> Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2008 09:11:29 -0700 > From: "Danny Horn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: [Wikia-l] Wikia new style > To: "Central Wikia Mailing List" <[email protected]> > Message-ID: > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > The ads won't actually break tables like the one on that Yu-Gi-Oh page. If > the 300x250 ad would break a table at the top of the page, then you'll see > a > banner ad under the edit bar instead of a square ad. Essentially, the edit > bar and the banner ad that you currently see on Monaco will switch places, > with the edit bar on top and the banner underneath. > > This change is a huge deal. It's not something that we're taking lightly at > all. What you're seeing right now is the result of months of conversations, > tests and compromises. We looked at a lot of different options, including > most of the ones that people are asking about. You're seeing the end result > of that long process -- the best balance that we've been able to come up > with so far. > > We have to change things in order to make Wikia financially stable. It > would > be great if we could host wikis with no advertising at all, or just have > Google ads running in the footer. Unfortunately, Google ads in the footer > pay pennies a click, and nobody clicks. We need to be able to attract real > advertisers, who pay for impressions rather than clicks. > > Impressions work on a pageview basis -- the advertiser will pay for people > to look at the ad, whether they click or not. But they won't pay for > impressions if the ad is hidden at the bottom of the page, because they > don't know whether people are scrolling down to look at the ad. The ad > needs > to be visible on the screen when people first come to the page, so the > advertisers know that they're paying for real impressions. > > So how do you design a wiki page that has a 300x250 box at the top of the > screen? Either you put it in the header, which pushes the entire content > area down, or you put it in the sidebar so that it squishes the content > area > over... or you put it in the article area, and allow the content to wrap > around it. > > We tried out all three versions, and I think putting the box into the > article actually creates the least disruption. A huge header would make the > content disappear to the bottom. A huge sidebar would create a big blank > area on the left side of the screen as you scroll down. Having the box at > the top right means that the only space that's being used for the ad is the > 300x250 box itself. > > So what happens on Tuesday is basically a big test. Once things go live on > Tuesday, there are a few things that we're going to be looking at very > closely: > > * whether the system actually works the way we expect it to, and it doesn't > break page designs > > * the actual impact on ad sales and click-through rates > > * the community reaction -- how people feel when the changes are actually > live on the site > > * the overall impact on readers and contributors, which we can evaluate by > looking at the stats on pageviews, edits and active editors. > > There are a couple of possible predictions that people could make. One > prediction is that the change won't make any difference to people at all -- > that it's just exchanging one ad shape for another, and people will adapt > their designs around the new format. Another prediction is that the change > will drive people away, that every wiki will lose their core contributors, > and that all of the wikis will die within a week. > > But those are the extreme cases, and it's not likely that either of those > will happen. It won't be a dream or a nightmare. Some people will hate it, > some people will like it better, and some people won't care. We can't know > for sure what's going to happen until we try it out. > > Once we turn it on, then we can start evaluating the impact, and making > changes. The parts of this that work well will stay; the parts that are > completely broken will have to change. One version of "completely broken" > is > that people read and contribute less. Right now, everything is theoretical. > It's easy to say "this will be fine" or "this will drive every user away". > We have to try it out and see what actually happens. > > I know how important everybody's wiki is, and how connected you feel to > your > wiki. I started Muppet Wiki in 2005, and I ended up working for Wikia > because I figured out that I love working on wikis more than anything else > in the world. There are a lot of wikis on Wikia that I'm tight with now, > but > Muppet Wiki is my home -- that's the community where I've put in hours of > my > own time every day, every week, for two and a half years. When I've felt > like that community is threatened, I've fought like a tiger for it. > > So I'm paying a lot of attention to how this plays out. If it really hurts > the wikis, we'll make changes. We just need to see the impact in order to > know what's true and what's hypothetical. > > > -- Danny > > > User:Toughpigs > Community Development Manager, Wikia
So multiple angles have been considered, and the end decision was that the most intrusive type of ad would really be the least intrusive, because it would be sitting *in the content* and not create a wide sidebar or a big header. I'm sorry, but I just don't buy that. You have people -- real people who use the system, not within-Wikia yes men -- saying, "No, really, we'd rather have either of the other options." I think you should take that into consideration rather than blowing it off. Do you honestly think "some people will like it better"? *Like* it? Some people might be indifferent, but just who is going to look at an ad sitting inside an article and think, "Man, this is great!"? I think you need a new focus group. When it starts sitting in the content, that's when people start asking, "Is nothing sacred?" Apparently, nothing is. The message I'm getting is "The Wikia sales department is going to be running all your wikis now. They control how it looks and what's in your content space." Because there's no other player in this who gains from this move. How long until Wikia sales starts dictating content? "We get more page hits when you use the word 'sexy' in an article. You have to use 'sexy' at least twice an article now." "We can sell more ads if we have more pages, so you're going to have to split all your long articles up into ten-kilobyte chunks so we can get more total page hits." When you spend "months" on discussing options, and you settle on the one guaranteed to offend the most users, that's the only conclusion I can come to. I'm really disappointed with what seems to be a total disregard by Wikia for the people actually making them money. We're told it's just a test. Well, sure it is, but when the only response to concerns expressed by Greyman is "Well, they'll just get used to it. Shut up and stop questioning our decision," I don't think it's very likely that Wikia will be willing to decide that their test went poorly. "Well, it didn't burn down and no wiki packed up and left inside a week, so clearly they'll just get used to it and the massive opposition will die down." Wikia appears to have already made up its mind how it's going to be, and everyone is just going to fall into line. I don't think that's an attitude that's going to get Wikia anywhere, but that's the attitude I've observed over the last several months in every announced-two-days-in-advance, supposedly-just-a-test-but-really-irrevocable, made-by-Wikia-staff-with-no-real-input-from-the-end-user-community major change, and I find it an appalling way to treat the people you rely on. It's not the 1880s, and there aren't waves of skilled Irish wiki-editors coming off the boat every day to replace the editors you've driven off with indifferent, domineering treatment. I'd be ashamed to run a company this way. Havac
_______________________________________________ Wikia-l mailing list [email protected] http://lists.wikia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikia-l
