I love Contributor, but I'll just leave this here:
http://www.smbc-comics.com/?id=2490
Give Google Contributor a try: Pay to remove ads
71–80 of 472 posts
Re: Give Google Contributor a try: Pay to remove ads
#72Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Google has cleverly tricked us into keeping that industry aloft, essentially paying to keep something we hate alive. We hate content creators?
We hate shitty content creators (like Buzzfeed) who replicate content from other sources or even worse disguise ads with content (i.e. native advertising) . We also hate paying for the whole site just to read a couple of articles every now and then. How about a pay-by-article model with widespread adoption from the industry? I'd gladly go for it. Lastly, we hate tracking. I can't overstate that. They kill profiling w…
It sounds like when you're saying "we" you really mean "I."
Re: Give Google Contributor a try: Pay to remove ads
#73I've been using Contributor for the last month or so: 1) One needn't turn on all third-party cookies to make it work. Enabling a subset of [*.]doubleclick.com, [*.]doubleclick.net, and [*.]google.com is sufficient. 2) Contributor is the best existing solution to the third-party micropayment problem I've yet encountered. Direct contributions to sites are surely preferable, but not yet practical. Contributor would appe…
I would add another shortcoming: Contributor is owned by an ad network.
Re: Give Google Contributor a try: Pay to remove ads
#74Does this sound like a good old fashioned "pay for protection" type business model to anyone else?
Re: Give Google Contributor a try: Pay to remove ads
#75Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most users tend to complain about flying, pop ups, auto playing audio/video. Google does none of that. So is there a real benefit here?
> Google does none of that. I have seen several adsense ads that auto-play. But it could be that they're violating Google's policies. I tried looking for a policy document, but this is all I could find. https://support.google.com/adwordspolicy/answer/176108?hl=en
I saw a few that expanded to take over the screen if you hover over them for like 5 seconds but they gave you a warning. I haven't seen autoplay though. Are you certain they were adsense? Sometimes ads can appear to be adsense because they are served via DoubleClick For Publishers ( https://www.doubleclickbygoogle.com/solutions/revenue-manage... ). The site controls the approval of those ads. Google won't approve an as that violates the policies unless it somehow slips by.
Re: Give Google Contributor a try: Pay to remove ads
#76Once everybody is paying to avoid looking at ads, what will be the point of advertising?
Once everybody is paying, they'll start slipping ads back in.
Re: Give Google Contributor a try: Pay to remove ads
#77Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most users tend to complain about flying, pop ups, auto playing audio/video. Google does none of that. So is there a real benefit here?
Google does have the big green download button type ads (this kind of ad made me decide to install an adblocker)
Those are really the only ones I can think of that bother me but it's the sites placement that is what makes it a terrible UX. They place all those ads around the actual download button. You would think you could get banned for trying to force a click like that.
Re: Give Google Contributor a try: Pay to remove ads
#78Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Google has cleverly tricked us into keeping that industry aloft, essentially paying to keep something we hate alive. We hate content creators?
We hate shitty content creators (like Buzzfeed) who replicate content from other sources or even worse disguise ads with content (i.e. native advertising) . We also hate paying for the whole site just to read a couple of articles every now and then. How about a pay-by-article model with widespread adoption from the industry? I'd gladly go for it. Lastly, we hate tracking. I can't overstate that. They kill profiling w…
Tracking is weird. One hand it's gross and I don't like it. I think because who knows who is looking at what you're looking at. On the other hand, as a consumer I actually find the ads more valuable, and I sometimes buy items advertised to me. And as a content creator, they generate much more revenue.
Re: Give Google Contributor a try: Pay to remove ads
#79The best part about this is that you have really fine grained control over where your money goes. Don't like it going to a specific site? You can disable just that site in the settings. Want to replace ads with an image of something random? You can do that as well! Want to only have contributor run on a few hand-picked sites? Can do that too! A friend of mine has it setup so that it's whitelist only where he disables…
This is exactly what I was considering. Basically only paying for the content that I think has value by disabling uBlock or w/e for those sites.
It would be nice if I wasn't also being tracked though since I'm paying for the content myself.
Re: Give Google Contributor a try: Pay to remove ads
#80Earlier quoted context omitted.
$15/month. There's a sliding scale that goes in $1 increments.
Is the $15/mo use it or lose it, or just a maximum amount? IE, do all your monthly subscriptions add up to $15? If I'm paying the same as the bidding cost for advertisers, then I'm all in, this is super sweet. If I'm paying some vague hand-wavy fee that reduces my ads, but doesn't correspond 1-1 to what advertisers are paying then forget it.
The $15/month is a flat fee. I'm not aware of how the math works behind the scenes, but it does not appear to be a 1:1 mapping.
Edit: Apparently it is a 1:1 mapping and unused money rolls over until next month. I was wrong. Thanks cmpb for pointing that out.