a million ip#s and urls each. At the top of the fuel price increases last year, I gave up counting the different links for run-your-car-with-water when I got to 50.

The way it's possibly self-defeating is that they will know from web stats that JREF keeps disappearing off their reports. If the numbers have been worthwhile, it wouldn't be hard to write ads which won't get deleted, but which will bring in punters from a busy discussion board.

I wonder how much revenue is generated by these ads?

Obviously enough.

I recall that when the first psychic ad campaign was run, the income over a period of a couple/few weeks was in the low hundreds.

See, with the ads having tacit approval under a "Notice" banner rather than "These ads are by Google Adsense , over which we obviously have no control. Be aware that many of the ads will be for blatant rip-offs and feel free to discuss them right here!" or words to the effect which I would have been able to use if Chill had left it in Management. I'm sure that had no bearing on its move.

:bgrin:

I used to be OK-ish with the idea of the ads, until I happened to be logged out one day and saw a huge banner ad here for utter woo, disguised as science. It was 'how to improve your career and intelligence using subliminal mind control like they do in advertising' or some such.

Was the bloke whose name is actually "Wu"?

He's one I've chuckled at several times along the lines of what you describe.

I wrote a pretty long personal email to JREF which I haven't sent for various reasons, but the main gist was:...

Nominated, copied onto hard drive, CD and the code for it etched in titanium, packaged and put into a time capsule so your wisdom will last forever.

I've read a few posts in my time; nowhere near as many as I've written, of course, and I can't ever recall seeing one which is a such a vision of clarity and from someone whose opinion is absolutely valuable on the very subject. Not to mention the degree of sadness at the way you feel.

I'd hardly expect you to call me a pal, but whatever we feel about each other on a human level, I respect your honesty, integrity and intelligence.

Remember that open letter Hal Bidlack wrote to Montel about honor? It's great reading.

Jesus, yes.

What a perfect analogy.

________________________________________________


Nothing sluts me worse than people making better points than me, by the way.

Did anyone else have points worth noting?

No?

Excellent.


(H3LL - the numbers you're quoting are exponentially higher than reality. Lots of different ways of paying for ads on Google Adsense, but cents per click is a max.)
 
Dear Cthulhu, I was hoping I'd avoid that kind of crap here. *sigh*

So was I. Wall of text posts drive me nuts. Especially when it's one which you know from experience will be boring, irrelevant and trite. Still, you take the good with the bad.

The JREF website advertising woo-- Oh well, business is business. Anything for a buck--Wouldn't a thunk it--

Yep, that's the exact equation, I think, a nice dichotomy of whether JREF is a business or a not-for-profit organization founded in 1996, whose aim is to promote critical thinking by reaching out to the public and media with reliable information about paranormal and supernatural ideas so widespread in our society today.

If it's a business, then hell yes, all's fair. I certainly have higher ethical standards myself, but is it fair?

Definitely.

If, on the other hand, it's the description as above that comes direct from the JREF then I would say it's a fail.
 
Are the two sentences in your post directly related? Do you think Teek believes JREF to be something other than "reasonably open minded?" Would it be fair to characterize you as "unreasonably" open minded?
I don´t know what she believes on that matter. I´d hazard a guess she believes JREF to be reasonably open minded. Myself, I believe JREF to be reasonably open minded provided that what you´re saying can fit into the prevailing JREF worldview (philosophical naturalism, give or take).
So, for example, for the most part one´s political position will not be so narrowly defined by adherence or otherwise to philosophical naturalism. Thus in the politics forum here we typically have a wider range of non-automatically-leapt-upon viewpoints than we do in, say, Philosophy and Religion, and General Skepticism. In its favour I´d say that JREF values freedom of speech highly, and I commend it for that.

Now, are the ¨woo¨ ads examples of free speech? As a non-orthodox JREFer I´d say they are, and am therefore in favour of them being allowed to be hosted here.
But if I were an orthodox JREFer I´d be quite justifiedly crying hypocrisy. This due to the fact that quite a significant part of JREF output, including the forum, consists of attacking perceived fraudulent ¨woo¨ activities such as mediumship and homeopathy. A main line of criticism of these latter activities is that they are conning gullible people out of their hard-earned money.
But then for JREF to happily accept funding, via these ads, from such enterprises, amounts to JREF effectively profiting from that which it believes, and seeks to ´educate´ the public into believing, to be fraudulent.
Such a situation can only damage JREF´s integrity.

What kind of ad would you consider so unsupported by evidence and rational thought that you would consider it inappropriate? Or were you simply attempting to throw out an insult at Randi/JREF (or troll - ymmv)?
Well, I missed the memo telling us from now on that advertisements needed to be supported by evidence and rational thought.
I was mainly making a joke.
From Teek´s point of view JREF will probably be reasonably open minded. From my point of view it clearly is not.
 
Last edited:
...justifiedly...

Good post; I thought the joke was tres funny - I'll just take issue with this one word, with my Grammar Tyrant hat on.

"Justified in" or "justifiably".

Don't you go making up more words for me to be irregardless of.
 
Good post; I thought the joke was tres funny - I'll just take issue with this one word, with my Grammar Tyrant hat on.

"Justified in" or "justifiably".

Don't you go making up more words for me to be irregardless of.

Thanks TA, and may I be the first to wish you a Happy New Year, even if that year has to be spent in NZ ;)
Perhaps I can improve your grammar tyrant rating and move you up to 3rd place in the Russian people's affections by promoting you to Grammar Stalin. Justifiedly is indeed a word.. and different from 'justifiably' in that it's a bit more definite, less contingent.. already notionally established, rather than having merely the future possibility of establishment.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/justifiedly
http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/JUSTIFIEDLY
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/justifiedly
 
Last edited:
Thanks TA, and may I be the first to wish you a Happy New Year, even if that year has to be spent in NZ ;)

Yeah, hell, I can hardly take much more of this weather, sea conditions and fishing, cleanliness and lack of people - I think I'll move to some over-crowded, polluted hole instead.

Perhaps I can improve your grammar tyrant rating and move you up to 3rd place in the Russian people's affections by promoting you to Grammar Stalin.

That's how I started, but Darth Rotor came up with some good reasons to change, so I did.

Justifiedly is indeed a word...

Don't be silly.
 
This thread reminds me of a blog post I read recently, which of course I can't find right now. Anyway, the main point was to observe this curious but common set of events:

1) Website/forum/blog is created that services a Community.
2) Eventually, Creators realize that website is a money drain, as it costs money for hosting and Community is unwilling to donate money for what they perceive as a free service.
3) Website is also a time drain, as it requires (unpaid) moderators and (underpaid) coders and (unpaid or underpaid) email-answerers and so on and so on.
4) Creators institute some method by which their website can earn money without becoming more of a time drain.
5) Malcontents complain because they want perfect service with unlimited attention and oh yeah, it should be free! And don't forget the perfect part! Spend more time to make it perfect with little to no compensation!

The solution to Generic-Targeted-Google-Ads is, of course, to pay a salesman to go out, solicit ads for the forum, and screen out the inappropriate ads after they are submitted. After all, that's what newspapers do, right?

Except people pay for newspapers. Perhaps if the Generic-Targeted-Google-Ad Haters collectively donated enough additional money to cover the salary of a part-time advertising representative, JREF could consider hiring one.
 
This thread reminds me of a blog post I read recently, which of course I can't find right now. Anyway, the main point was to observe this curious but common set of events:

1) Website/forum/blog is created that services a Community.

I'd say this step alone makes your analogy inapplicable. The JREF's web site should not be viewed as serving a community; it should be viewed as a major method of carrying out the JREF's mission.

An educational foundation that doesn't have a significant web presence in 2009 is probably failing at its mission. How do you expect to reach people?

An organization devoted to skepticism should be doing things to address the concerns of skeptics, and it seems to me that a frequently voiced concern is the need to build a community, so that skeptics don't feel so much like lone voices in a sea of woo.

I really hope the JREF doesn't view forumites as a bunch of ingrates who don't pay their way. I have detected a whiff of this attitude in the past, but I would think Phil Plait of all people would appreciate the importance of building an internet community.
 
Quite the opposite - I click on woo-woo Google ads whenever possible. It costs them money with zero chance of them getting a farthing from me. That's a good thing IMHO.

As someone who pays for Google ads, runs campaigns on behalf of others, and makes money from Google Adsense, I find that unethical and childish. In the long run it *could* create headaches for the JREF.

The way it's possibly self-defeating is that they will know from web stats that JREF keeps disappearing off their reports. If the numbers have been worthwhile, it wouldn't be hard to write ads which won't get deleted, but which will bring in punters from a busy discussion board.

If that's the case, then it seems pretty clear that the JREF *should* be running these ads. After all, if enough visitors coming to the site go spend their money with these businesses, then who is the JREF to interfere?

Thing is Google lets you block advertisers, but it's a lot of work.

You can do it up front by blocking a domain (StopScooby.com), which would effectively prevent any ads from that domain. Or you could get more specific like StopScooby.com/Psychics.

You can also choose to "pre-approve" all ads that appear on your site, but they are automatically approved if you don't mark them good or bad within 24 hours. Of course, you can go back later and block specific ads, but this a manual process.

So, really, the best solution for the JREF is to find volunteers they trust to periodically review the ads and mark them accordingly. Or just acknowledge that the world's an imperfect place.
 
I don't understand the fuss.

Quite the opposite - I click on woo-woo Google ads whenever possible. It costs them money with zero chance of them getting a farthing from me. That's a good thing IMHO.

I see it from a different angle.

These people make that money through pseudoscience, or plain lies and dishonesty. They range from the ignorant to flat-out con artists. In any case, they make their money through less than honest means, taking them from people either through exploiting emotional states, naivity or through feeding out lies and misinformation.

The entire point of groups like the JREF makes a stand against this. Obviously they have a different moralistic view of the situation than I do, because I'd feel damn uncomfortable taking what I see as being little different to blood money.

As for 'where is the JREF going to get the cash from?', I think it's a nonsense question. It does what it can with the money it gets from honest means. If it can't run the forum without compromising its values, it doesn't run it. If the forum is that important to its message (which, IMO, it is), then it compromises on something else that may not be as efficient at reaching its goals, such as dropping the scholarships. Hell, if it were me, I'd personally probably take a pay cut if I felt it was all that important to the goal - JREF is about values, after all. It's not about making Randi's wallet fat.

Athon
 
Just my 2 cents (per click).

The ads don't show up for me, since I'm automatically logged in whenever I visit, hence they don't bother me.

I personally find those ads hilarious. They're a lot like those ads that showed up on a fanfiction site I used to visit, advertising things that nobody had actually been talking about, like sites hosting Sesame Street slash fics. Try not to think about that too hard, or something inside you might die. Of laughter.

Anybody that those ads are going to fool if they see them while visiting this site is probably going to miss the point regardless. They've already got an inclination to let that stuff fool them, after all.

Almost all advertisements, regardless of what they're selling, are a form of sophistry intended to persuade viewers to suspend their critical thinking and make subjective judgments. i.e. "Oh my god, I REALLY need to run out and buy that stupid product! I don't know how I could have lived without it before!"

An argument could be made that those ads serve to demonstrate exactly what it is JREF is setting out to debunk and why it's considered important.


So I don't really let them bother me.
 
From this thread

· Wellspring Ministries
A Prophetic Worship Center in DC Prophetic Webcast & Music all week
link - wellspringministry.net
· Life after Death
Proof your child still lives. Endorsed by psychic John Edward.
link - quitkissingmyashes.com
· Dr. John Hagee Store
Authorized source all JHM Hagee 200+ Ministry books DVD CD Series.
link - faithcenteredresources.com



From the main menu..
· Dieting This Xmas?
Stay Motivated W/ Tony Ferguson. Online & Offline Weightloss Support
link - TonyFerguson.com
· "Arbitrage Conspiracy?"
Don't Buy Arbitrage Conspiracy Yet. $1139 Arbitrage Conspiracy Bonus!
link - InternetMarketingSpeed.com
· Wall Street Pro Exposed
Secrets ETF Forums Won't Teach You Learn More, Free E-Mail Series
link - ETF-Master-Trader.com



Notes.
1. www. removed at the start of links. If they want ads they can pay for them.
2. I have sent an e-mail to Jeff about these ads and this thread.
 
I just got a cute, little booklet from the Skeptic Society, describing 10 steps to "become a psychic", based on material gleamed from cold reading books; attached to a donation card.

Last year, they mailed out sheet of paper to build a glider and an optical illusion, in commemoration of Paul MacCready and Jerry Andrus.

Why can't JREF come up with something cute, like that, for donation cards? Maybe they could raise a bit more money that way.

And, for the record, I am also a loud critic of the Forum ads. But, I am willing to compromise: I will complain less often about the ads, if they can somehow manage to make the Forum more reliable with the income they generate. Is that too much to ask?
 
I'd say this step alone makes your analogy inapplicable. The JREF's web site should not be viewed as serving a community; it should be viewed as a major method of carrying out the JREF's mission.

A forum that is created to "carry out a mission" rarely thrives the way this forum does. It is undeniable that the JREF forum attracts skeptics and promotes a sense of community.

The www.randi.org website is a different matter, of course. However, the only ad I see there is for "The God that Never Existed".
 
Woowoo advertisements...

IF we click on them and then close the page, does the forum get money?
 
Back
Top Bottom