It's not the popup adverts I object to. I don't like them but it's just
a moments effort to dismiss them. No, when Photo.net loads, at least on
my machine, I see the page, then a popup advert, then after the visible
page loads, it continues to try to load data which blanks the browser
window. This happens weather I dismiss the popup ad or not. The only
way I can see the page is hit to back button on my browser,. then
immediately hit the X to stop photo.net from trying to load whatever it
is that blanks the page. Now admittedly I'm not using the latest
version of Firefox, I looked at the new version and decided to pass. I
can't believe that I'm the only one who decided not to move to the
latest and greatest so I expect others will have problems with Photo.net
in the future. It's probably not deliberate, it's just sloppy work and
I find it appalling.
On 3/26/2012 1:13 PM, Tom C wrote:
Sheesh, guys.
1. Quite a few of us post on photo.net, so if you adopt a "no photo.net" policy
you'll miss a lot of pix.
2. You'll see the pop-up ad once per day.? After that, no ad.
3. You can spend 1 minute getting a free membership, and then you won't see
pop-up ads (or any others) at all.
4. For all its warts, photo.net presents pix well, and is easy to navigate
(unlike, say, Flickr).
Someday I'll move my on-line gallery elsewhere, but there are other things to
do.
Rick
I'm with Rick on this. I've used photo.net for years and have been a
paying member for years. Is it perfect? No. Neither is Flicker,
Smugmug, or Picasa, all of which I dislike more than photo.net.
What's strange is that as a paying member I still see the occasional
popup ad. It may be that I'm not logged in at the time.
From: Tim Bray<[email protected]>
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List<[email protected]>
Cc:
Sent: Sunday, March 25, 2012 2:44 PM
Subject: Re: OT -- Really annoying Photo.net behavior
I also practice such a policy, mostly.? And for PESOs here, I?m way
less likely to click on them if the URL includes photo.net.
-T
On Sun, Mar 25, 2012 at 11:42 AM, Bob W<[email protected]> wrote:
No, I'm endorsing a stop-shoving-ads-in-my-face-or-I'll-stop-visiting-your
site policy.
B
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of
Bob Sullivan
So Bob W, you are actively endorsing a no win policy? ?Regards, ?Bob S.
On Sun, Mar 25, 2012 at 12:55 PM, Bob W<[email protected]> wrote:
Well, they are offering a "free" service.
[...]
Nothing is free. ?You have to pay for it somehow.
they're not offering me a service at all. The people who use it are
getting the so-called service, but if nobody looks at their pictures
because the so-called service provider is pissing people off then
nobody wins.
B
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf
Of George Sinos
Sent: 25 March 2012 18:42
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: OT -- Really annoying Photo.net behavior
Well, they are offering a "free" service. ?And they do have to pay
the bills. They aren't doing anything many other sites are doing. I
agree that the interstitial ads are more annoying, but they are
easily dismissed with a single click.
The most annoying ads, for me, are the flash animated ads you see on
many sites. ?That's a sure way to drive me away.
I did sign up several years ago, but other than looking at the links
people post here, I haven't been there for years, not because of
ads,
it just didn't fit my needs.
One of the reasons I use Smugmug is the lack of ads, and their
policy
of not constantly bugging your customers with follow up emails.
?But,
they have to pay the bills, too. ?And for that, you pay between $50
and
$150 per year.
Nothing is free. ?You have to pay for it somehow.
gs
George Sinos
--------------------
[email protected]
www.georgesphotos.net
plus.georgesinos.com
On Sun, Mar 25, 2012 at 11:45 AM, Bob W<[email protected]>
wrote:
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On
Behalf Of George Sinos
This sounds right. ?Every time I go to photo.net I get an
advertisement that is a full screen overlay. ?There is an "x" in
the upper right hand corner to dismiss it. ?They started doing
this
several weeks ago.
Sounds like the problem is a side effect of this.
Like all advertisements, it's annoying, but they have to support
themselves somehow.
they've been doing similarly annoying things with their ads for
years.
Whether or when you see them seems to be random, but it seems to
go
in runs.
When you get them they are extremely intrusive, and they can't be
excused by 'they have to support themselves somehow' because
driving people away from the site can't possibly be a good
business model.
Since they started doing this I never knowingly follow a photo.net
link, just as I don't give time of day to chuggers, doorstep
salesmen,
Jehovah's Witnesses, spammers or cold-callers. A plague on all
their
houses!
B
And all exercising lawful rights and freedom of expression (except
possibly spammers).
Sorry Bob, the world doesn't run by your rules alone.
Tom C.
--
Don't lose heart! They might want to cut it out, and they'll want to avoid a
lengthily search.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
